I saved some extracts:

"Great scientists tolerate ambiguity very well. They believe the theory enough to go ahead; they doubt it enough to notice the errors and faults so they can step forward and create the new replacement theory. If you believe too much you'll never notice the flaws; if you doubt too much you won't get started. [...]

What you want to do [when talking to people about your work] is get that critical mass in action; 'Yes, that reminds me of so and so,' or, 'Have you thought about that or this?' When you talk to other people, you want to get rid of those sound absorbers who are nice people but merely say, 'Oh yes,' and to find those who will stimulate you right back. [...]

If you read all the time what other people have done you will think the way they thought. If you want to think new thoughts that are different, then do what a lot of creative people do - get the problem reasonably clear and then refuse to look at any answers until you've thought the problem through carefully how you would do it, how you could slightly change the problem to be the correct one. So yes, you need to keep up. You need to keep up more to find out what the problems are than to read to find the solutions."