A New Kind of Science
A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolframby Stephen Wolfram
Shares rank 26 of 50 popular science books by recommenders
Recommended as a clear, worthwhile read for people interested in its subject; critics find it repetitive, overhyped, and short on practical use cases.
Recommended as a clear, worthwhile read for people interested in its subject; critics find it repetitive, overhyped, and short on practical use cases.
11 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 4
- criticize it
- 7
- approval share
- 36%
Recommended in 4 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: not recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 4 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
- 0.5 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, not met.
- Recommended in 4 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Clear explanations and overall quality
“the clarity of his explanations and the quality of the book overall”
Comment from 22 Aug 2026 in “A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram: Monster Raving Egomania” Worth reading for interested readers
“Super cool book and absolutely worth reading if you're into this kind of thing.”
Comment from 3 Dec 2025 in “1D Conway's Life glider found, 3.7B cells long”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Credits Wolfram with others' discoveries
“Why blame the book for giving the author credit, instead of the author for giving himself credit?”
Comment from 22 Aug 2026 in “A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram: Monster Raving Egomania” “it seems to give Wolfram credit for a bunch of discoveries made by a huge array of people”
Comment from 22 Aug 2026 in “A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram: Monster Raving Egomania” Repetitive, grandiose, needs editing
“NKS was bloviating, grandiose, repetitive, and shallow.”
Comment from 4 Dec 2025 in “1D Conway's Life glider found, 3.7B cells long” “My goodness it's bad and need of an editor.”
Comment from 24 Feb 2026 in “Making Wolfram Tech Available as a Foundation Tool for LLM Systems”
Other popular science books people recommend
The four most recommended other popular science books, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gödel, Escher, Bachby Douglas Hofstadter | 47 | 10 | 82% | 10 | — | Approved |
| Thinking, Fast and Slowby Daniel Kahneman | 17 | 13 | 57% | 9 | — | — |
| Thinking in Systemsby Donella Meadows | 17 | 0 | 100% | 8 | — | Approved |
| The Selfish Geneby Richard Dawkins | 14 | 5 | 74% | 8 | — | Approved |
| A New Kind of Scienceby Stephen WolframThis page | 4 | 7 | 36% | 4 | — | — |
What people said
All 12 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“A New Kind of Science is a much better monitor stand.”
“the clarity of his explanations and the quality of the book overall”
“Why blame the book for giving the author credit, instead of the author for giving himself credit?”
“it seems to give Wolfram credit for a bunch of discoveries made by a huge array of people”
“Wolfram displays absolutely no understanding of evolution, or what would be necessary to explain the adaptation of organisms”
“I don't feel like it lived up to the hype of the first chapter.”
“My goodness it's bad and need of an editor.”
“is probably best revealed by Wolfram's”
“has failed to provide any use cases of when the tool would actually help advance science.”
“it's the same in his book”
“NKS was bloviating, grandiose, repetitive, and shallow.”
“Super cool book and absolutely worth reading if you're into this kind of thing.”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.