Thanks for that example. I had no idea that SICP was now available for free on the web! Do you remember where you heard the story about convincing MIT Press and the outcome? I took a look but couldn't find it.
That might come in handy if this winds up going somewhere.
I can guarantee the author will not be offended with either a phone call or by someone dropping by. On the other hand, he's less often in the office post-COVID, so it might take a few tries.
Hal probably knows the story better, but he's a bit less drop-in-able. Jerry is super-friendly. (Hal is friendly too, but more random contacts go to /dev/null)
Dropping by would be harder to do, but a dream interview would be to put him in a room with Guido van Rossum to talk about Python and SICP.
I now need to get over my irrational fear of cold calling someone I don't know already (heck, I don't even do that with people that I do know - it's always "what's a good time to call"?)
Jerry and Guido? I think the conversation might be less interesting than you might hope for. SICP is 1984, almost four decades ago now.
If you wanted to talk about robust programming, quantum gravity, differential geometry, education, or a slew of other topics....
As a footnote, I love Python, but someone like Jerry outclasses Guido intellectually. Guido really only did one thing, which is Python. Jerry has done dozens of things.
It's a great thing that Guido has managed to do that one thing - the world would be poorer without it. It's also a great thing that Jerry has done dozens of things - the world would be poorer without them. I see those accomplishments as complementary.
I think you misunderstand my motivations for putting the two of them in the same room. If there's one thing that I've learned over my years in this world, it's that the magic happens between people, not within any one person's mind. There are three "people" in my scenario - Guido, Jerry, and the audience. Somewhere in that conversation, an idea might be sparked.
... well, it has to be the right people. Perhaps it's worth a try, but I'm not sure there would be a spark like that.
If you put Isaac Newton in the same room as George Washington, it'd be two brilliant people, but I'm not sure they'd have much to talk about. They think about different problems.
What might be interesting, come to think of it, would be a Chat Roulette, but populated with these sorts of folks.
I understand what you're trying to go for, but you're treating people like the equivalent of a particle accelerator hoping that by smashing them together at sufficient velocity... that something will come of it.
In practice I find this rarely to be the case unless you as the facilitator are also commensurately cognitively capable (say that three times fast), otherwise you're sort of placing an excessively undue amount of pressure on them.
That might come in handy if this winds up going somewhere.