amark

It's extremely difficult to re-gain respect once it's lost. That's just how people are. We form an opinion on somebody, and then look for reasons to justify that opinion, not challenge that opinion.

Also, group/team dynamics are usually influenced by the most vocal. If there was a previous serious conflict with 1 or 2 team members, it's possible they continued to poison the discourse, even when the management quality improved for that week.

I've been a hypem fan for 7 years. Take it from me, it's the BEST.

My company's UX even riffs off of theirs (with an unrelated focus)

Same as with any position in the tech industry. It's not about job applications and education anymore. It's about networking. It's about demonstrating skills through projects. It's about online presence. It's about conferences and events. It's about reaching out to people who have done it before, and learning from them.

Why do they use so much bloom lighting? It's excessive.

That's true, but you're ignoring the other environmental impacts your plastic use (and my plastic use) will have. Raw materials, expanding landfills, landfill leakage, leeched chemicals from plastic bottles/containers into our food/water, reduced bird populations from eating plastics, etc.

Nobody gets tenure anymore. Most stay as associate professors, and make 60-70k.

He said contemporaries, not friends. Meaning that other successful PHDs/Scientists that put in the same amount of work that he did, but in the private sector, are making that much money.

Science requires repeatability and thorough testing to stabilize theories. If studies are only preformed once and discarded, instead of repeated, we know nothing.

Those fields aren't the issue, and not what he is discussing in the article. The two fields he mentions, bio-chem (the DNA sequencing) and quantum physics (higgs), both require large amounts of funding to progress. Think the large hadrom collider was cheap? Think a DNA sequencing machine is cheap?

Math is only limited by computer power, and our own personal mental computing power. Computer science, similarly. Those two fields are different from the rest of science as we know it today.

Don't think so. The interview is long winded, but right around the mid-point the author get's to the point. The title isn't misleading.

That won't work. The money isn't going to line the pockets of (most) of the researchers. It's going to fund the actual science costs itself, which is millions per project.

The problem is that science nowadays is expensive. We've past the days where scientits can preform chemistry experiments in their garage, most science requires heavily specialized equipment, years of preparation, and/or lots of people.

I don't see a clear way to fix this problem. The projects that have the clearest ROI will continue to get funded first.

He's really a PR genius. When he restores Flappy Bird to the app store next week, after a week of the media writing about how it was taken down abruptly, It'll blow up even more.

Dogecoin's already innovating faster then bitcoin!

Basically what they're saying is "we're ok with subverting the constitution if it fits our needs".

The executive branch's power has gotten completely out of hand in the past decade, all under the guise of "security" and preventing "terrorism". The reason the judicial branch exists is to stop crap like this. If they can't do their job constitutional balance of power doesn't exist.

Yes.

I disagree. Dogecoin has the backing of one of the strongest communities on the internet. It's quite feasible to see it as a virtual currency used to pay for online goods, such as karma, games, or media.

It's friendliness means it may be adopted by the majority of consumers, who are scared off by the volatility and high price of bitcoins.

What needs to happen? First, it needs to distance itself from the meme part of it, and just become the standard fun, digital currency. Second, the barriers to entry need to be reduced. That means buying DOGE with USD instead of bitcoins, and easy online wallets. Finally, it needs uses, the most likely to happen are inter-app payments, such as over reddit or imgur.

The power of dogecoin comes from the community. If it can become the "default" crypto for redditors and the like, it will see huge success. No other currency has launched with such a strong community backing.

It's one of the reasons I think Dogecoin is such a good bet.

Yep. Pretty silly to write a whole article about it.

This article is severely flawed.

1. He's confounding "The Internet" with electronics in general. He mentions how most days he spent time listening to an e-book or playing video games. The problem is lack of human connection, emotion, and socializing, the internet is just one piece of that puzzle. Playing video games for 2 hours straight is just as bad as surfing reddit for 2 hours.

2. He's clearly an introvert, and his natural tendency is to avoid human interaction and involve himself in solitary pursuits. Introverts aren't always happy about their lack of human interaction, but it's their natural state. The internet is just an enabler of his aloneness, much as videogames, or e-books, or even regular books are.

3. He talks about losing track of friends. He is the only one culpable for that, nobody else. When we have facebook, it enables us to passively keep up with friends, but in a superficial way. To maintain a real friendship, we must still be active, with our without tools like facebook.

4. He complains that traditional communication is just as time consuming as things like email. However, he's receiving snail mail in excessive quantities because he's a writer, which is not indicative of the average person. Hes not charging his phone, which is his fault. And the fact that he's afraid to call anyone is, again, a symptom of him being an introvert. Email, texting, and commenting ARE excessively time consuming.

The problem is not the internet, the problem is the fact that we all waste ALOT of time spewing content, forming superficial relationships, and encouraging superficial online communication.

The solutions are things like time management. Attitude. Action. The internet, and technology by extension, enables wonderful things, but it also enables the worst of us. It's up to the individual to make the best of it.

This is something that you could google. No need to ask on here.

Anything with that kind of growth is eventually going to crash. Human behavior is extremely predictable.

Is this "THE" crash? Maybe, maybe not. Will it go back up? Probably.

Super useful article, thanks for posting! This is the true way to manage a content marketing strategy. Build relationships, but go about it in a very organized, targeted manner, and they will pay off long term. Thanks!

It's not just an aesthetic, depth changes your perception of information hierarchy, can draw your eye, and can entice user actions depending on the real world analogues of the object.

"Needing" depth really depends on your interpretation. Yes the github buttons don't need depth to be buttons, but at the same time, their depth probably makes them feel more clickable, and draws more attention.

Hard to say 7 out of 10 is "complete penetration"... Also the author probably meant saturation, not penetration.