morganwilde

It’s a lovely product and you can tell a lot of work went into making this course. But I fail to understand the author’s logic behind “a good course has to be free”. Why though? What’s wrong with creating value (like The OP) and then extracting it from the people that benefit from it?

In fact, there’s tons of anecdotal evidence that free MOOCS haven’t faired well in terms of retention precisely because of a lack of a buy-in from the people taking those courses.

I know the feeling, in fact a little over two years ago I posted something similar on HN and got 0 responses. It’s always empowering to finally acknowledge that there is no safety net.

Forget computers and engineering interviews, start looking for any and all work that pays. If all else fails, go to McDonald’s and work there until you save up a little. Once you have an income restart your job search.

If you go homeless that becomes a social stigma that’s hard to come back from, so do EVERYTHING in your power to avoid that.

Oh, and find an apartment you can afford.

If you want someone to talk to, you can give me a call (send message first to [email protected]).

Can you give a good resource that's not wrong? I'm really curious.

As far as I know, this issue is not comparable to our carbon economy, I.e. Natural gas extraction, coal mining, oil, etc. Key difference is that agriculture is a closed cycle, animals produce a lot of green house gas, but it's gas that's already a part of our ecosystem. When we did stuff from the ground we add new carbon to the ecosystem, and this feat is what's destabilizing the environment. I heard this argument from an interview Elon Musk did about agriculture after someone posted a tweet at him about the documentary "Cowspiracy".

I think the issue of "not understanding each line of code" in Swift is due to a poor learning experience, and not the language itself. If the person teaching you doesn't inspire confidence that he knows what each line does, you should look for a new teacher. JavaScript has a much wonkier syntax and structure than Swift, especially if we're talking about ES5.

So is every single Apple product they sell on their opening weekend. Of course the difference is customers walk away with that product and pay full price, but I feel that the revenue projection is important.

Even though the rendering performance is very snappy and efficient, to me this fails on the most important thing for this sort of software - UI. Can you imagine someone totally new to 3D modelling opening this thing and just going for it? It's completely unintuitive and yet, because it's so accessible that should've been the primary concern.

No wonder the results skew towards elite education, they measure performance by market value. Your market value, under a certain threshold in terms of company size, is dominated by your network. Which the top schools are very good at providing. I wonder what difference would it make if First Round analysed revenue and profitability instead of market value.

Is there no rotation in this game? Can't do much aiming without that.

Given that inflation number the difference is still vast, with almost a billion dollars more for Apple.

Just to substantiate this claim - here's a wikipedia table with the numbers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_corporate_profi...

67% more pixels than 4K. That's certainly more than expected!

I don't get it, do I have to pay you for this service? It's not at all clear from the website.

First, let me say that you've done great! Not giving up after your first and second year, seeing it through till this moment. Congrats dude :)

Personally, I appreciate the fact that it was read rather than recited. This made it easier to interpret the message as I understood it. Theatrical motivational speeches have the opposite effect on me. So it was perfect.