Worthwhile technical books have not been published since about 2000.

Technical publishing died in the dot-bomb. The number of new technical books I bought prior to about 2005 was staggering. The number of new technical books I bought in the past 5 years borders on zero.

First, the web killed a bunch of technology publishing. Buying "new" technical books rarely makes sense as the target is probably moving too quickly and the web will be more accurate. So, the only "new", worthwhile technical books are covering more timeless fundamentals, and we probably already have good books for those.

Second, the attitudes of modern youngsters are a bit of an issue. "If it isn't on the web, it doesn't exist." Well, there was a whole lot of history prior to 2000, but none of you know how to find it. That's why you all keep making the same mistakes.

Third, technical books got ferociously expensive. Most technical books that are covering something semi-cutting edge are almost $200.

Fourth, there are no outlets for technical books to be browsed. Amazon killed all the technical bookstores because it wasn't paying sales tax. If I can't browse a book, I'm certainly not paying $200 for it.

So, while this might be an office of someone who checked out 15 years ago, the lack of books later than 2000 isn't good evidence.

These are, after all, just people. People the same as the homeless or the newborn. Queer as folk, as they say. We're just folk. A bit strange but folk none the less.

There are many other views ..

> I may take over this guy's office and leave behind the same stuff he did, albeit newer versions, and never accomplish a fourth of what he did

> Even though he was passionate about what he did, he still had important things outside of it like a beautiful family

> People go through things in life. Yet, they carry on.

> Form and function... Function being the same, what is really changing?

> I will never truly know a person's story until I take the time to hear it from them.. Otherwise, I'm likely making up my own story that confirms with my own beliefs.

The author of the article has fears most of all and he molded what was left in the office to conform to those fears.

Whose to say what mental toll great accomplishments take... If it takes you 50 years to create what one man did in 5, who are you to comment on 'coming' to work for the remaining 45? All things being considered, in the aforementioned example, at least his work had 45 years to be shared and built upon. What of a person who takes 50?

That said, maybe he was phoning it in for years. That would be sad, because it's a waste of time and life.

Perhaps the best research we can do is about us and our loved ones.

Pardon me if I'm not dying to hear the insights this experience triggered for you.

I was like a scavenger roaming in the dark faculties. The best were Physics and Electrical Engineering faculties, and the labs of few of our Maths Profs (I had the ones who wrote our textbooks for Electricity and I'd press them to give me some stuff they had (usually unpublished for personal use). I had few gems along the way.

I've found a lot of stuff and was often burried in the pile they just put next to the appropriate lab's door. It gave a glimpse on where the labs were coming, what was their focus at a given period, what were they working on, thesis titles, how students prepared them, what did they use to produce it, which languages, etc. These things aren't online or in a database.

I still have most of my stuff from college. There's a bunch of things that are cool(the course in 4th year on Control Theory for example: information that _quickly_ gets you to speed on RST digital controllers, Pontryagin, Bellman is pretty scarce). I wasn't in good terms with the Prof, but boy she had a great course.

So I appreciate what I find looking in those dusty places.

Rather then trying to change the universe, I say it's better to enjoy the experience.

As expected, there were nothing of interest there. Old books and articles (I assume the best stuff was taken by other people already!). Not much to talk about really. Not different from any other researcher's office.

Actually, maybe this was the only really thing noticeable. Despite being extremely famous, his office was similar to anyone else's office.

Unlike the person mentioned in the article, he was very active and passionate research-wise until his retirement. That being said, not being active research wise doesn't mean being idle! there are lot of useful and interesting things to do for an academic that don't involve research.

I'm especially pissed off by the way he mentions the anti-depressant medication bottle as a sign of failure. Maybe the professor would have been far more depressed if he hadn't been working on awesome new ideas. Maybe he would have been depressed either way. How is the empty bottle a sign of failure? He sought treatment for his mental health problems. If you scorn that, you're a coward, and I attach very little weight to your opinions on how to live.

And you realize this is what happens when you keep coming to work years after you’ve mentally retired. This terrifies me."

I may perhaps be overly sensitive to this, but this juxtaposition makes me a little uncomfortable.