The NYT has just given Wolfram an interview. Either you can see all this as the greatest exercise in self-publicity in history, or you can accept that despite the arrogance, despite the infantilism, and despite the failure to recognize others who have something to say on the subject, this show is going to run and run, because, at the bottom line, there is something really, really interesting. And whether he's right or wrong, I kinda agree with this:
I'm probably more nervous about people trying to apply what I've done in the book too quickly, rather than too slowly. It would be bizarre if my attempts to sort of change the direction of quite a bit of science were, you know, immediately absorbed and understood by people who had spent decades working in some different direction. In academia, there is this common statement: New ideas have either been done before, or they're wrong, or both. And it's kind of charming to me that people send mail about some things in my book, say, ''We've said this before.''
But I don't think they've understood what I've said. In fact, if they did understand, their first response would be, ''That can't be right.'' People's responses are being documented in a very obvious way. There are newsgroups and postings. I find it rather interesting. But so far, I'm just collecting the data. The thing one learns about the history of science is that these things take awhile. And one waits.
Source: New York Times: