xiaoma

I like small books that build progressively more complex projects (Dave Thomas's Elixir book was good that way, Realm of Racket was my favorite). Short video tutorials are nice as a supplement are nice, too. Daily Drip's elm videos were fantastic.

The #1 thing I'm usually looking for is something that eliminates any time-wasting hassles related to getting set up, and all the major language features in some set of working examples.

After that, I usually write little command line apps, play with graphics a bit and convert some simple games into the language.

The bubble is credentialed post-secondary schools and the 1.3 trillion dollar student debt crisis.

Just like the credentialed schools, there's a wide variety in quality and outcomes, but I think it's pretty clear they're doing better on ROI (and at least people aren't going into decades of debt for them en masse).

> "If the school failed to survive, does it affect the survival of its graduates? Is this going to have a psychological effect on how industry views bootcamp grads, and consequently affect the job prospects of bootcamp grads?"

If someone learns nothing after finishing their courses and has nothing positive on their resume for several years, they'd probably be in a tough spot. That's not really very different from the case for other types of schooling, though. If someone is learning and growing though, why would it? Only an extremely strange employer would ignore a candidate's performance in their last job and reject them based on schooling they did before it.

What's the best resource for learning CLJS as of mid 2017?

Okay, so it looks like I disagree with both you and the low carb nut.

You don't need glucose packets. They might help speed you up a bit, but as long as you've built up your range progressively, the human body can go without them. As I mentioned above, I used to do > marathon distances once or twice a month in the mountains for fun (which I realize is very different than racing. I did dozens if not hundreds of 50k+ runs and have never yet even tried a gel pack. Some of those runs were at a weight of over 90kg!

Yes, you'll burn a ton of calories. I often found I weighed in at a full 5kg less after a run and probably 0.5kg less after re-hydrating. Sure, I was never anywhere near as good at long distances as mid distances, but you don't need gel packs. At least I didn't for anything up to 50k, and I probably could have gone further if not for the logistics of carrying enough water and dealing with the heat and humidity that go along with living on a semi-tropical island.

I've only had that happen twice in a dozen years.

WordPress has had one-click updates for years and makes it easier than any other CMS I've seen. It's been doing a fine job and powering 25% of all pages on the net and growing.

And yet Rob Krar isn't into low-carb, is pushing 40 and runs the same distances faster... For that matter, the Bison Bar mentioned in the video you linked to contains roughly equal amounts of protein and sugar! Not that it matters much. Frankly, ultra runners can get away with more mistakes since there's so much less competition at their distances.

The top competitive distance runners (a group dominated by Kenyans and Ethiopians) generally eat over 70% of their calories from carbohydrates. Naoko Takahashi said she loved Korean barbecue. Bill Rodgers, the dominant marathoner of the previous genration, seemed to live off of pizza slathered in mayonnaise. Paula Radcliffe talked about eating a lot of fruits, yogurt and granola. While many, many runners have sworn by various odd diets, it doesn't look like anyone has been able to get a sizable edge from theirs.

I only raced 5-10k ranges, but I used to run greater than marathon distances once or twice per month in the mountains for fun so I can have some personal experience with "walls". Even a skinny person has enough fat on them to run for far longer distances than any race I've heard of. The "walls" are more about glycogen limits in your muscles. Extending the wall is mostly an issue of how high your aerobic threshold is, how well you can spare glycogen at the beginning (though this probably matters less for ultras) and your running efficiency.

All three of these factors are influenced by diet to some degree but training is by far the more important factor. Strangely, caffeine has a bigger effect than macro-nutrient composition.

Yeah, there's an evolutionary cause for sure. Maybe the cause for revulsion at certain kinds of marketing is a similar protective mechanism but driven my memetics rather than genetics at the core.

In each case, your answer was essentially, "the disgusting thing in its entirety!" This is equivalent to nudiustertian's reaction toward the affiliate site.

The difficulty comes from trying to zoom in to a higher level of precision, as nimchimpsky requested. What exactly do you find disgusting about someone eating an eyebrow, for example? Can you explain it?

> "I think that if you see a complex equation, you should be able to roughly imagine it in your head."

This breaks down in many cases. What if your equation involves complex numbers for each component? What if it's an eight dimensional space or perhaps a multi-hundred dimensional space for recommender system?

At some point, you have to be comfortable with more abstract representations.

>"what exactly do you find disgusting."

Disgust isn't usually that easy to pin down with precision.

Do you find a soiled diaper disgusting? If so, "What exactly do you find disgusting?" Do you find a it disgusting if a person is plucking out their eyebrows and eating them? Probably, but what exactly about it is disgusting?

Many if not most people would struggle to pin it down "exactly". In the case of this particular affiliate site, I'd say the general incentive structure that leads to this entire category of business is disgusting but it's somewhat difficult to pin it on any one specific actor. The site builder may have the best of motives and simply be rationally exploiting an opportunity that would undoubtedly be done by someone else otherwise.

How unusual is it for venture units like this to collect data from the companies they've invested in and then scale up competitors to the successful ones?

I can't imagine either of them putting up with things like doing sales, handling operations or not having a steady paycheck, but anything is possible.

I did have two acquaintances from long ago when I was a humanities major at school who did this. They were roommates in college, both worked for the same lab, then worked at the same tech company after college.

They later moved to California, continued living together and working on the same teams at work. Eventually, they got separate houses but still work together as a high functioning mini-team in their own shared office at a huge SV company last I heard. It probably raised eyebrows at interviews saying they wanted to work together, but they excelled technically and in the long run it seems to have been a significant career advantage that raised their productivity and possibly even rate of learning.

The impression I get is that the situation is something almost no manager would ask for or have any desire to disrupt.

Is IH open for people to publish posts on now or does the author have some sort of connection to them? I've never seen a post like this and it's cool.

Singapore's not that bad as long as you're not gay (which is illegal and punishable by a prison term), a political activist for the opposition party, too independent thinking or otherwise labeled as undesirable by the government.

Thus the moral hazard. If geo-engineering were a major point in climate change discussions, some would feel a false sense of security. Ultimately, this could increase the odds of such drastic measures would be needed. The other thing is that we just can't know how much acidity it would take to cause an ecosystem collapse until it's too late.

That said, sulfate aerosols are one of the oldest proposed plans and our technology has advanced considerably since then. Perhaps some people working on or funding work on a better solution are on reading this thread.

I sure hope someone is quietly tackling it because the political efforts around CO2 emmissions agreements of the past 50 years are not working very well despite a great deal of activism.

Honestly? It's from voracious reading over many years, and including both pop and more academic sources. Books almost always go deeper than what you'll find in video format.

That said, if you try googling geo-engineering and climate change for a few minutes, you'll almost certainly find some of the techniques people have evaluated, their trade-offs and how the issue of moral hazard adds a cost to discussing them.

Don't believe everything you hear from talking heads on TV.

We could put the earth into an ice age for under 1% of global GDP. Discussing geo-engineering is generally seen as a moral hazard, though, so western commentators act like no such possibility exists.

The real threat is ecosystem collapse.

It's not a "myth" or "fantasy" that they didn't have master's degrees.

To the best of knowledge any of them would have needed a visa to go to France, and one of them did in fact live in Canada and then the US on visas before naturalising and starting three separate billion dollar companies along the way.

Ah, that's good it doesn't apply to founders. On the other hand, it's still pretty disastrous if your startup does well and you need to hire people. Nearly all the key early hires at the companies I listed above also lacked master's degrees.

> "This is just silly."

It's worse than silly. It's a baked in design flaw that literally would have prevented the foreign successes the program is in theory trying to replicate. It is silly to heavily credentialize an industry focused on doing new things, but it's also destructive.

The US has some enormous hurdles related to immigration, but it also has a network. Once someone is looking at the world outside SV/SF, there are many other places in the world trying to attract startups. Some of them have both stronger tech scenes and less regressive (though I still wouldn't say visionary) immigration requirements.

Why would a founder pick someplace like France, instead of South Korea or Australia where they could have a path to citizenship and a much easier time hiring talent?

In startups, nearly all the value is in the outliers. Black swan farming beats conservative strategies with even one success in a decade.

They're requiring masters degrees for entrepreneur visas. One thing Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Lei Jun, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Travis Kalanic and Cheng Wei all have in common is a lack of a master's degree.

Why would France add a restriction to their visa that would have eliminated the founders of Amazon, Paypal, Tesla, SpaceX, Apple, Xiaomi, Facebook, Microsoft, Oracle, Uber and Didi Chuxing?

Are they pinning all their hopes on someone following the path of Larry Page or Robin Li, except choosing to immigrate to France to start their search engine? Are the people who made the rule just not aware how few of the top tech company founders have master's degrees? Is it some kind of intentional low-beta strategy to try to scoop up a bunch of more certain, smaller wins?

I truly don't understand what kind of reasoning went into to this program. It's just making France look out of touch.

Edit: ok apparently the founder needs money and it's employees who all need masters degrees (nearly as bad).

I was a pretty early user of Dropbox back when it was featured on this site. As much as I'm loathe to admit it since I don't like the consolidation of huge tech companies, I've pretty much completely abandoned them for Google offerings.

Google drive is just there, whether I wanted it or not. And that goes for anyone who's signed up for Gmail or YouTube (i.e. collectively 40% of the people I know). It's not quite as nice as Dropbox, but it's right there in that weird 9-squared popup menu every time I check my email.

Kudos to Dropbox for having made it to this point, but how long can they survive against free + connected to your email + everything you save on an Android? What if chromebooks get more popular? I wouldn't short them, but it's really hard to see a big win for them given the market dynamics.

Yes, we need retail investors to be able to invest in micro cap level companies. Nobody independent is going to do well competing against institutional investors who have, better access, faster trades and teams of quants. The only way to win is to play a game they can't play. Micro caps are a good example since institutional investors can't invest in them easily (even buying the whole company doesn't move the needle much for them). The other place where independents have an edge is long time horizons. They don't have anyone to report to or any need to sacrifice the long term in order to make quarterly numbers.

As for the average person picking well, I encourage you to look at the Motley Fool community. There you'll find literally millions of hobbyist investors, some who have been chatting together since the mid 90s and many, many people doing well. Even looking at the medium-active CAPS player (basically their over/under prediction board where anyone can make bull or bear cases on any stock), it's better than what you'd get giving your money to Wealthfront or some other manager.

Blocking retail investors from micro caps would just be one more way insulating the rich from competition with the conscientious. As bad as Sarbox has been, that would be an entirely new way to make the US system less equitable for the masses.

I've noticed a huge difference between China (and the greater Chinese speaking community throughout Asia) and the US, too. I also see a lot of hostility between the sexes in the US. Part of that is due to differences in how people use social media for public shaming and to share "outrage porn", but even in offline interactions there are just fundamentally different expectations.

It's absolutely striking how few American couples pour their resources together and run a business together. There are still some family businesses, but it seems like most are run by immigrants. To me, it seems like such a natural thing to band together with and feel you are on a team with the person you've decided to spend your life with. Of course not everyone can be an entrepreneur, but it also looks uncommon in the US for people to significantly invest in their partner's careers either. The focus is more personal.

Us vs them has some problems with nepotism and cases of corruption, but it does a lot better than "us vs us", IMO.

The sad irony of all of this is that I regularly view the NYT without JavaScript because the experience is so much better without.

They may just be specifying the amount of marketing.

If the headline simply reads "Taking $foo to 250M API req/day" and then it turns out that all of the traffic came from a $4MM ad spend, it's a lot less interesting to those without $4MM to spend.

It's not a coincidence that work is done by Foxconn and not a local partner.

China has fantastic human capital. The problem is usually incentives and culture, especially for blue collar work.

Unless by "political orthodoxy", you mean the KMT military dictatorship in power before Taiwan became a democracy, your comment is simply false. You will not find any elected politician on the island claiming that Taiwan is a part of China.

The political views of the mainland soldiers who invaded Taiwan during the 50s and the views of the people of Taiwan who were at their mercy weren't the same, even when dictatorship made it impossible to speak freely. Many had to acquiesce to the system to get by and some did for decades. A prime example would be the first Taiwanese native to succeed in the KMT. After decades of doing the party's bidding, he made it to the very top and destroyed the dictatorship from the inside by allowing opposing parties to form, participate in elections and ultimately win.