dwolfson20

Thanks for the perspective. You're almost certainly correct that I am overthinking it.

I actually disagree that you shouldn't read "Roots." I just finished it myself, and it's about as close as you can get to experiencing what it would be like to be taken away from your home in chains.

Also -- it took the Civil War to end slavery in this country.

Conking is one example.

If you haven't read the book, how can you even begin to have formed a judgment of him?

Consider reading the comments on that article. A lot of good points are made about why Reading Rainbow is worthwhile.

Another way to put it: Malcolm X was authentic in everything he did, and that was something this country needed.

He was able to articulate more clearly than anyone else the implications of being black in America: that the only way to succeed in any way was by trying to act white.

Thanks in large part to his activism, that is far less true today.

Actually, his views were rapidly evolving at the time of his death. Read the whole book.

Everyone should really just read the entire Autobiography.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Autobiography-Malcolm-Told-Haley/d...

Also, they should spell "Malcolm" correctly. :)

As one who is serious about web apps, I have some different feedback for you.

I would pay at least $300 for the interviews alone.

While there are clearly improvements that could be made to the sales page, they are all tactical. I think your strategy is spot-on, and I think you've compiled a package of incredible value.

Thank you for putting this all together in such a well-designed way! Clearly if one values their time, this investment is far more productive than sifting through "hundreds of blog posts."

How about evaluating the work itself -- through the sample, or buying the book and asking for money back if it's unsatisfactory?

> For the price of the book alone ($29), I could watch 100+ hours of tutorials on a site like Lynda or Tuts+ from a variety of developers with similar experience. I'm having a hard time verifying that the value of the resources matches the price tag.

Dude. Do you realize that you are valuing your time at approximately 25 cents per hour? I suspect you have other, deeper reasons for not investing such a small amount of money in something that, by the way, comes with a full guarantee.

For other busy people, it's also worth pointing out that the schedule is very slow and focused on understanding. For instance, we are taking the introduction one section per day. The guy running it at Reddit created a nice Google calendar for the "course." Needless to say I am psyched for this.

This is the field we choose.

Expand your thinking in the abstract about what a database is. As 71104 mentions, a file system is also a database. What you are thinking of as "a database" is really a specific type of key-value store that is located on disk. But the fact most DBs are on disk has nothing to do with the concept itself.

As a sports fan, I wonder what's specific about the sports industry in this analysis? Vanity metrics are an issue for any business with a digital presence.

Maybe left unsaid is the idea that sports organizations are used to relying on numbers to assess on-field ability, and it now permeates their social marketing strategies as well? Still, this is a mistake I've seen many businesses in plenty of far-flung industries make.

Maybe. It depends on what we as a society want our government to spend money on. Considering our current demands in this country (no cuts to entitlements), I think it requires at least that much.

People can't vote away multi-million dollar CEO bonuses, though.

It's a nice intention, but how do you devise that mechanism? If I keep $10,000 in my savings account for 30 years, are you going to tax it every year?

Without government to pay for the roads citizens drive to their businesses, and the infrastructure that gives them water and temperature moderation, and 1,000 other things that are essential to provide for functioning commerce, citizens wouldn't be making so much money as they do. And I'd wager that effect is worth a lot more than 30%.

This is an extremely abstract argument. It's a matter of degree. If everyone gave all their money to charity, we'd have no government at all.

>Maybe the tax code needs tweaking at the level of the top 400, but it's very progressive up to the level of the top 1%.

If you read the whole piece, that's exactly what he says.

He also puts on a great shareholder's meeting every year, where he and his #2 Charlie Munger spend a lot of time just answering questions. And of course, there are the discounts at Dairy Queen and Nebraska Furniture Mart. He even supports local independent businesses like The Bookworm.

http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/meet01/VisGuide2011.pdf

I'd have liked to see that, too, but one can run the numbers if one wants.

Also, isn't getting more money better than not getting more money? (NOTE: We certainly need to slow our spending, as well, but I fail to see how an increase in revenue is a bad thing.)

Maybe take a look at Buffett's charitable record sometime.

He really is amazing. I live in Omaha. You can drive by Buffett's house, and you'd have no idea who lives there if you didn't already know. I know people who have interacted with him on a regular basis, and he is just as personable and down-to-earth as his public image suggests.

Buffett has been saying this for years. I don't expect anyone to start listening now.