(1) You don't understand the distinction between having a big ego and being annoying. In this case I don't know what to say, except: thinking you're great doesn't necessitate telling everyone you're great.
(2) You do get the distinction, and you're really arguing that, big ego or small, immodesty is desirable. Again, there's not a lot to say here: it seems possible that Wolfram's success has a lot more to do with creating Mathematica than with telling people he's smarter than they are. If your position is really that being obnoxious (as opposed to merely having self-confidence) is useful, and that we should therefore be obnoxious, then so be it.
'It's arrogant beyond belief but it also makes me think "fuck yeah".'
Well put. I agree that the version of the story in which Wolfram quietly notices that he doesn't know facts, retreats to his room, and tries to learn something doesn't make me want to tear off my shirt and pound my chest NEARLY as much as the version in which he tells everyone he's better than they are before going to his room and trying to learn something.
Thank you for your contribution. Is it really impossible that a genetic difference accounts for some of a person's willingness and/or ability to devote the huge amount of effort that's required to become a 'genius' in any pursuit? I propose we extend your theory: the total inability to grasp complexity is also attributable entirely to environmental circumstances.