Linus Torvalds: you take a week-long swing at a problem you find annoying, fascinating, or both. The result enjoys staggering worldwide success in the ensuing decades, despite being clearly outclassed by some alternative from the GNU project that, pinky promise, is coming out any day now.
Grace Hopper: BEGIN a framework that powers critical government functions, AND has secretly saved America from mass destruction time and again, only to be dunked on by Reddit for trivial matters of syntax END.
John Carmack: Doom, but better-looking.
Brendan Eich: you take a week-long swing at a problem your employer finds commercially compelling. The result enjoys staggering worldwide success in the ensuing decades, despite being clearly outclassed by the prior art it was supposed to build on.
Fabrice Bellard: A problem with several competing solutions catches your fancy. Within a week you have a gleaming, state-of-the-art solution that is flexible, reliable, and extensible—all written in pure, efficient C. Everyone begins to build on your work.
Donald Knuth: While writing your magnum opus, a minor irritation arises. You invent a new subfield of computing and spend two years developing a highly idiosyncratic language and tool system.\footnote{And several new typefaces!} Your irritation dissipates and you go back to work with your writing. Generations of academics curse your creation but have nothing better to work with. They wonder if they can get Fabrice Bellard to take a crack at it…
Working on (a medium-sized team that is working on) an LTE base station in the late 2000s and then I'm introduced to his work. It was a very humbling experience. Over the decades I've met a handful of people who were, at times, within reach of Fabrice but he is truly in a league of his own.
> Brendan Eich: you take a week-long swing at a problem your employer finds commercially compelling. The result enjoys staggering worldwide success in the ensuing decades, despite being clearly outclassed by the prior art it was supposed to build on.
Jack Woodford, a decent pulp writer in the first half of the 20th century who also wrote several books on writing and on how the publishing industry works, including "Trial and Error" in 1933 which Robert Heinlein and Ray Bradbury both cited as a major influence in getting their writing careers started, had a nice description of how to plot:
> Boy meets girl; girl gets boy into pickle; boy gets pickle into girl
To summarize Dan Brown books by describing the characters fundamentally misunderstands them. The characters are about as important as the characters in a porno.
The point of a Dan Brown book is to chart the stupidest possible path through history and pop science, and he's uniquely capable of this.
Terry Pratchett: A visionary on the Discworld invents something vaguely like a modern object or industry. That invention enslaves the visionary and must be stopped by a crotchety old person who hates change.
Wodehouse: Titanic forces beyond your control such as scheming aunts, accidental engagements, and inability to express your feelings threaten to irrevocably ruin your life forever. It’ll take a Machiavellian mastermind and a series of unlikely coincidences to extricate you from this predicament but you’ll have to pay a price.
The above was written by hand. As an experiment, I asked Claude to generate a few dozen more. Most weren't great. Here are the highlights:
Michael Crichton:
You're a brilliant scientist who's just created something that will revolutionize the world. Congratulations! It's now trying to eat you.
Michael Crichton:
You've stumbled upon a conspiracy involving [insert scientific field]. Now you're being chased by [insert government agency] while trying to explain complex scientific concepts to the reader.
Suzanne Collins:
You must choose between two brooding love interests while simultaneously overthrowing a totalitarian regime. Priorities!
Stephen King:
Welcome to small-town Maine, where the biggest threat isn't the weather, it's the [insert supernatural horror]. Don't worry, a writer will save the day.
Neil Gaiman:
Mythology crashes into modern life. You're either a god who's fallen on hard times or a regular person about to have a very weird Wednesday.
Margaret Atwood:
Society has taken a slight turn for the worse. Women are now [insert dystopian scenario]. This is definitely not a commentary on current events.
And perhaps my favorite:
George Orwell:
Big Brother is watching you. So is your toaster. And your pet. Trust no one, especially not the pigs.
Out of 30 generations, there were a few more that made me smile, but these were the main ones I enjoyed. Something I've noticed with statistical content generation is that it has a difficult time not being too "on the nose" -- almost like next-token-prediction is making it want to rush and get to the punchline a little too quickly. It has a hard time being subtle, and too often it felt like it was just a glib little summary of a story, rather than a sardonic take-a-step-back-and-look-at-the-big-picture sort of approach.
No major revelations, but just barely interesting enough to warrant commenting here. If there were a Dull Men's Club version of Hacker News, I would have posted this there.
Readit News
Linus Torvalds: you take a week-long swing at a problem you find annoying, fascinating, or both. The result enjoys staggering worldwide success in the ensuing decades, despite being clearly outclassed by some alternative from the GNU project that, pinky promise, is coming out any day now.
Grace Hopper: BEGIN a framework that powers critical government functions, AND has secretly saved America from mass destruction time and again, only to be dunked on by Reddit for trivial matters of syntax END.
John Carmack: Doom, but better-looking.
Brendan Eich: you take a week-long swing at a problem your employer finds commercially compelling. The result enjoys staggering worldwide success in the ensuing decades, despite being clearly outclassed by the prior art it was supposed to build on.
Donald Knuth: While writing your magnum opus, a minor irritation arises. You invent a new subfield of computing and spend two years developing a highly idiosyncratic language and tool system.\footnote{And several new typefaces!} Your irritation dissipates and you go back to work with your writing. Generations of academics curse your creation but have nothing better to work with. They wonder if they can get Fabrice Bellard to take a crack at it…
Working on (a medium-sized team that is working on) an LTE base station in the late 2000s and then I'm introduced to his work. It was a very humbling experience. Over the decades I've met a handful of people who were, at times, within reach of Fabrice but he is truly in a league of his own.
Pretty brilliant, right? Right?
> In reply to that, Mr Markus was asked whether he had considered energy usage when creating the cryptocurrency.
> “i made doge in like 2 hours i didn’t consider anything,” he wrote.
> Boy meets girl; girl gets boy into pickle; boy gets pickle into girl
The point of a Dan Brown book is to chart the stupidest possible path through history and pop science, and he's uniquely capable of this.
https://onehundredpages.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/dont-make-f...
Clive Cussler begs to differ.
They really didn’t do Wodehouse justice in the OP
From 50,000 feet they do look somewhat similar, but they're not.
[0] https://www.the-fence.com/all-possible-plots-ii/
https://archive.ph/h2y0R
Michael Crichton:
You're a brilliant scientist who's just created something that will revolutionize the world. Congratulations! It's now trying to eat you.
Michael Crichton:
You've stumbled upon a conspiracy involving [insert scientific field]. Now you're being chased by [insert government agency] while trying to explain complex scientific concepts to the reader.
Suzanne Collins:
You must choose between two brooding love interests while simultaneously overthrowing a totalitarian regime. Priorities!
Stephen King:
Welcome to small-town Maine, where the biggest threat isn't the weather, it's the [insert supernatural horror]. Don't worry, a writer will save the day.
Neil Gaiman:
Mythology crashes into modern life. You're either a god who's fallen on hard times or a regular person about to have a very weird Wednesday.
Margaret Atwood:
Society has taken a slight turn for the worse. Women are now [insert dystopian scenario]. This is definitely not a commentary on current events.
And perhaps my favorite:
George Orwell:
Big Brother is watching you. So is your toaster. And your pet. Trust no one, especially not the pigs.
Out of 30 generations, there were a few more that made me smile, but these were the main ones I enjoyed. Something I've noticed with statistical content generation is that it has a difficult time not being too "on the nose" -- almost like next-token-prediction is making it want to rush and get to the punchline a little too quickly. It has a hard time being subtle, and too often it felt like it was just a glib little summary of a story, rather than a sardonic take-a-step-back-and-look-at-the-big-picture sort of approach.
No major revelations, but just barely interesting enough to warrant commenting here. If there were a Dull Men's Club version of Hacker News, I would have posted this there.