Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful youā€™ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutā€™nā€™paste it into its own post ā€” thereā€™s no quota for posting and the bar really isnā€™t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many ā€œesotericā€ right wing freaks, but thereā€™s no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iā€™m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged ā€œculture criticsā€ who write about everything but understand nothing. Iā€™m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyā€™re inescapable at this point, yet I donā€™t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnā€™t be surgeons because they didnā€™t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canā€™t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

Last weekā€™s thread

(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)

  • BlueMonday1984@awful.systemsOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    Ā·
    1 hour ago

    Quick update - Brian Merchantā€™s list of ā€œluddite horrorā€ films ended up getting picked up by Fast Company:

    To repeat a previous point of mine, it seems pretty safe to assume ā€œluddite horrorā€ is gonna become a bit of a trend. To make a specific (if unrelated) prediction, I imagine weā€™re gonna see AI systems and/or their supporters become pretty popular villains in the future - the AI bubbleā€™s produces plenty of resentment towards AI specifically and tech more generally, and the publicā€™s gonna find plenty of catharsis in watching them go down.

    • o7___o7@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      Ā·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      New for him, Iā€™d wager, but I think ESR is treading a well-worn path: i.e. a huge weirdo gets himself in trouble but then finds favor with terrible people, and ultimately suffers from audience capture.

      Edit: I was wrong, itā€™s not new (hat tip to @Soyweiser)

      • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        Ā·
        13 hours ago

        Racism is insane; it fixates on superficial characteristics like skin color rather than important ones like IQ and time preference.

        Iā€™m sorry, ā€œtime preferenceā€? Is this piece of shit referring to Colored Peopleā€™s Time as a scientific concept or am I missing something?

        This is such a cursed tweet ughhhhh

        • V0ldek@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          Ā·
          5 hours ago

          referring to Colored Peopleā€™s Time

          to the what now? What cursed horror beyond my comprehension am I going to learn today?

        • Soyweiser@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          Ā·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          I think that is a reference to the ā€˜eat 1 cookie now or wait, and get 2 cookiesā€™ childrens thing. Racists refer to it often. (This also means the black eat the 1 cookie kids canā€™t build empires bla bla bla).

          (when I search for the term on youtube, it instantly gave me a video linking it to cultural degeneracy for example. Really annoying you canā€™t block channels properly. Also the mises institute has a video on it)

            • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              Ā·
              10 hours ago

              (This particular study, if there even is a real study, is infuriating because what itā€™s really measuring is how much you trust a figure of authority to keep their promise. I wonder why black kids would have issues with this!)

              • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                Ā·
                10 hours ago

                Study finds greedy white children would rather have two fictitious cookies than one real one they can eat.

              • Soyweiser@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                Ā·
                10 hours ago

                Poor hungry kids also more likely to want to eat now than later. Big shocks, clearly this must mean the poor are deficient in some genetic way.

    • Soyweiser@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      Ā·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Quite the proof he no longer writes his own tweets. Fun fact seems like they created various freerossdayone cryptocurrency tokens, who are all doing badly (according to my quick google) he has lost the mandate of heaven.

    • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      Ā·
      1 day ago

      Truly, we are blessed to have a candidate willing to represent the freedom to sell anything on a darknet market and hire a hitman to take out your previous partners or detractors or whatever.

    • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      Ā·
      19 hours ago

      I feel like Ed is underselling the degree to which this is just how businesses work now. The emphasis on growth mindset is particularly gross because of how it sells the CEOs book, but itā€™s not unique in trying to find a feel-good vibes-based way to evaluate performance rather than relying on strict metrics that give management less power over their direct reports.

      Of course heā€™s also written at length about the overall problem that this feeds into (organizations run by people with no idea how to make the business do what it does but who can make the number go up for shareholders) but the most unique part of this is the AI integration, which is legitimately horrifying and I feel like the debunk of growth mindset takes some of the sting away.

    • sinedpick@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      Ā·
      20 hours ago

      This made the rounds last week IIRC. Though, looking at it again I realize I didnā€™t notice how over-stressed the hallucinated button is. Itā€™s funny in a disgusting way.

    • sinedpick@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      Ā·
      20 hours ago

      Iā€™d like to imagine that Adobe/other AI photo editing people are frantically scrambling to fondle their prompts a little harder to avoid things like this. Infinite whack-a-mole.

      • o7___o7@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        Ā·
        6 hours ago

        I wonder if Adobe has considered cooling their new data centers with liquid nitrogen?

        Cold is key to successful turd polishing.

    • bitofhope@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      Ā·
      1 day ago

      ā€”What kind of gambling do you usually have here?
      ā€”Oh, we got both kinds. We got day trading and betting.

  • nightsky@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    Ā·
    1 day ago

    Was browsing ebay, looking for some piece of older used consumer electronics. Found a listing where the description text was written like crappy ad copy. Cheap over-the-top praising the thing. But zero words about the condition of the used item, i.e. the actually important part was completely missing. And then at the end of the description it saidā€¦ this description text was generated by AI.

    AI slop is like mold, it really gets everywhere and ruins everything.

    • froztbyte@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      Ā·
      1 day ago

      I donā€™t think itā€™s exclusively due to rust but itā€™s a very cool change

      can only imagine how much wailing and consternation it must be causing in some areas

      • swlabr@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        Ā·
        19 hours ago

        I donā€™t think itā€™s exclusively due to rust

        to be fair, I donā€™t know any other languages concerned with safety other than rust, so it was my only option for joke construction.

        • self@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          Ā·
          3 hours ago

          the US DoD used to push for Ada adoption, with mixed success outside of where its use was mandated, due to Adaā€™sā€¦ well, look at it

      • self@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        Ā·
        1 day ago

        the C reactionaries[*] I know definitely arenā€™t ok, but thatā€™s not a new condition. the cognitive load of never, ever writing bugs takes its toll, you know?

        [*] and I feel like I have to specify here: your average C dev probably isnā€™t a C reactionary, but the type of fuckhead who uses C to gatekeep systems development definitely is

        • bitofhope@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          Ā·
          1 day ago

          You (group A) think C is simple, that it can be thought of as portable assembly, that it teaches you how computers actually work, and that itā€™s easy to avoid memory safety errors with good programming discipline, and is therefore fine.

          You (group B) think C is deceptively complex, is far removed from current-day real world hardware semantics, abstracts memory in an outdated and overly simplified manner, and that itā€™s very hard for even professionals to write programs that are correct to the extent of equivalent programs in memory safe languages, therefore C shouldnā€™t be use for new software development.

          I think C is deceptively complex, is far removed from current-day real world hardware semantics, abstracts memory in an outdated and overly simplified manner, and that itā€™s very hard for even professionals to write programs that are correct to the extent of equivalent programs in memory safe languages, which are some of the features that make C so fun and exciting. Like rawdogging a one night stand!

          We are not the same.

          • gerikson@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            Ā·
            23 hours ago

            Yeah thatā€™s the property of C that ensures it will never go away. If you keep telling young men (which most programmers starting out are) that this language is so dangerous, so scary, of course theyā€™ll start using it. Thereā€™s all sorts of rationalizations going on - itā€™s portable, itā€™s performant, itā€™s what the computer is really like - to justify basically driving a fast car without a seatbelt for the sheer thrill of it.

            • V0ldek@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              Ā·
              5 hours ago

              If you keep telling young men (which most programmers starting out are) that this language is so dangerous, so scary, of course theyā€™ll start using it

              I always suspected that I wasnā€™t a REAL MANā„¢, but I didnā€™t know that me learning programming through C++ and being like ā€œwell this shit sucks, what the fuck, there has to be a better wayā€ was one of the first symptoms.

            • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              Ā·
              19 hours ago

              Past a certain point itā€™s a little bit like learning to type on a typewriter. On one hand it forces you to think about certain types of mistakes and forces you to avoid making errors. On the other hand it gives you a whole bunch of trained habits that are either useless or actively harmful once youā€™re working with better tools.

            • bitofhope@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              Ā·
              23 hours ago

              Now to be fair, C really is quite close to what the machine is really like, if by C you mean B and by machine you mean PDP-7.

              Itā€™s also highly portable in the sense that all twenty or thirty well-formed, standard-compliant and nontrivial C programs ever written can be compiled to a mind-bogglingly huge variety of hardware and OS targets and even work correctly on some of them.

        • froztbyte@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          Ā·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          [*] and I feel like I have to specify here

          and like all C things, the specificities of pointer mechanics might mean any one of a number of things and theyā€™re all correct

          • istewart@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            Ā·
            1 day ago

            The original statement was clearly meant to dereference a pointer to an object of type ā€œreactionary,ā€ but I expected it to return maybe a Yarvin or at least a Catturd

            • self@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              Ā·
              22 hours ago

              the thrill of UB: you try to dereference a C reactionary but get a lambda calculus neoreactionary instead

  • blakestacey@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    Ā·
    2 days ago

    eigenrobot:

    almost every smart person I talk to in tech is in favor of mandatory eugenic polygynous marriages in order to deal with the fertility crisis. people are absolutely fed up with the lefty approach of using generational insolvency as a pretextual cudgel to install socialism.

    • V0ldek@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      Ā·
      5 hours ago

      almost every person in tech (ā€¦) to deal with the fertility crisis

      Why would we be listening to ā€œtechā€ to deal with ā€œthe fertility crisisā€? Why is ā€œtechā€ concerned with ā€œfertilityā€?

      Stay in your fucking lane, will ya. How about mandatory eugenic polygynous marriages to address the growing crisis of open-source development? The crisis of newest C++ standards not being implemented in the popular compilers quickly enough? The crisis of Node.JS existing?

    • istewart@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      Ā·
      1 day ago

      why do we want people who canā€™t deliver viable technology raising more kids?

      why should we assume that they would be any better at the kid-raising than the technology?

    • maol@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      Ā·
      1 day ago

      Oh but you see itā€™s not regressive because itā€™s polygynous not polygamous. Those women totally want to be forced to have the ubermenschā€™s children

    • gerikson@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      Ā·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Cue the scene where Buck Turgidson finds out that Dr. Strangelove proposes humanity survive deep inside mineshafts, with multiple women for every man.

      Anyway I like how the options presented are ā€œsocialismā€ - vaguely defined so as to be something anyone can project their fears on - on the one hand, and state-ordered sexual slavery on the other. True freedom, amirite?

      I had to doublecheck what ā€œpolygynousā€ means, and I ā€œloveā€ this Google-generated Wiki excerpt. Itā€™s technichally correct in some parts of the world.

      • maol@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        Ā·
        1 day ago

        ā€œsocialism or barbarism you say? well maybe barbarism has its upsidesā€

    • corbin@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      Ā·
      2 days ago

      Every person I talk to ā€” well, every smart person I talk to ā€” no, wait, every smart person in tech ā€” okay, almost every smart person I talk to in tech is a eugenicist. Ha, see, everybody agrees with me! Well, almost everybodyā€¦

    • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      Ā·
      2 days ago

      Man, I didnā€™t even know how to react to this nonsense. The obvious sneer is to point out that if the alternative is to interact with people like ER here we really shouldnā€™t be surprised to see a declining birth rate. But I think the more important takeaway that this hints at is that these people are dumb and fundamentally incurious.

      Like, thereā€™s plenty of surveys and research into why people are having fewer kids than they used to, and itā€™s not because toddlers are little hellions more so than in the past. And ā€œgenerational insolvencyā€ is a pretty big fucking part of the explanation actually, as is empowering families to choose whether or not to have children rather than leaving it entirely up to the vicissitudes of biological processes and horniness. The latter part cuts both ways, in that people who want families are (theoretically; see above re: financial factors) able to take advantage of fertility treatments or IVF or whatever and have kids where they historically would have been unable to do so.

      But no, rather than actually engage with any of that or otherwise treat the world like other people have agency they have identified what they believe to be the problem and have decided that the brute application of state power is the solution, so long as that power is being applied to other people. For all that we acknowledge the horrors of fascism, I think the stupidity of these people is also worth acknowledging, if for no other reason than to reinforce why this shit shouldnā€™t be taken seriously.

      • maol@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        Ā·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Saying theyā€™re dumb and incurious offers almost too much respect. They believe in racial eugenics based on IQ - look at the kind of shit Elon Musk retweets. Scaremongering about fertility is just the way they get to the racial eugenics, while pretending itā€™s a necessity not a choice.

        Edit: and now I see froztbyte said almost the same thing first. Oops

      • froztbyte@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        Ā·
        2 days ago

        Man, I didnā€™t even know how to react to this nonsense

        same way as other nazis - boop 'em on the nose

        Iā€™d be willing to wager a guess that this fragile little flower has never had a ā€œphysical altercationā€ in their life and would walk away with fucking ~ptsd from a single ā€œhey that shit is not okayā€ boop

        this hints at is that these people are dumb and fundamentally incurious

        if youā€™re talking about eigenrowboat, I donā€™t think I agree. theyā€™re quite curious, but they ā€œjustā€ go in with a particular viewpoint and a desire to ā€œprove their pointā€ in the most prevaricating way possible. itā€™s no accident that the entire sphere of ā€œhow do we make scientific racism and nazism more socially palatableā€ gravitates around these fuckers. if youā€™re instead talking about them making these comments in a ā€œsee the poor are dumb and useless and thus deserve what they getā€, well, see aforementioned shitty opinions

        • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          Ā·
          1 day ago

          Nah, itā€™s the Nazis who are dumbasses, not that that makes them less dangerous. They certainly think theyā€™re smart and the want to present themselves as curious, but in reality they reduce knowledge to another political tool. There is no true spirit of inquiry or asking questions, only trying to marshal arguments in favor of their pre-established answer. Intellectual discourse becomes both a source of power to give their preexisting ideology a veneer of legitimacy and also an arena of conflict where they can prove that theyā€™re the biggest bestest boys.

          These people possess neither a desire nor a willingness to engage with the world as it actually is. Instead they want the power to impose their vision of what the world should look like (a strict hierarchy with them at the ostensible top) onto reality, and when it inevitably fails because thatā€™s not how any of this works they end up uselessly doubling down and retreating into conspiracies. Next time theyā€™ll have more power and itā€™ll work, even though itā€™s the basic underlying shape of Creation that theyā€™re ultimately at war with.

    • froztbyte@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      Ā·
      2 days ago

      aww, is the poor baby missing that maybe thereā€™s people who donā€™t want to talk to them because of how much of a piece of shit they are? how sad

      lefty approach of using generational insolvency as a pretextual cudgel to install socialism

      this dipshit continues to make the most astounding not-even-wrong posts. guess theyā€™re angling for a job as the next Noahpinion or Yglesias

  • maol@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    Ā·
    2 days ago

    Got linked to this UFO sightings timeline in Popbitch today. Thought it looked quite interesting and quite fun. Then I realized the information about individual UFO sightings was being supplied by bloody Co-pilor, and therefore was probably even less accurate than the average UFOlogy treatise.

    PS: Does anyone know anything about using Arc-GIS to make maps? I have an assignment due tomorrow and Iā€™m bricking it.

      • maol@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        Ā·
        1 day ago

        I donā€™t know what these acronyms mean šŸ«”

        Iā€™m just going to have to send an email in and be like hi Iā€™m out of my depth. Can I still pass this class if I fail this assignment

  • swlabr@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    Ā·
    2 days ago

    https://www.infoworld.com/article/3595687/googles-flutter-framework-has-been-forked.html/

    Iā€™m currently using Flutter. Itā€™s good! And useful! Much better than AI. It being mostly developed by Google has been a bit of a worry since Google is known to shoot itself in the foot by killing off its own products.

    So while itā€™s no big deal to have an open source codebase forked, just wanted to highlight this part of the article:

    Carroll also claimed that Googleā€™s focus on AI caused the Flutter team to deprioritize desktop platforms, and he stressed the difficulty of working with the current Flutter team

    Described as ā€œFlutter+ā€ by Carroll, Flock ā€œwill remain constantly up to date with Flutter, he said. Flock will add important bug fixes, and popular community features, which the Flutter team either canā€™t, or wonā€™t implement.ā€

    I hope this goes well!

    • froztbyte@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      Ā·
      2 days ago

      that android project of some months was a venture into flutter (and havenā€™t touched it before)

      I had similar impressions on some things, and mixed on other

      dartā€™s a moderately good language with some nice primitive, tooling overall is pretty mature, broad strokes works well for variant targeting and shit

      libraries though holy shit the current situation (then) was a mess. one minor flutter sdk upgrade and a whole bunch of things just exploded (serialisation things in nosql-type libraries I tried to use for the ostensible desired magic factor (just went back to sqlite stuff again after)). this canā€™t have been due to sdk drift alone, and felt like an iceberg problem

      and then the documentation: fucking awful, for starting. excellent as technical documentation once you grok shit but before that all the examples and things are terrible. lots of extremely important details hidden in single mentions in offhand sentences in places that if you donā€™t happen to be looking at that exact page good luck finding it. this, too, felt like inadequate care and attention by el goog

      I imagine if one is working with this every day you know the lay of the land and where to avoid stepping into holes, but wow was I surprised at how much it was possible to rapidly rakestep, given what the language pitches as

      • swlabr@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        Ā·
        2 days ago

        Yes to be clear when I say flutter is ā€œgoodā€ I deliberately avoided a definition of ā€œgoodā€. I find itā€¦ usable.

        • froztbyte@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          Ā·
          2 days ago

          yep yep - didnā€™t mean to argue with your post inasmuch as to fill in details to the fork, but I guess I couldā€™ve been clearer about that

  • BigMuffin69@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    Ā·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I know itā€™s Halloween, but this popped up in my feed and was too spooky even for me šŸ˜±

    As a side note, what are peoples feelings about Wolfram? Smart dude for sho, but some of the shit he says just comes across as straight up pseudoscientific gobbledygook. But can he out guru Big Yud in a 1v1 on Final Destination (fox only, no items) ? šŸ¤”

    • corbin@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      Ā·
      2 days ago

      The big difference is that Yud is unrigorous while Wolfram is a plagiarist. Or maybe putting it another way, Yud canā€™t write proofs and Wolfram canā€™t write bibliographies.

      • self@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        Ā·
        1 day ago

        I knew Wolfram was a massive asshole, but I didnā€™t know or forgot that Mathematica was based on appropriated publicly-owned work:

        In the mid-1980s, Wolfram had a position at the University of Illinois-Urbanaā€™s Beckman Institute for complex systems. While there, he and collaborators developed the program Mathematica, a system for doing mathematics, particularly algebraic transformations and finding exact-form solutions, similar to a number of other products (Maple, Matlab, Macsyma, etc.), which began to appear around the same time. Mathematica was good at finding exact solutions, and also pretty good at graphics. Wolfram quit Illinois, took the program private, and entered into complicated lawsuits with both his former employee and his co-authors (all since settled).

        and on that note, Symbolics did effectively the same thing with Macsyma (and a ton of other public software on top of that, all to drive sales of their proprietary Lisp machines), but a modernized direct descendent of the last publicly-owned version of Macsyma named Maxima is available and should run wherever Common Lisp does. itā€™s a pretty good replacement for a lot of what Mathematica does, and the underlying language is a lot less batshit too

      • Architeuthis@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        Ā·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I could go over Wolframā€™s discussion of biological pattern formation, gravity, etc., etc., and give plenty of references to people whoā€™ve had these ideas earlier. They have also had them better, in that they have been serious enough to work out their consequences, grasp their strengths and weaknesses, and refine or in some cases abandon them. That is, they have done science, where Wolfram has merely thought.

        Huh, it looks like Wolfram also pioneered rationalism.

        Scott Aaronson also turns up later for having written a paper that refutes a specific Wolfram claim on quantum mechanics, reminding us once again that very smart dumb people are actually a thing.

        As a sidenote, if anyone else is finding the plain-text-disguised-as-an-html-document format of this article a tad grating, your browser probably has a reader mode that will make it way more presentable, itā€™s F9 on firefox.

      • sc_griffith@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        Ā·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        on a side note, I notice this passage in the review:

        Wolfram refers incessantly to his ā€œdiscoveryā€ that simple rules can produce complex results. Now, the word ā€œdiscoveryā€ here is legitimate, but only in a special sense. When I took pre-calculus in high school, I came up with a method for solving systems of linear equations, independent of my textbook and my teacher: I discovered it. My teacher, more patient than I would be with adolescent arrogance, gently informed me that it was a standard technique, in any book on linear algebra, called ā€œreduction to Jordan normal formā€, after the man who discovered it in the 1800s. Wolfram discovered simple rules producing complexity in just the same way that I discovered Jordan normal form.

        this is certainly mistaken. I think the author or teacher must have meant RREF or something to that effect, not Jordan normal form