blog/content/post/2006/01/04/2006-01-04-richard-hamming-...

149 lines
9.8 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

2019-03-31 11:00:21 +00:00
---
title: 'Richard Hamming: You and Your Research'
author: kazu634
date: 2006-01-04
wordtwit_post_info:
- 'O:8:"stdClass":13:{s:6:"manual";b:0;s:11:"tweet_times";i:1;s:5:"delay";i:0;s:7:"enabled";i:1;s:10:"separation";s:2:"60";s:7:"version";s:3:"3.7";s:14:"tweet_template";b:0;s:6:"status";i:2;s:6:"result";a:0:{}s:13:"tweet_counter";i:2;s:13:"tweet_log_ids";a:1:{i:0;i:2243;}s:9:"hash_tags";a:0:{}s:8:"accounts";a:1:{i:0;s:7:"kazu634";}}'
categories:
- つれづれ
---
<div class="section">
<p>
 <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html" onclick="__gaTracker('send', 'event', 'outbound-article', 'http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html', 'Richard Hamming: You and Your Research');" target="blank">Richard Hamming: You and Your Research</a>を読んで気になった部分を書き出しています。面倒くさいから英語のまま。
</p>
<hr />
<ul>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
So far as I know,&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
so<br /> far as I know, and I&#8217;ve been told by others, much of what I say applies<br /> to many fields. Outstanding work is characterized very much the same<br /> way in most fields[.]&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
One of the characteristics&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
One<br /> of the characteristics you see, and many people have it including great<br /> scientists, is that usually when they were young they had independent<br /> thoughts and had the courage to pursue them.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
One of the characteristics&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
One<br /> of the characteristics of successful scientists is having courage. Once<br /> you get your courage up and believe that you can do important problems,<br /> then you can. If you think you can&#8217;t, almost surely you are not going<br /> to.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
What most people think are the best working conditions&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
What<br /> most people think are the best working conditions, are not. Very<br /> clearly they are not because people are often most productive when<br /> working conditions are bad.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
What appears to be a fault&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
What<br /> appears to be a fault, often, by a change of viewpoint, turns out to be<br /> one of the greatest assets you can have.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
The more you know, the more you learn&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
The<br /> more you know, the more you learn; the more you learn, the more you can<br /> do; the more you can do, the more the opportunity &#8211; it is very much<br /> like compound interest.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
On this matter of drive&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
On<br /> this matter of drive Edison says, &#8220;Genius is 99% perspiration and 1%<br /> inspiration.&#8221; He may have been exaggerating, but the idea is that solid<br /> work, steadily applied, gets you surprisingly far. The steady<br /> application of effort with a little bit more work, intelligently<br /> applied is what does it. That&#8217;s the trouble; drive, misapplied, doesn&#8217;t<br /> get you anywhere. I&#8217;ve often wondered why so many of my good friends at<br /> Bell Labs who worked as hard or harder than I did, didn&#8217;t have so much<br /> to show for it. The misapplication of effort is a very serious matter.<br /> Just hard work is not enough &#8211; it must be applied sensibly.&#160;&#160;<br /> &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
If you do not work on an important problem,&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
If you do not work on an important problem, it&#8217;s unlikely you&#8217;ll do important work. It&#8217;s perfectly obvious.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
If you want to do great work,&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
If you want to do great work, you clearly must work on important problems, and you should have an idea.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
there is a pretty good correlation&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
there<br /> is a pretty good correlation between those who work with the doors open<br /> and those who ultimately do important things, although people who work<br /> with doors closed often work harder. Somehow they seem to work on<br /> slightly the wrong thing &#8211; not much, but enough that they miss<br /> fame.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
by altering the problem, by looking at the thing differently&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
I<br /> suggest that by altering the problem, by looking at the thing<br /> differently, you can make a great deal of difference in your final<br /> productivity because you can either do it in such a fashion that people<br /> can indeed build on what you&#8217;ve done, or you can do it in such a<br /> fashion that the next person has to essentially duplicate again what<br /> you&#8217;ve done. It isn&#8217;t just a matter of the job, it&#8217;s the way you write<br /> the report, the way you write the paper, the whole attitude. It&#8217;s just<br /> as easy to do a broad, general job as one very special case. And it&#8217;s<br /> much more satisfying and rewarding!&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;
<li>
one of the reasons is drive and commitment.&#160;&#160; &#160;<br /> <blockquote>
Well,<br /> one of the reasons is drive and commitment. The people who do great<br /> work with less ability but who are committed to it, get more done that<br /> those who have great skill and dabble in it, who work during the day<br /> and go home and do other things and come back and work the next day.<br /> They don&#8217;t have the deep commitment that is apparently necessary for<br /> really first-class work. They turn out lots of good work, but we were<br /> talking, remember, about first-class work. There is a difference. Good<br /> people, very talented people, almost always turn out good work. We&#8217;re<br /> talking about the outstanding work, the type of work that gets the<br /> Nobel Prize and gets recognition.&#160;&#160; &#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
&#160;&#160; &#160;</li> </ul> </div>