This is a classic example of the problems that tech companies/hackers inevitably face as they scale - an increasing obligation to develop algorithms to keep the bad guys out, and the good guys happy. Unfortunately the occasional yet inevitable false positive may trigger and a good guygets flagged. So we do the right thing, apologise to the wronged and try to move on / improve our 'bad guy filter'. What urks me is that as a free & (semi) public service, a demand for retribution is then assumed - In a pseudo-litigious way, implying some kind of damage/compensation model needs to be applied. Even if in a faux-self serving way. "Fix your free service, oh and to really say sorry, prove it by spending your revenue serving my self interests.. because I have (yet another), (vested) good cause that you should be promoting.
Karunamon, you're a cock, your profile even alludes to it. Don't comment on my comments man, just learn when to shut your mouth. No one's going to back your shitty ideas so don't try to be the cool guy, k?
"As I walked out of the interview and stepped back into my time portal device, destined for 2012, I couldn't help but wonder - Why was she using a pencil on that 'Gorrila Glass' screen...
Could it be that she was still hanging on to a corporate process or HR career that was as obsolete and irrelevant as the 'handbook criteria' she was trying judge me by?
Or was it just that she was destroying her iPad as fast as the guy (with the beard and john lennon glasses) on the cover of my CS101 course book was turning in his grave.
Then I kicked myself for not short-selling my Apple stock back in 2012... but wait, I thought... I guess I still can!"
That is just epic! The thing I loved most about this whole article was this line:
"The Apple II disk drive stutters and scrapes."
Remember that sound? It sounded like a hungry gremlin while you waited for what felt like a lifetime before you saw what you were expecting appear on the screen - Sometimes it errored out which was a major bummer, so you ejected the disc, wound it round your pinky, blew on it and tried it again.
When everything loaded correctly, life was awesome.
This is definitely fodder for the "walled garden" proponents to justify closed and heavily vetted architectures. It feels like the old WWW-Wild west days but this time with bigger brothers smugly looking down with the "tut, tut, tut" expression on their faces.
Apologies for reducing this down to "smut", but way I read it, this whole manifesto is a big waste of time and has enjoyed more real estate on HN in the last couple of days than it deserves.
Here's my take:
To decompose or reframe the whole debate into what will nicely fit 1) a talent, skill and inherent urge, and 2) possibly the oldest profession in existence;
As human's most of us are genetically programmed to enjoy the act of sex, that's predominantly what nature gave as an incentive to continuously populate our species.
- Some people 501 it (do it out of necessity, then get on with something they enjoy more)
- Some people are obsessed with it (think about it and do it as much as they can)
- Some people are labelled "frigid" with it (Know how to do it, but choose to do something else whenever they can)
- Some people want to do it but are not in a position to do so - But can enjoy it vicariously via modern technology (Thank god for HN, cos metaphorically, as a beginner programmer, I'm in this boat)
- And some people do it as a job to put food on the table (not strictly 9-5, but you get the idea).
Should the latter case-in-point still feel some sense of enjoyment performing the same task outside the hours of their employment, who the hell is anyone to throw a "pity" card at them. (even if shrouded in a thinly coated tossed bone of respect)
Of all the career choices anyone can make, I'm sure it's this last demographic that truly knows how to separate 'work' from 'pleasure' whilst still performing the same core task (read: natural and acquired skills).
If the buzzer sounds and you still want to keep going - Keep going!
If you want to go home and keep going with someone/something else: Good on you!
If you want to call it a day and read a book - I can recommend a few goo reads!
If you're held back or bullied to into doing it when you don't want to - There are laws to protect you.
Or
Can we call it a job/career: Yes
Can we call it a skill/talent: Yes
Can we call it a born obsession: Yes
Can we call it a lifestyle: Yes
Can we call it a culture: No
Do we need a freaking' manifesto : No
Are we in control of our bodies and minds and in a position to dictate how and when they are utilised: Absolutely!
TL;DR: No matter how you roll, you can do what you do as a job, a hobby, an an obsession, 8:00am-5:01pm or 24/7 - but whether its sex or programming, someone's gonna end up getting screwed.
Anyone know why some of the courses offered by the likes of Standford that are available as open (free courses) on iTunesU and across the web aren't available on Coursera? One thing I dislike about the courses on iTunesU is the lack of being able to connect with others who are also studying along with you. There's no community per se
Yeah as I say, "I hope"... maybe even retrospectively from atop of his own 'iCloud'. Please read my comment as slightly tongue in cheek, I'm well aware of his later-life stance on adult material.
I hope that Steve Jobs, who happily credited himself as an openly adherent member and ambassador of the counterculture that fought for ideas like this to be acceptable in a then over-conservative society, is rightfully turning in his grave.
It is bullshit, I'm currently learning to program by following the excellent CS106A paper at Stanford, free on iTunesU. In the current online climate you can learn to code without trying to figure out how to pay a massive student loan back when you're done.
What bugged me about the spin was the comment about Systrom receiving no formal training, unlike Zuck. Zuck built Facebook with next none of the "formal training" he was supposedly getting during his short stint at Harvard. Systrom actually graduated and then went on to be exposed to some pretty big name companies in the tech world.
Unlike Mark Zuckerberg, the man responsible for acquiring the popular photo sharing app for $1 billion, Systrom received no formal engineering training.
From Systrom's bio on Instagram:
Kevin graduated from Stanford University in 2006 with a BS in Management Science & Engineering—he got his first taste of the startup world when he was an intern at Odeo that later became Twitter. He spent two years at Google—the first of which was working on Gmail, Google Reader, and other products...
No hard feelings at all mate. It didn't work out in the end btw, she cheated on me.