fireandfury

It looks amazing. I'm trying to figure out the best way to read this. The printed option looks good.

This is definitely something I want to sit down with and soak in.

Before you hit compile, look at the key lines of code that you just wrote and think about exactly what you expect them to do. Then compile and run the code. Don't rush to compile. It'll take longer in the long run. Also, it's less enjoyable to program that way. I prefer a careful, focused style where every line is carefully written.

I know what you mean about hitting F5 all the time. I usually program that way when I don't feel like thinking. I want to cross my fingers and hope that it works. When I notice I'm doing this, I need to stop and think about what it is that I'm doing. I'll often write down in text what I'm trying to do. Or I'll turn off the computer and think about it.

He believes people can accomplish great things, when those people may not believe it themselves. He reminds them they can.

I read about half of Dive Into Python, and it was pretty advanced stuff. It's good if you know another programming language very well. The book starts out slow, but the difficulty curve accelerates very fast. I wouldn't read it cover to cover. It would be a good reference to have though.

I'd suggest skimming the table of contents of both books first.

Then again, Dive Into Python is free, so you might as well start with that, and if it's too advanced, switch to Learning Python (I read the first 100 pages of it last summer, and I thought it was good, I'm a fan of O'Reilly).

If you really want a beginner book, Learning Python is a great choice. It was just updated too. Good luck.

Heroku is awesome. Great idea, great vision. Scalable hosting makes so much sense for web applications. If they get it developed and working properly I'd definitely pay to use their service.

Yeah the tech talks are awesome. The Museum of Computer History has some great lectures on tech talks. One that I particularly like is titled "Great Principles of Computing". It's a nice summary of the past few decades of computing principles. Here's the link: http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5494452304620274339

Yeah I'd like that too. It could have more about learning how to build software and different technologies.

Nice. I like your list. I forgot about reasons 9 and 10. I've known some pretty opinionated people who I would imagine would be very hard to do collaborative work with.

Lol about the "dreaded single founder thread". I don't keep up with YC News everyday, so after I posted I figured that this topic has definitely come up before. Oh well. Maybe people have changed their views since the last time it was posted and have interesting things to share.

Yeah, it seems like a good idea to just start building alone if there is no one else to do it with. People can be added later.

Yeah I agree. Working on something with someone who is excited about the project is a pretty great thing. Combining strengths is definitely a huge advantage too.

An alternate for the question would be: What advantages are there for having a co-founder?

Mostly I'd like to read people's opinions and not particularly argue for one side. In my opinion, the right answer depends completely on what type of person you are. Although historically, it seems multiple co-founders are much more prevalent.

The way I see it now, it's a harder to stay focused and committed to one vision if you are by yourself. Having a co-founder forces you to choose one thing, define it so that both of you understand it, and then show up every-day to implement it. By yourself, you can always just stop working on an idea and move to something else. You don't have anyone to make commitments to.

I used to get annoyed about working with other people because I would lose some control and would be "bound" to one idea. Now I see that as a potential good thing, assuming the initial plans are solid and the team is solid.

It took me a pretty long time to get excited about engineering. It's kind of funny, because University really made me dislike education/learning so much that I had to go discover all the good stuff on my own.

In the article, I definitely agree that we need to get more young people excited about programming and other kinds of engineering (I've heard enrollment is dropping in these areas).

I think teachers should show Steve Wozniak interviews in middle schools and high schools. That to me is the true spirit of engineering. It would get kids excited about engineering and show them that it's not just about memorizing formulas and solving homework problems.

The question I was thinking was: Who exactly is this product for?

I like this post because it shows what it's like in a different part of the world. Reminds of Bill Gates's recent talks on global inequity.

I liked this quote: 'I have this idea in mind that regular players should understand that people do different things in the game, he said. They are playing. And we are making a living.'

That was hilarious. I still can't really gauge how serious that guy was. From the article:

"Situation 7: you have a small, lightweight startup company filled with cool young people with long blue-tinted hair and nose rings and tongue rivets and hip black clothes and iphones and whatever the hell else young people have these days. You use Ruby on Rails for your site..."

lol

Sorry about being off-topic. I posted it in a flash without really thinking, and it didn't even occur to me that it was off-topic. The reason why I asked is because I am still trying to figure out what kind of program/service I would want/need to use.

Anyway, here's why it could be related to start-ups:

If you examine Steve Job's history, it's worth noticing that he was influenced by East Asian writings. Apparently at one point he travelled around India for 6 months.

Also, the company 37 Signals has a very distinct philosophy (I'm thinking of their book "Getting Real") that's focused on minimalism and the path of least resistance, etc. It sort of reminds me of the Tao or something like that.

Thus, I think adhering to some philosophy can be useful in a start-up.

I've read most of Paul Graham's essay's and have read that he was a philosophy/classics major, so I wonder what sorts of books influenced him. I'd like to read a few of the old books too, but I don't know where to start.

Here is a constraint for the recommendations: -At least one book that is good to start with and not too challenging

Lots of new stuff on this one. The turbo memory seems like a very cool feature.

I'm reminded of the quote that goes something like "don't let your schooling get in the way of your education."

The reason I think this applies is because engineering isn't really like what is taught in schools. It's probably the best you can do with 1 professor for 200 students.

But to answer the question, I would definitely be interested in doing engineering as a profession. Really I want to always be doing what interests me.

I like how Woz described it in his interview from "Founders at Work". He says that he loved working at HP and he wanted to work there for life. I'd want to find something like that.

Yeah Woz and Jobs were a great combo. It amazes me how well they matched.

It seems harder to identify a good "Jobs" type person. Good presentation skills... Couldn't you just get a smooth talking MBA type? An MBA that is good with technology? A smooth talking engineer with an MBA?

Great interview. 10/10

I love how Woz described his relationship with Steve Jobs. What a great story of how Apple got started.