List of YouTube channels for improving web development and programming skills - <AUTHOR> https://devandgear.com/posts/the-ultimate-list-of-youtube-channels-to-boost-your-web-development-and-programming-skills/ <comment><USER2> I think a lot of educational Youtube channels aren't that great in actually teaching you anything. What they are great at is sparking the interest and planting the seed for your own work. At least my experience is that actually doing things is how I learn them. Youtube can be a great springboard for that.

Things to look out for: a person you like and who has enthusiasm and knowledge.

For example EEVBlog Youtube channel was a great way to get into electronics. It's very surface level, and you have to do the learning yourself, but the surface level of what you get is a broad overview which you can choose how to deepen and iterate on. Get that surface level from Youtube, so that you can understand the whole picture, then go through the parts yourself.

For just learning web efficiently, things like [https://fullstackopen.com/en/](https://fullstackopen.com/en/) seem a lot better.

<comment><USER3> "If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea." \- Antoine de Saint—Exupery

<comment><USER4> Corollary lesson: when you find yourself driven by a yearning for some overarching majestic goal to overcome great challenges at great cost, remember that working hard on something doesn't mean you'll ever get to use that thing. Those woodcutters, metalworkers, shipwrights, artisans, etc. who poured their hearts and souls into building that ship will very likely not sail the vast and endless sea that motivated their labor.

If you yearn for the vast and endless sea enough that you wish to sail it, forget the wood. Become a seaman.

<comment><USER5> That's one of the awesome things about software. You can have a grand idea for something, actually spew it out into reality, and then actually use it and see lots of other people use it, often for very little cost on your part besides some time and effort. I'm sure many people of long past would be like "shit, you all are so lucky" if they saw what we could do, and I think there's a pretty good chance we'd say the same of our distant future descendants (barring all the standard hypothetical catastrophe caveats).

It's almost like magic, except limited by what software can actually affect. You can't compile "ship.rs" into an actual ship. But in 100 years I think more of the borders between software and hardware/meatware will start to blur.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Like someone else had mentioned, the list is comprised of channels geared heavily at web development featuring content for early career developers.

There are a ton of channels that dig deeper in more general software and particulars: 1\. Algorithms Live! for those that are into competitive programming

2\. PapersWeLove for those that are into white papers and the research that underpins some of the systems that we use today

3\. 3Blue1Brown for mathematics

4\. ThePrimeagen for Vim and other software things

5\. Gaurav Sen for digestible chunks of system design components

6\. code_report for just programming. The author is going through Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (SICP) at the moment

7\. commaaai archive for following George Hotz, founder and creator of comma.ai, a self-driving car company. He was a former Googler working on zero days (security)

8\. Jon Gjengset for Rust. He's got a lot of great videos as an open-source contributor in Rust projects and was most recently at MIT doing his PhD

9\. Bitwise is a bit old (last post was a year ago), but former Oculus lead dev teaching folks about compilers, simulators, FPGA-based hardware, and other low level topics from a practitioner

10\. Two Minute Papers for quick high level hits/overviews of whitepapers

11\. Engineer Man for great short introductions into various parts of the stack, scripting, Unix, and other abstractions

There are many more and recorded streams from other programmers teaching random things. There are tons of engineers on Twitch representing a multitude of companies like Lyft, CockroachDB, Netflix, and others working on open- source projects.

As a more experienced developer, I much prefer these channels over the ones listed, but my point is that the content is there when people actually search. The YouTube algos may not pick up all of them immediately and is most certainly more dominated by content directed at less experienced devs, but I much prefer some of this to the course recommendations that others are stating. Courses are really good, once you're convinced you want to do a deep dive into something, but most people do not finish MOOCs.

<comment><USER7> If I may, I also suggest:

Ben Eater: electronics, networking, computer architecture, breadboards, and information theory.

Missing semester: Great introduction to computer science and basic programming skills. Good as a reference.

BPS.space: Aerospace engineering, rockets and stuff.

Andreas Kling: computer OS from scratch.

Numberphile, computerphile and so on for quick bites.

Edit: fixed typo

<comment><USER8> Just a note for anyone Googling: it's Andreas Kling rather than King. (And his channel is _awesome_ )

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I clicked on a few and they all turned out to be tutorials for beginners.

I would use it if it had a filter for "How long have you been programming:"

[ ] Never [ ] 1 Year [ ] 3 Years [ ] Over 10 years

Then I would tick the "Over 10 years" option and hope to find channels that update me on the latest developments. While somebody else would select the "Never" option and will find beginner tutorials.

<comment><USER10> But if you've been programming for over ten years doesn't looking at say, javascript. make you feel like you've been programming for never. I totally understand that it's all been done. And you've probably done it all as well. But things really do move fast out there. Even if it's in silly circles.

<comment><USER11> After programming for 10 years, nothing really makes you feel you haven't programmed before. I have found that even looking into entirely different programming paradigms, beginner material does not resonate with me, essentially what i would want when approaching something entirely new would be X for Y programmers.

<comment><USER12> This isn't exactly what you're looking for, but it has brief cheat sheet type treatments for many languages. It assumes you know the common programming language features, but want to know how they're done in a particular language.

[https://learnxinyminutes.com/](https://learnxinyminutes.com/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm working on something similar, but laser-focused on:

\- early-career software developers

\- familiar with ruby/rails

[https://intermediateruby.com/make-oss-contributions- part-1-f...](https://intermediateruby.com/make-oss-contributions- part-1-finding-an-issue)

I'm working on resources to help early-career software developers feel like they're no longer early-career developers.

"pair with seniors" is the go-to recommendation for learning, so I paid a senior rails dev to pair with me on an OSS contribution (we fixed a bug in Jekyll)

I recorded the whole process, end-to-end. It's about 90 minutes of video.

Neither of us had prior knowledge of the application.

There's a lot of good stuff in it, but I'm still working on how to best show the "path" someone should take through it.

I plan on adding "obstacle courses" for certain skills that are amenable to that kind of approach.

If this is of interest to any of you, I'd love for you to click over and follow along.

Matt (the senior rails dev) and I start coding and part 2: [https://intermediateruby.com/matt-swanson-jekyll- bug-p2](https://intermediateruby.com/matt-swanson-jekyll-bug-p2)

</comment><comment><USER14> Thanks to Covid, I ended up starting my own YouTube channel called 'Software Engineering using C#'.

I started to help intermediate programmer take their skills to the next level.

[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-hYI_iMzc- wkvIqvsW2u1Q](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-hYI_iMzc-wkvIqvsW2u1Q)

I am currently wrapping up a series called 'Truly Understanding Linq'.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ_2ZbyiT_Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ_2ZbyiT_Q)

</comment><comment><USER15> Do people find success learning from video? As a class lecture along with a pros I find it ok but not as well as a book. I am not sure if I am old or an outliner. Most youtube/videos lessons seem to move to fast and gloss over details.

<comment><USER16> I'm the same way. Videos either move too fast or too slow and generally both at the same time. That and I hate having to pause a video to view the code.

I've asked this question in other programming forums and always get a mixed response. For some people, videos are the only way to learn. For others, text is the only way to learn. And then there are many in between that choose the form of learning based on the topic.

<comment><USER17> Youtube videos are nice since you can change the playback speed. Tutorials on other platforms might not have that.

Also, for me, I could control Youtube with the play/pause button on my keyboard even when it's not the active window. J,K,L shortcuts are useful when Youtube is the active window for skip, pause, and forward.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I have recently discovered [tsoding twitch channel]([https://www.twitch.tv/tsoding/](https://www.twitch.tv/tsoding/)) which describes itself as Recreational programming. The topics range from webassembly and Game development to functional programming in haskell and ocaml. Some of the interesting random things I found there include:

* [a parser combinator in haskell]([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9RUqGYuGfw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9RUqGYuGfw))

* [stack based language compiler in ocaml]([https://www.twitch.tv/videos/654258168](https://www.twitch.tv/videos/654258168))

You can find all the things that were done during the streams in [https://github.com/tsoding](https://github.com/tsoding). You can also find his schedule at [https://tsoding.org/schedule/](https://tsoding.org/schedule/)

</comment><comment><USER19> I don't see how this list is going to help anyone if they are not in someway tagged or organized into levels, technologies or topics.

<comment><USER20> Agreed, far too broad a topic, the list is equivalent to those questions that have a one line answer but are within a 2000 word document.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> This list would have been considerably more helps with description of what each channel was about and other surrounding details

<comment><USER22> Completely agree on this. At least the major topic/language/framework discussed in those channels could be mentioned.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> If you're an experienced programmer whose interests lean towards more timeless technologies (unix, system design, vim, databases, uptime etc.) and/or have an entrepreneurial bent and want to learn how software businesses are run (complete with the marketing side), my channel Semicolon&Sons might be for you: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC17mJJnvzAa_e9qQqLIfIeQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC17mJJnvzAa_e9qQqLIfIeQ)

The overall idea is to teach via setting the screencasts in live production code used by a real business for over a decade, rather than via toy examples set in the fad framework of the now. Basically it's a behind-the-scenes tour of a production codebase.

</comment><comment><USER24> Computerphile is a good channel on Youtube. The hosts explain things very well for beginners.

[https://www.youtube.com/user/Computerphile/featured](https://www.youtube.com/user/Computerphile/featured)

</comment><comment><USER25> I really love Ben Awad on YouTube. Really funny smart guy. The content is always basic but it goes deep.

One video is about best practices. He mentions that some people use best practices because they are scared their code will be bad if they don't. To which he responds: "The first law of programming is that in order to write good code, first you must write bad code. You need to stop skipping steps!"

[https://youtu.be/gc8mDZwUlfo](https://youtu.be/gc8mDZwUlfo)

<comment><USER6> Good maxims, but I find that Ben's videos lack depth -- don't get me wrong, but you're just not gonna get the expert domain knowledge in any particular area watching his videos. It's also primarily for those with less experience. I still watch them as they're entertaining from time to time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> quick poll: do the people of HN prefer resources like this in video format or written formats like blogs or actual docs? i've personally found it difficult to self-learn from YouTube videos so if you prefer that, what about it do you like?

<comment><USER27> Both have their places.

For me I'd rather have a good speaker talk and walk through the subject matter than read about. As I can process audio faster than text.

The other side to this is that blog posts are full of people that don't write well or who are optimizing for search engines. An extreme version of this is cooking recipe posts, but I've seen tech articles that are moving this direction.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> While not on that list my channel has lots of css related content: [https://YouTube.com/FollowAndrew](https://YouTube.com/FollowAndrew)

Check out my css grid video. It's the best you'll find!

Agree with many comments that most channels are geared towards beginnerS (mine included), as when folks get more advanced they tend to then use stackoverflow/blogs to find solutions to very specific problems

</comment><comment><USER29> This list needs thenewboston [1]. I got into programming by learning Android development, and learned entirely by watching his channel. He has hundreds of tutorial videos on everything from Adobe suite products to Angular to PyGame and he's incredibly thorough on each one.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/user/thenewboston](https://www.youtube.com/user/thenewboston)

</comment><comment><USER30> I'll throw mine out there.

I have over a hundred videos on WebGL, and over two hundred videos total.

[https://www.youtube.com/user/iamdavidwparker](https://www.youtube.com/user/iamdavidwparker)

I haven't added a new video in a couple of years, but am thinking of getting back into it.

</comment><comment><USER31> The most concise web learning channel I found on the internet is made by an Indian guy and his videos are absolutely amazingly built. The content might not interest you but the format is fantastic. They are in small chunks and there's a slide review a the end. I wish more content makers took up to this guy. Take this angular for beginners course: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CusfUmB6mkY&list=PL6n9fhu94y...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CusfUmB6mkY&list=PL6n9fhu94yhWNJaDgh0mfae_9xoQ4E_Zj)

</comment><comment><USER32> This one is still seen by loads of developers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ)

<comment><USER33> You are technically correct.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I'll tell what my big blank spot is that I've never found a good tutorial for is how to break down a design file into a working page. I do mostly backend and architecture kinda work, but frontend/mobile UI dev has gotten more and more important. I understand the tech and can write code that functions, but when I look at a Sketch or Figma design, I just have no idea what to do with it.

<comment><USER35> I think like anything else it comes with practise and some familiarity with the UI framework of the platform you're building for. You could try looking at something like dribbble and reimplementing some small widget or bit of UI in your platform. On mobile I've found things to become a little bit easier as the types of layouts are more restricted and designers tend to make use of the platform's stock UI elements more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Context Free is my favourite YouTube channel right now. Most recently, he did an interview with the creator of Zig. He often contrasts multiple languages in his videos, which I find very interesting. Can't recommend context free enough.

[https://youtube.com/channel/UCS4FAVeYW_IaZqAbqhlvxlA](https://youtube.com/channel/UCS4FAVeYW_IaZqAbqhlvxlA)

</comment><comment><USER37> I found the DNS explanations here very good: I've knew enough to be dangerous... but this helped.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lxgpKh_fRY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lxgpKh_fRY)

And the React tutorial on the same channel a good primer.

Not very flashy

</comment><comment><USER38> shameless plug (I'm the authour):

Dynamic Programming for Beginners: [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVrpF4r7WIhTT1hJqZmjP...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVrpF4r7WIhTT1hJqZmjP10nxsmrbRvlf)

</comment><comment><USER39> Thank you for this, I will look at many. My issue with things aimed at beginners is the person teaching often doesn't remember what it was like to be a beginner. They often skip over the most basic things to know.

</comment><comment><USER40> Horrible list. It's missing my channel, Alchemist Camp! :D

[https://alchemist.camp](https://alchemist.camp)

Seriously, though I see some good stuff but also a lot of edutainment.

</comment><comment><USER41> Don't see how this would be better than performing a blind web search, at least without any kind of description for each item in the list.

</comment><comment><USER42> This list with no context is bordering on useless. Here are some channels i've watched and enjoyed:

1\. interviewing.io - they do tech interviews with big5/6 tech co candidates and step through them: [https://www.youtube.com/c/interviewingio/videos](https://www.youtube.com/c/interviewingio/videos)

2\. CS Dojo - ex-googler who steps through CS topics (data structures, algorithms) at the intermediate level and applications in python + javascript: [https://www.youtube.com/c/CSDojo/videos](https://www.youtube.com/c/CSDojo/videos)

3\. Academind - Heard of tech x and have no idea what it is? Chances are there is a 20-30 min video on this channel explaining it clearly. He also does longer form "build x app" videos: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSJbGtTlrDami- tDGPUV9-w](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSJbGtTlrDami-tDGPUV9-w)

4\. comma.ai / George Hotz - ML + AI livestreams from geohot: [https://www.youtube.com/c/commaaiarchive/videos](https://www.youtube.com/c/commaaiarchive/videos)

5\. Lex Fridman - ML, AI, python and tons of awesome interviews with luminaries: [https://www.youtube.com/c/lexfridman/videos](https://www.youtube.com/c/lexfridman/videos)

6\. Joma Tech - data science, big companies / startups as a dev and some funny vids: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0qA- eDDICsRR9rPcnG7tw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0qA-eDDICsRR9rPcnG7tw)

7\. Wes Bos - decent css explainer vids for whenever you're _how do i align the fucking boxes_ + react / js [https://www.youtube.com/user/wesbos](https://www.youtube.com/user/wesbos)

8\. Rect conf - Sophie and Dan's presentations are great: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz5vTaEhvh7dOHEyd1efcaQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz5vTaEhvh7dOHEyd1efcaQ)

9\. Nickolas Means - not a channel but two presentations that are good:

9.1 How to crash a plane : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=099cHWSbAL8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=099cHWSbAL8)

9.2 The original skunk works: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL3Yzjk5R4M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL3Yzjk5R4M)

There are _tons_ of shitty tutorial videos and channels to avoid if you just rely on search (the comments are full of what appear to be dev contractors out of their depth begging for solutions)

</comment><comment><USER43> Would anyone be interested in a programming live stream? I've thought about turning on Twitch while poking at $sideproject.

</comment><comment><USER44> so happy to see WebDev Simplified on the list and #2 to boot!!! that dude makes things so easy to understand. if you have not watched his videos on flexbox and cssgrid, you are doing yourself a disservice. easily the most clear and simplest explanations i have found. keep up the good work kyle!!!

</comment><comment><USER45> too bad my channel isn't on the list :(

[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN66Pz78qCMzGa1eNdBxWfQ/](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN66Pz78qCMzGa1eNdBxWfQ/)

<comment><USER46> good videos! im so reluctant to watch this topic on youtube because so many people are trying to sound smart / hip, but you are perfectly focused on the actual subject. thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> It is just a list without any more info or context. Do people find these things useful? I get the impression it's just a lot of bitching on how important soft skills are without any good technical content. "Go for func" is the only one I got something out of when I started developing Go.

</comment><comment><USER48> Why isn't CppCon listed?

</comment><comment><USER49> The list feels too long to be really useful.

<comment><USER50> Good insight, you might take it as your opportunity to curate a shorter or more detailed one, maybe as an [https://github.com/topics/awesome- list](https://github.com/topics/awesome-list)

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Do you have anything for getting worse?

</comment><comment> a-b [https://www.youtube.com/c/DevEd](https://www.youtube.com/c/DevEd) [https://www.youtube.com/WebDevSimplified](https://www.youtube.com/WebDevSimplified) [https://www.youtube.com/c/TheNetNinja](https://www.youtube.com/c/TheNetNinja) [https://www.youtube.com/c/TraversyMedia](https://www.youtube.com/c/TraversyMedia) [https://www.youtube.com/c/BenAwad97](https://www.youtube.com/c/BenAwad97) [https://www.youtube.com/c/coreyms](https://www.youtube.com/c/coreyms) [https://www.youtube.com/aniakubow](https://www.youtube.com/aniakubow) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvI5azOD4eDumpshr00EfIw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvI5azOD4eDumpshr00EfIw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd- EhXGbXSozuzsAAdPIn3A](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd- EhXGbXSozuzsAAdPIn3A) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTlvUkGslCV_h- nSAId8Sw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTlvUkGslCV_h-nSAId8Sw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCADyUOnhyEoQqrw_RrsGleA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCADyUOnhyEoQqrw_RrsGleA) [https://www.youtube.com/c/webcrunch](https://www.youtube.com/c/webcrunch) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyU5wkjgQYGRB0hIHMwm2Sg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyU5wkjgQYGRB0hIHMwm2Sg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO1cgjhGzsSYb1rsB4bFe4Q](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO1cgjhGzsSYb1rsB4bFe4Q) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxSITxL2JbF229OGCqieVZw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxSITxL2JbF229OGCqieVZw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpOIUW62tnJTtpWFABxWZ8g](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpOIUW62tnJTtpWFABxWZ8g) [https://www.youtube.com/florinpop](https://www.youtube.com/florinpop) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwRXb5dUK4cvsHbx- rGzSgw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwRXb5dUK4cvsHbx-rGzSgw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoebwHSTvwalADTJhps0emA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoebwHSTvwalADTJhps0emA) [https://www.youtube.com/user/thenewboston](https://www.youtube.com/user/thenewboston) [https://www.youtube.com/user/williamprey](https://www.youtube.com/user/williamprey) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzRDg0orQBZFBPzeXm1yNg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzRDg0orQBZFBPzeXm1yNg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt0ya0xGvXu01zfXjNrGqzg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt0ya0xGvXu01zfXjNrGqzg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnUYZLuoy1rq1aVMwx4aTzw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnUYZLuoy1rq1aVMwx4aTzw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRxWW_Ncs308nW4An23Yeig/](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRxWW_Ncs308nW4An23Yeig/) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChByJR- sX8CooIAc5nkV7Mg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChByJR-sX8CooIAc5nkV7Mg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvM5YYWwfLwpcQgbRr68JLQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvM5YYWwfLwpcQgbRr68JLQ) [https://www.youtube.com/kepowob](https://www.youtube.com/kepowob) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-T8W79DN6PBnzomelvqJYw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-T8W79DN6PBnzomelvqJYw) [https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveGriffith- Prof3ssorSt3v3](https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveGriffith-Prof3ssorSt3v3) [https://www.youtube.com/user/programmingwithmosh](https://www.youtube.com/user/programmingwithmosh) [https://www.youtube.com/user/CalebTheVideoMaker2](https://www.youtube.com/user/CalebTheVideoMaker2) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4JX40jDee_tINbkjycV4Sg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4JX40jDee_tINbkjycV4Sg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A0M0eDttdB11MHxX58vXQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A0M0eDttdB11MHxX58vXQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqAGUPPMOdo0jfQ6grikZw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqAGUPPMOdo0jfQ6grikZw) [https://www.youtube.com/user/shiffman](https://www.youtube.com/user/shiffman) [https://www.youtube.com/user/andrewjosephmead1](https://www.youtube.com/user/andrewjosephmead1) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHkqtrnQO2HMyW50ixOtJGw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHkqtrnQO2HMyW50ixOtJGw) [https://www.youtube.com/c/KentCDodds- vids](https://www.youtube.com/c/KentCDodds-vids) [https://www.youtube.com/user/Weibenfalk](https://www.youtube.com/user/Weibenfalk) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtb40EQj2inp8zuaQlLx3iQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtb40EQj2inp8zuaQlLx3iQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8butISFwT- Wl7EV0hUK0BQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8butISFwT-Wl7EV0hUK0BQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJq6AEgtWeZt7ziQ- fLKOeA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJq6AEgtWeZt7ziQ-fLKOeA) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWr0mx597DnSGLFk1WfvSkQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWr0mx597DnSGLFk1WfvSkQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtxCXg- UvSnTKPOzLH4wJaQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtxCXg-UvSnTKPOzLH4wJaQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsBjURrPoezykLs9EqgamOA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsBjURrPoezykLs9EqgamOA) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRLEADhMcb8WUdnQ5_Alk7g](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRLEADhMcb8WUdnQ5_Alk7g) [https://www.youtube.com/user/irideabanana](https://www.youtube.com/user/irideabanana) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDCHcqyeQgJ- jVSd6VJkbCw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDCHcqyeQgJ-jVSd6VJkbCw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsUalyRg43M8D60mtHe6YcA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsUalyRg43M8D60mtHe6YcA) [https://www.youtube.com/unsureprogrammer](https://www.youtube.com/unsureprogrammer) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJUmE61LxhbhudzUugHL2wQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJUmE61LxhbhudzUugHL2wQ) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC80PWRj_ZU8Zu0HSMNVwKWw](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC80PWRj_ZU8Zu0HSMNVwKWw) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8n8ftV94ZU_DJLOLtrpORA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8n8ftV94ZU_DJLOLtrpORA) [https://www.youtube.com/user/DesignCourse](https://www.youtube.com/user/DesignCourse) [https://www.youtube.com/simplesnippets](https://www.youtube.com/simplesnippets) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxA99Yr6P_tZF9_BgtMGAWA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxA99Yr6P_tZF9_BgtMGAWA) [https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveSchoger](https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveSchoger) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDrekHmOnkptxq3gUU0IyfA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDrekHmOnkptxq3gUU0IyfA) [https://www.youtube.com/user/javaboynavin](https://www.youtube.com/user/javaboynavin) [https://www.youtube.com/c/ackzell/videos](https://www.youtube.com/c/ackzell/videos) [https://www.youtube.com/c/Academind](https://www.youtube.com/c/Academind) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQI- Ym2rLZx52vEoqlPQMdg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQI-Ym2rLZx52vEoqlPQMdg) [https://www.youtube.com/user/IAmTimCorey](https://www.youtube.com/user/IAmTimCorey) [https://www.youtube.com/user/CodingEntrepreneurs](https://www.youtube.com/user/CodingEntrepreneurs) [https://www.youtube.com/codinggardenwithcj](https://www.youtube.com/codinggardenwithcj) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCksTNgiRyQGwi2ODBie8HdA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCksTNgiRyQGwi2ODBie8HdA) [https://www.youtube.com/SimonHoiberg](https://www.youtube.com/SimonHoiberg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC54NcJvLCvM2CNaBjd5j6HA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC54NcJvLCvM2CNaBjd5j6HA) [https://www.youtube.com/c/QuickProgramming](https://www.youtube.com/c/QuickProgramming) [https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCharmefis](https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCharmefis) [https://www.youtube.com/c/RodtheITGuy](https://www.youtube.com/c/RodtheITGuy) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjX0FtIZBBVD3YoCcxnDC4g](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjX0FtIZBBVD3YoCcxnDC4g) [https://www.youtube.com/user/hiteshitube](https://www.youtube.com/user/hiteshitube) [https://www.youtube.com/c/Lengstorf](https://www.youtube.com/c/Lengstorf) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbwXnUipZsLfUckBPsC7Jog](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbwXnUipZsLfUckBPsC7Jog) [https://www.youtube.com/c/WrongAkram](https://www.youtube.com/c/WrongAkram) [https://www.youtube.com/user/binarythistle](https://www.youtube.com/user/binarythistle) [https://www.youtube.com/cleverprogrammer](https://www.youtube.com/cleverprogrammer) [https://www.youtube.com/user/Conutant](https://www.youtube.com/user/Conutant) [https://www.youtube.com/user/GeekyShow1](https://www.youtube.com/user/GeekyShow1) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC- Zcse8tC53G34Uo4kzLeAg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC- Zcse8tC53G34Uo4kzLeAg) [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNFmBuclxQPe57orKiQbyfA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNFmBuclxQPe57orKiQbyfA) [https://www.youtube.com/techsithtube](https://www.youtube.com/techsithtube) [https://www.youtube.com/hswolff](https://www.youtube.com/hswolff) [https://www.youtube.com/c/FKnight](https://www.youtube.com/c/FKnight) [https://www.youtube.com/user/Tychos1](https://www.youtube.com/user/Tychos1) [https://www.youtube.com/c/sentdex](https://www.youtube.com/c/sentdex) [https://www.youtube.com/BeforeSemicolon](https://www.youtube.com/BeforeSemicolon)

</comment><comment><USER52> Useful. Thanks!</comment>


Getting sued? troll the other party - <AUTHOR> I was part of a startup and the team fell apart, after that I took the product on my own and now they are to suing me. I did not have any non-competing clause signed with them, so I am directly competing with them. I already pivoted my idea but they do not know that I did pivot.
I decided to troll them by creating buzz on Twitter so they will go after a product that I am no longer interested in making. When I stand in front of the judge, I will show him that I am making a different product. Also the pictures I am uploading is pictures I find on google. This is basically to let them chase something that is not true. Game of the lawsuit is to make them spend more money.
I will keep you all updated on how this game goes. <comment><USER2> Who owns the rights to the product, though? Was it a work for hire?

<comment><AUTHOR> This is an interesting question. I was promised shares but was given nothing. Therefore the "contract" I have with the company is void. The argument could both ways.

<comment><USER3> Do you have a lawyer? If not, you should probably get one. Representing yourself in a lawsuit is a risky proposition.

 _" I decided to troll them by creating buzz on Twitter so they will go after a product that I am no longer interested in making."_

A judge might get upset if you admitted that you misled your opponents into filing a lawsuit over something that didn't happen. You're not just wasting the plaintiff's time - you're wasting the court's time. The court system is not your toy. (A huge corporation with lots of lawyers might be able to get away with something like this, but you'll just end up with a pissed off judge who might order you to pay the plaintiff's legal expenses and court fees.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I am out of money to pay the lawyer. I am in the same business but not building the same product. I would tell the judge that I was talking about the current project I am working on. They simply didnt do any searches.

I understand the part about wasting court's time. Thats why I sent a letter saying I have pivotted my business and started working on a different project. I can explain the judge about the buzz I created. It was for my new project.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why are you putting stuff like this in writing.

<comment><AUTHOR> You mean on here?</comment></comment>


Show HN: jQuery key mapping plugin - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/rafaqueque/jquery-keymapper

<comment><USER2> Cool. Might implement this in a project later this evening. Amazing it's only 52 lines.</comment>


Generative Adversarial Networks – A Deep Learning Architecture - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@gautamrbharadwaj/generative-adversarial-networks-a-deep-learning-architecture-4253b6d12347 <comment><USER2> I use GANs at work (I manage a machine learning team) and while they can be useful, they can also be difficult to train. A good approach is to start with a working and hyper parameter-tuned example that is similar to your problem.</comment>


Microprofile - <AUTHOR> What's the alternative to Microprofile? microprofile.io <comment><USER2> you should be more specific. alternative in what aspect? alternative java framework (like spring) or alternative microservice stack or something else? what do you mean.</comment>


Ask HN: Sidework for data analyst/ programmer? - <AUTHOR>

Does anyone have any sidework ideas for a slightly bored and very experienced data analyst/ programmer/ GIS guy/ visualization journeyman who works for the government?
I prefer an open source environment (R, gnuplot, sqlite/ postgres, python, GDAL, QGIS etc) but have experience in proprietary environments (SAS, ArcGIS, Excel) and basic webdev (CGI-ish, but not fancy Javascript or scaleable...) I can also write comprehensibly and give non-snoozer presentations.
I don't want to quit my day job, but would love to make some extra money doing interesting work.  But for whom?
I live in the PNW and have experience remoting in.  I could meet a client in person, but would have to do most of my work in evenings from home.
I could also take poorly paying work if it was really interesting or might lead to more stuff.
Does anyone have any ideas about potential clients and how to find them?  Rates to charge?  Any other wisdom? <comment><USER2> Assuming PNW = Pacific Northwest US. If you are in Seattle area, you may want to consider attending a few data analytics/visualization meetups and build network. I know Seattle useR Group meetup is quite active.

Also UW data science and Fred-Hutch biostats groups are other possibilities. Overall, if your interests are in Biomed/Biotech domain, you shouldn't have any trouble finding some work in Seattle area.

Depending on industry domain of your interest, you may want to setup a blog and share your analysis and opinions on data analysis and visualization in that domain. You may get fair bit of leads this way.

Participating in Kaggle competitions, data related sub-reddit on Reddit and industry forums will also help you generate leads.

</comment><comment><USER3> I get asked this question a lot - my best advice if you are skilled in python etc is to learn some web frameworks, polish up on HTML/CSS, learn a bit of Javascript and take on web devel projects.

I outsource a TON of web development and I'm always looking for good English speaking folks with a good head on their shoulders that don't charge an arm and a leg. My .02.

<comment><USER4> Sorry for hijacking this thread, but I wish to contact you regarding business and couldn't find your contact information in your profile. Could you please send me your contact information to my email address: email@example.com?

Thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Have you thought about getting in touch with local scientists, in an academic area you are interested in? If they don't already have someone experienced in visualizations you may be able to offer them some ideas they have not even considered. If you can make their research more efficient, I wonder if they might be able to fund some work for you.

</comment><comment><USER6> interested in mentoring?

<comment><USER6> if so. contact me. michael [at] mherman [dot] org

i know a a few people interested.</comment></comment>


The Issue with Static Typing - <AUTHOR> http://metaphysicaldeveloper.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/the-issue-with-static-typing/

<comment><USER2> The sad reality of trying to win the debate about any dichotomy (such as typing) in computer science is that turns out mostly to be religious bantering of personal experiences rather than clear arguments with verifiable claims. Which always end with people covered in shit.

For instance, we can say dynamic typing makes huge productivity wins. Ok, but that is only a short-term win; what about supporting an application that needs re-factoring due to a marketing fuck up. Well, maybe we don't care about dynamic languages and uses the reverse. static typing wins in long term support. Ok, well you work at a start-up that may not exist in a month, it is better to get the product out early so the marketing and business fuckups can be found early.

Long story short: both static and dynmaic typing suck.</comment>


Machine Learning Crash Course - <AUTHOR> https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/crash-course <comment><USER2> There's a lot of points on this post but no comments. What do people experienced with ML think about this course? Is it worth the time?

</comment><comment><USER3> I have a dumb question: isn't the quality of Machine Learning dependent of the quantity and quality of training data sets ? And if were are to utilize Google or Microsoft for ML, then the whole world ends up uploading their datasets to these giants -- which helps these companies develop even better ML systems-- like a network effect but for data ? Would these companies not have a tremendous advantage against any challengers or competition? Would this system not lead to some sort of Oligopoly ?

<comment><USER4> The quality of the question too.

Some people ask ML to do patently implausible things. Can you determine whether someone is a criminal from a photo of their face? It should be INCREDIBLY obvious that the answer to that question _must_ be "no." Even if you do manage to guess correctly, there is has to be some confound, either a technical one (criminal training data is lit differently from the non-criminal ones) or a statistical one (e.g., correlation with socioeconomic status).

<comment><USER5> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy)

Controversial but clearly not "patently implausible".

<comment><USER4> Yes, implausible.

There is /no/ evidence that physiognomy or its cousin phrenology, the idea that scalp shape carries information, "work." I normally appreciate wikipedia's NPOV stance, but it's absurd that it takes two paragraphs to mention that it is universally (or almost, apparently) regarded as psuedo- science. I'm a neuroscience researcher, and I can't think of a single colleague who puts any credence in these ideas; in fact, I know several who use them as insults. As for the data, the hair-whorl things have been pretty aggressively debunked. The "gaydar" results were driven by individual choices in fashion, grooming, etc. I don't know if anyone has followed up on the hockey data, but...it doesn't matter, because of the second problem.

There's a giant leap between detecting _actual criminals_ and people who _look like_ members of groups that are, statistically more/less likely to be involved in crime. You just can't jump between group-level priors and individual predictions. This is especially true when some of the factors shouldn't legally or morally be used to make predictions.

Finally, think about how weird the biology would need to be for this to work. You'd need to have an underlying factor (genetic, presumably) that affects both facial structure and behavior. It would need to have a strong enough effect to reliably overcome all of the other factors that also determine someone's appearance and behavior. It's not totally impossible, but it's an extraordinary claim that would require extraordinary evidence and to date, no one has found much of anything.

<comment><USER5> Okay, "controversial" was much too generous and junk is more accurate. I just wanted to point out that it is not something some ML research came up with on the spot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Are these machine learning courses the only courses like this that google provides? Is it a new thing for google to offer courses like this?

I admire their attempt to provide translations, yet it does not seem like all languages listed are available. I.e. it seems to work much better for Spanish than German.

<comment><USER7> Google has similar courses for web development and Android development among others ([https://developers.google.com/training/](https://developers.google.com/training/)). Many of these have made the front page of HN at some point, but ML courses tend to get upvoted more often than web development or general programming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Google has had a Machine Learning Crash Course up for about a year already, has it been updated or is this the same thing?</comment>


Systems thinking as important as ever for new coders - <AUTHOR> https://www.hanselman.com/blog/SystemsThinkingAsImportantAsEverForNewCoders.aspx <comment><USER2> Systems thinking is, by far, my favorite mode of thinking. It's why I love programming, business, biology, mathematics, aerospace, etc... I'm convinced that being able to think about abstract systems fluidly is a core skill that separates the good from great in many fields and this is probably more so true in software. I really wish there were better resources for building up this skill set. I was gifted with a decent intuition for it and gained a lot from engineering courses, but I just haven't found anything specific that I can point a junior engineer towards and say "This, this is the essence of systems thinking!". The closest thing I've found is a lecture series on the space shuttle design[0], and while the series is fantastic, it doesn't focus on the core idea of systems thinking. Does anyone have any useful resources or recommendations on the subject?

[0] [https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and- astronautics/16-...](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and- astronautics/16-885j-aircraft-systems-engineering-fall-2005/video-lectures/)

<comment><USER3> I have found "Thinking in Systems" [0] to be a good book for crystallizing "systems" concepts in abstract. For example, it includes discussions on feedback loops, bottlenecks, equilibrium, etc.

IIRC, it has been used as a textbook for systems theory classes in some universities, but it's concise and written for a general audience.

[0] [https://www.amazon.com/dp/1603580557](https://www.amazon.com/dp/1603580557)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Teaching based on an older framework still will require learning the basics of the language, basics of analysis and design. As long as the course is well structured and well taught, the students should become empowered enough to aquire the updated knowledge for the newer framework.

Would it be better to base the course on the up-to-date flavor? Yes, if resources allow that. However,the emphasis should still be on developing a mindset that is motivated for extended learning.

Frameworks change, domains change. Learning the basics of a framework will not guarantee a job, learning how to solve problems using whatever combination of frameworks will prepare one better for a career. After all, a perfect entry level is a practical learner.

<comment><USER5> > Would it be better to base the course on the up-to-date flavor? Yes, if > resources allow that.

I'm not so sure. Java is a popular language both in industry and for teaching, but I'm glad they taught us the ancient and unpopular Common Lisp first.

When you know Common Lisp, you're well prepared for most of the Amazing New Features that slowly trickle into Java, since Common Lisp already had most of them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well said. I have come across candidates looking for engineering positions with a laundry list of fancy technologies they claim to have have worked on — yet can't answer simplest questions about the fundamentals — way too often for my liking. There seems to be an inherent assumption that one just needs to be able to operate the newfangled technology of the day to be an engineer. Who needs to know about how network calls are made or the mechanics of spawning processes/threads — there are libraries to abstract all that.

<comment><USER7> It makes sense though. Think about how our education system typically works. Memorize these identities and recite them off, you'll do fine. Learning is a checklist, not a process. Your collecting facts, not tools.

To address this problem we need to implement real changes to schooling, starting as early as elementary school.

<comment><USER6> I agree — and it's not the new graduates. I have come across people with a couple of years (sometimes more) under their belts.

<comment><USER8> Folks with just a few years experience are very much still new.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > _Know what artifacts your system makes and what 's needed for it to run. > Know what kinds of things its good at and what it's bad at - in a non- > zealous and non-egotistical way._

It's hard to remain objective when deciding what technology to use. The programming language you _know_ can usually the most suitable; as you have the most experience in it, despite better alternatives which might be available.

The disheartening reality is that there's _always_ a better system for your application...

<comment><USER10> True and sometimes you have to decide whether the time spent learning new language and development is better or worse than just using the language you know well.

It's one of the reasons I'm learning Kotlin, I know sometime in the next year I'll need it.

<comment><USER11> At least _someone_ on the team should know where the landmines and Booby traps are in the language before you plan a big project on it.

If you find out how many and what kind they are after you have gotten half way to the goal then you might have to start over.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is a great way to think about it when you're looking for good candidates. Most everyone with a CS degree knows the general systems knowledge. But, most interviewers aren't going to hire someone with general systems knowledge, when they can get someone who knows the exact technology stack they're working on.

<comment><USER6> Err no.. I disagree. I'd rather hire someone with strong fundamentals but with minimal knowledge of the stack over someone who can cobble together a solution using the stack/framework but has unclear fundamentals.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> In my computer engineering program, we spent a lot of time talking about concepts and theory and less on the implementations of them. For example, in my database class, we spent a lot of time learning about relational calculus and less (almost no) time on writing SQL queries.

We studied CLR and spent more time using C++ as a way to understand the algorithms and reason about them and less time learning and mastering C++ specifically.

Isn't this the case at most universities or bootcamps? I guess I can see why someone would ask the questions the student asked Scott judging by the way new technologies are spoken about here and on the internet in general. There is an intense amount of FOMO as a developer that's hard to stave off even though concepts truly travel.

<comment><USER7> I simply can't imagine how you spent time learning about relational calculus without performing some of it.

No it is _not_ the case at most universities (I can't speak for bootcamps, though I wouldn't be surprised to hear a greater variance and overall lower average in this area for them).

There are always different teaching/learning styles, but everyone agrees you need to practice to learn. A course about databases without writing SQL, is like driving a car without the wheels.

<comment><USER14> Easy, relational calculus is a theoretical model, you don't even need a computer to understand it!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Might help those who are looking for reference material, a recent discussion on "Mental Models" — [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19895407](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19895407)

</comment><comment><USER16> As a developer who is looking to better my understanding of system thinking, are there any books/courses you recommend reading to help begin thinking in this manner.

<comment><USER17> Systemantics/The Systems Bible, by John Gall, for a lighthearted, whimsical introduction through real-world examples across a range of industries. An Introduction to General Systems Thinking, by Gerald Weinberg, for a more rigorous/structured introduction.

I've heard good things about Donella Meadows, but I haven't read anything of hers yet.

<comment><USER18> _Thinking In Systems_ by Donella Meadows is great.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is there a simple introduction, a few few pages that will help me at least identify "systems thinking" when I see it?

Right now I keep hearing that "systems thinking" is a good idea, but I could not tell it apart from regular thinking.

I've seen some definitions that are vague and circular: e.g. "systems thinking deals with thinking about systems" but there must be more to it than use of the word "system"

</comment><comment><USER20> Just a random thought - could there be a point, where system thinking is not feasible due to the size of the system?

<comment><USER21> At that point, one might as well start mentally breaking down the Larger System into smaller Sub Systems and the Contracts between them.

<comment><USER22> In fact, this is the distilled essence of software engineering, as I understand it.</comment></comment></comment>


How a 2001 video game warned us about artificial intelligence - <AUTHOR> http://www.hussainather.com/2018/11/how-2001-video-game-warned-us-about.html <comment><USER2> Really interesting, thought-provoking article. Hadn't exactly forgotten this game, but I was probably 12 years old when it came out, so a lot of this flew over my head. Would be curious to go back now and experience it again. Thanks for sharing!</comment>


Question: What is the best startup names you know? - <AUTHOR>

I see lots of startup names on ProductHunt. Some are cool, some are crazy, what are your favs? <comment><USER2> My favorite startup name? "Fogbeam Labs". But I'm just a little biased. :-)</comment>


Show HN: Tinytracks – Makes Parenting Easier - <AUTHOR> https://www.tinytracksapp.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hey HN!

George here. I've been working on an app (over the last couple of years) called Tinytracks which aims to make parenting easier.

Tinytracks is a baby tracker app which allows parents to track their child's diapers, sleep, feedings, books read to, and captured moments. As a parent myself, I could never find a baby tracker app that fit my needs. So, I decided to build one myself with everything I wish I had. Some of these differentiating features you get with Tinytracks are:

1\. Logging data hands-free with Alexa as your hands are more than likely occupied with your little one

2\. Seeing rich visualizations of this logged data — to help you understand your child's trends!

3\. Real-time sync of logged data between all invited caregivers' devices

4\. Setting goals which will help promote your child's development and academic success. The sleep goal uses the CDC recommended amounts and changes as your child gets older.

5\. Logging read books to your child which is important to do as it's an early indicator of future academic success. There's also a goal to reach 1000 books before kindergarten. Studies show children whose parents read them five books a day enter kindergarten having heard about 1.4 million words than kids who were never read to. This is important for your child's early literacy development. So, it's important to be reading to your child early and often.

6\. Adding photos of your little one which are shown as memories and shared with other caregivers

Please play around with the app — would love to hear your feedback! I hope it helps any of you current or new parents to be.</comment>


Learn on someone else's dime - <AUTHOR> http://dandreamsofcoding.com/2012/12/25/learn-on-someone-elses-dime/

<comment><USER2> If Peter Thiel (or anyone else who will follow through on their promises) offers you $100K to drop out of college and work on something real, consider it strongly.

There are very few colleges who will tell you that they really don't want to see you again in a year, or two, or seven. At worst they'll make you re-apply. If they won't even go that far, you probably didn't want to go to that college.

Education is not limited to schools, college is not limited to 16-22 year olds.

</comment><comment><USER3> Good points all around. People tend to have an idea that they are the next Gates/Zuckerberg/Jobs, but in reality these people had college educated colleagues that helped them build their dreams. College is about education, and just that: you are paying to be tutored by people who know their stuff. If you don't need to be tutored, and are willing to hustle yourself (Colleges tend to use their name to make the game easier for you), then by all means go for it, however without someone saying you have the skills you claim or you being able to prove you have them, then you aren't going to get very far. Life is a journey, don't front load it and don't be a rush to get to the finish line. You have tons of time to build your skill set, work for someone else, and then realize your dream when you are ready.

</comment><comment><USER4> Going off the title (can't say I followed the argument in the actual article all that well), this is exactly why I have a hard time working on learning things (i.e. new frameworks, languages, etc...) in my free time. For the most part, at this stage in my career, everything I know I've learned on the job. In other words, I was receiving meaningful income while learning. Why would I want to learn for free? Also, I'll add, it's a much quicker process to learn while working with other people who are already skilled at what you're learning. I don't constantly have that feeling that I'm putting in a bunch of time doing things the wrong way and getting a false sense that I'm making any real progress. What's the saying? Practice doesn't make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect. My last job, I picked up Python (coming from Ruby, which helped a lot) and because of code review, I had a bunch of people every time I wrote code telling me what I was doing right and wrong. That made it incredibly easy to go from 0 to somewhere above average and I was paid to do it. Currently, I'm very interested in clojure and go for various reasons. I have a feeling it might be a bit harder to find a job where I can learn either of those, however.

Now, I'm curious how people will respond to this attitude here. I'm guessing I'll get accused of lacking passion because if I was passionate, I'd want to do all this stuff on my own. I can truly say I enjoy writing software and the act of creation that comes along with that; I just like to get paid when I do it.

<comment><USER5> Your attitude makes it harder to reinvent yourself [edit: in a major shift].

But if you are happy with doing things which more or less builds on previous experience, all through your career while the world/you change, congratulations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not entirely sure what the argument was here

seemed to be stay in school, work for a big company, save some money, and get to know as many people as you can, and you'll be better perpared to start a company after all that (say at 30) than you would be without all that (say at 20)

I mean I guess thats true

I didn't see a real convincing argument that that education would be any better than the education you'd get from starting your company at 20, and going through some fires

seems like at 30, that guy will be better educated for starting a company than our first guy

I don't see any real great argument for school and big companies providing for exclusive learning opportunities

<comment><USER7> I don't think it's a question of better or more exclusive learning opportunities. I think the op is arguing that you can gain the same skills and experience you would get starting a company at 20 by trial-and-error, but without the lost income, time, and career progress.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you want flourishing employees, or want to flourish as an employee, then you need opportunity to learn and grow at work. Everyone needs a mentor, including the members of the executive staff. You can survive a little while running off experience, but that should not be an ingredient in a long-term culture.</comment>


Year 2038 Problem : Unix Millenium Bug - <AUTHOR> http://www.tutorialsonweb.com/it-updates/year-2038-problem-unix-millenium-bug/ <comment><USER2> This bug is ancient.

</comment><comment><USER3> The fix for this is easy. In types.h change

typedef long time_t;

to

typedef long long time_t;

Thereby doubling the amount of space for time_t. Future applications written in c should have this fix or something like it.

<comment><USER4> It isn't that simple it will break binary compatibility. 64 bit systems should be fine as but older 32 bit will be a problem and there is a lot firmware, embedded systems that won't be updated on time and that's where most of the problems will show up.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is the best privacy-focused home security system? - <AUTHOR> I do not need my security system to have WiFi and Internet access (Ring), nor do I need it to have a central hub with an always-on cell signal (Simplisafe). I don't trust these companies with me and my family's data, the same way I don't trust all these free Google Home and Amazon Alexa hubs with my data.<p>Any recommendations? Any open source security system projects with open source hardware? <comment><USER2> What kind of security are we talking about ? A good door/lock and tough roller blinds go a long way.

<comment><AUTHOR> Door and window sensors that trigger alarm or beep depending on if armed or not. Perimeter monitoring. Motion detectors.</comment></comment>


ISIS Drone Dropping Bomblet on Abrams Tank Is a Sign of What's to Come - <AUTHOR> http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7155/isis-drone-dropping-bomblet-on-abrams-tank-is-a-sign-of-whats-to-come <comment><USER2> Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X2ORSlPJ10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X2ORSlPJ10)

I guess this was inevitable as quadcopters and drones got cheap/mainstream, but still unsettling to see the high quality video recordings. And how does one defend against that? Suicide bombings of marketplaces or a shooting spree are bad enough, but at least the terrorists have themselves a deadly cost. Cheap 3D-printed drones dropping explosives from above are something else.

[http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a24056/iraq...](http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a24056/iraqi- officials-isis-drones-mosul/)

> "The bombs have hand-painted numbers on them, and some of the components > show a honeycomb structure which could mean they were 3D printed. If so, > then insurgents may be able to share their designs over the internet and > newcomers can print their own guided bomb without any experience."

<comment><USER3> > how does one defend against that

With one's own drones, programmed to crash into the attacking drones kamakaze style, or maybe armed with mini gattling guns or other weapons to shoot down enemy drones in flight. Might also have the assistance of other drones flying higher in surveillance mode, like AWACS. All kinds of possibilities.

<comment><USER4> Directed energy weapons

<comment><USER5> Except they aren't _that_ narrow of a beam. If that drone was hovering 20ft over that tank and you aimed an EMP blast at it, you will likely disable some of the tank's systems too.

<comment><USER6> Chemical Laser is probably a better option than an EMP.

<comment><USER7> Or you know a shotgun. Been killing birds real good for over a hundred years. All the links pretty much worked out.

<comment><USER4> shotguns have terrible range

<comment><USER8> Compared to the blast radius of something you can fit on a drone?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The scariest, science-fiction-coming-to-pass quote from this article:

"in the future, these cheap, highly available tool/toys turned into weapons will be used in greater numbers and, eventually, will feature autonomous flight coordination, also known as swarm technology."

Just picture a swarm of 50 or 100 drones suddenly emerging over a building and coming at you (or your tank) like a flock of killer bees. Note that they would NOT need conventional radio control from an observer station -- the kind of radio that currently you try to jam in order to disable a drone. All they need is to communicate between themselves, which could be done in a variety of ways, even optical (blinking IR light on the leader, etc).

This level of swarm AI could be implemented in a RPi right now.

<comment><USER10> Look up "Kill Decision" by Daniel Suarez

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Just need a squadron of wedge tailed eagles to form a counter drone strike force. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr- xBtVU4lg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg)

<comment><USER11> trained eagles, i love it!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> One thing we might see more of in the future is drone-placed IEDs. Steal an Amazon delivery drone, mix up some home explosives and you're practically there. Drones remove one of the largest barriers to IED use, which is that people get shot when placing them. Drone + sniper rifle, sneakily deployed on tall buildings, would be effective for similar reasons.

Lastly, you know what suddenly becomes a lot more effective when you don't have to worry about getting killed by your own payload? Chemical weapons.

<comment><USER13> Are drone delivered chemical weapons all that different tactically than remotely or timer triggered chemical weapons?

<comment><USER12> It's mobile, for one. You can cover and threaten a big area with a drone, which means a tiny amount of chemicals go a long way, and that solves the other main issue with chemical weapons.

Main goal would be to sap morale: a few grenade-sized bombing runs and you force everybody to wear chemsuits under the desert sun.

<comment><USER14> Chemical weapons are particularly difficult to use en masse outside of enclosed places like a subway.

<comment><USER12> Conventional chemical weapons are not cost-effective, because you have to hit a big area and cause big effects for it to be worthwhile, since both delivery and payload are expensive. With drones you can shoot/drop grenade-sized payloads that hits just a few people, barely more effective than an actual grenade. The goal is to sap morale and force lopsided reactions (such as forcing the opfor to wear chemsuits, or invest in cleanup teams).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is a real problem for critical infrastructure. As only one example, this makes it very cheap to damage thousands of power substations. These are usually above ground and unhardened.

Substitute your own favorite critical infrastructure, including freeways at rush hour.

</comment><comment><USER16> These videos are presented as real but look completely fake and staged.

First we see a winged glider being launched, but then we somehow switch to quadcopters dropping bombs with remarkable accuracy. I mean, they've even gone to the trouble of adding video game overlays at various points.

Please use as much skepticism with ISIS propaganda videos as you would with the next leaked video from Magic Leap.

<comment><USER11> like many video pieces, they often collage things together. however and unfortunately that tank one looked pretty real. not sure where the'd get a spare m1 to film that

<comment><USER16> They're known to have captured many of them from the Iraqis. Here's one such report: [http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/05/20/isis- captures-...](http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/05/20/isis-captures- hundreds-of-us-vehicles-and-tanks-in-ramadi-from-i.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm skeptical you could get a hobbyist-size RC airplane to fly with a big enough bomb to take a tank out of action.

<comment><USER5> As a psychological weapon, this has changed the rules dramatically. You can imagine that combatants in the firing zone now have an added thing to think about.

Not just watching buildings for snipers and scouring the road ahead and beside them for IEDs, they now have to have attention aloft to see/hear drone activity as well.

Spreading (the) enemy attention is highly effective. And don't discount low power explosives. A couple of friends of mine who are in the army have said that most weaponry is designed to maim rather than kill. They explained that if you kill a soldier, you take one man out of the battle (and make his comrades angry & vengeful to boot). If you wound him badly - you take two men out - the wounded soldier, PLUS the guy who has to stop what he is doing to care for and patch him up.

<comment><USER18> Very true. Plus don't underestimate the disastrous effect on morale of having 'your' weapons turned against you, and finding yourself in a victim position that you have indirectly imposed upon others on many occasions. Once American soldiers start coming under drone fire regularly, they will be massively demoralized by the realization that much of the world considers the US to the be The Bad Guys.

<comment><USER5> I agree with your assessment here. However, I didn't want to voice it because it would lead to a less that savoury place, like other drone threads have.

But I do appreciate the irony that a weapon when wielded from one side is an effective platform for swift and immediate justice & retribution, but when eventually wielded by the opposing side, is suddenly an evil, sneaky and underhanded thing indeed.

<comment><USER18> I've got very conflicted feelings about it myself. On the one hand, precision drone bombing is preferable to the older approaches of using bombers or conventional ICBMs. The ideal would be to simply stop bombing people, of course, but that would only last until such time as there were a substantial terrorist attack on American soil. As long as military engagement remains a political reality, I prefer it come in as low a cost in human life as possible. But it's arguable that the second-order costs end up being higher. At the same time I think it's inevitable given the available technology.

<comment><USER17> The US Army has a project they're calling " Autonomous Rotorcraft Sniper System" that's designed to kill just the person they're after. It's essentially a tiny remote controlled helicopter with high-precision sensors and a stabilized rifle.

They started flying a prototype in 2009, but I can't tell from public sources if they ever got it to work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is the turning point many have been talking about with drones, this will reduce the personal cost of terrorist attacks in the west, chilling.

</comment><comment><USER20> Some of the counter-measures shown seem to rely on the aircraft needing connectivity with the remote control in order to operate. For example, some of the videos show that by blocking RF, the aircraft slowly descends to the ground.

I see this as a problem, because many drones/UAVs can be configured with waypoints and "loss of connectivity" logic. You can configure drones to fly a set of waypoints and continue doing that, even if connectivity is lost.

This is really concerning, and I think the article points this out saying that countermeasures are way behind the attack vectors.

</comment><comment><USER21> How hard would it be to electrically "sanitize" an area with EMP before going in?

<comment><USER22> do you have a viable EMP design that's not a nuclear weapon? Better patent it quick - you'll reap billions.

<comment><USER23> They already exist.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_comp...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_generator)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter- electronics_High_Power...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter- electronics_High_Power_Microwave_Advanced_Missile_Project)

<comment><USER22> interesting! didn't know such are being developed! TIL

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Quadcopter bomber drones might be new, but isn't this like the maker- simulacrum of extant predator drones?

[https://www.versobooks.com/books/2294-buda-s- wagon](https://www.versobooks.com/books/2294-buda-s-wagon) <\- this book for more discussion on "poor man's air force"

</comment><comment><USER25> Seems like some drone radar and trained eagles might be effective vs quadcopters - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAYVyj6vf3Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAYVyj6vf3Y).

</comment><comment><USER26> Scott Adams (dilbert creator) called this in 2004 [https://www.amazon.com/Religion-War-Scott- Adams/dp/074074788...](https://www.amazon.com/Religion-War-Scott- Adams/dp/0740747886/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=ECBA9W7HSN0S9R3BAFGT)

<comment><USER20> Here's the appropriate Dilbert strip:

[http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-01-28](http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-01-28)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This seems like propaganda but I can't figure out if it's US propaganda or ISIS propaganda.

<comment><USER28> Does it matter? They have the exact same aim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Both sides have been actively using cheap off-the-shelf drones in Ukraine as well, although it seems to be mostly used for recon and sniper spotting there - I haven't heard about any cases like in this video.

</comment><comment><USER30> I feel like there are quite a few ways to counter drones better than lasers. Even nets, ropes, or guns work better than lasers...

Soon we will have counter drones buzzing around I'm sure.

<comment><AUTHOR> Launching nets or ropes can only work at very short ranges. The projectiles are too slow to hit a small, agile target.

<comment><USER31> Small plane that quickly strafes drones with silly string-like incapacitating weapon? Wouldn't need to sustain aim, just pass near by.

<comment><USER18> That's a bit like using a tank to hunt rats - it would work in theory, but the rats are a lot more agile than the tank. What are you gonna do, blanket whole neighborhoods in silly string? How are you gonna tell the difference between birds and droves while also flying the plane and avoiding ground fire from people who don't like you? Any anti-drone countermeasures are likely to involves more drones.

<comment><USER31> I was actually thinking more along he lines of an RC plane. Something launchable by a soldier but that would be quicker linearly than a drone.

<comment><USER18> Oh I see - I had misunderstood you to mean something like a crop duster. I'm sure we'll see a rapid evolution/arms race involving everything from machine learning to rapid prototyping to autonomous swarming behaviors, and more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Hah, I'm sure those M-80s that ISIS is dropping really messed up that Abrams.

<comment><USER33> The Abrams can be replaced easy enough, The Tanker takes years of training.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> It will only become easier and easier to do great harm to many people. And so there is no number of terrorists that is an acceptable risk.

We can't allow these savages to keep developing their capabilities, growing their numbers, and inspiring sympathizers around the world. The only option is to eradicate ISIS and similar groups from the face of the Earth. We must strike fear deep into the hearts of any who would think to do us harm.

<comment><USER35> That's more or less how we got here in the first place. The tech isn't going away, and genocide is not a great way to make friends.

<comment><USER34> "It is better to be feared than to be loved, if you cannot be both."

Muslims are the primary victims of terrorists groups. They would be very happy to be rid of the likes of ISIS and Al Qaeda.

> _That 's more or less how we got here in the first place._

I don't agree. We got here because Western institutions and ideas were causing dramatic and rapid social change in the Muslim world, and inspired a violent counter-reaction.

<comment><USER36> They are also the primary denizens of these groups.

How much money does Saudi Arabia etc spend on combatting these groups again?

<comment><USER37> How much money does Saudi Arabia spend on SUPPORTING these groups again?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Wait, does this mean B&H is an arms dealer?

</comment><comment><USER39> America military industrial complex doesn't want a clean win. If they did, then they'd have to start another war to keep the hellmachine churning.

<comment><USER40> I suspect you are being downvoted not because you are wrong (I happen to think you are right), but because your comment usurps this fairly specific article to discuss a fairly general qualm.

Is there something specific about this happening that you think advances your point?

<comment><USER39> This part of the article:

"Yet the hard truth is that the Department of Defense has had plenty of time and warning to do just that. In fact, they spent many millions of dollars looking at the problem, but no hard action was really taken to develop countermeasures, which makes their scramble for countermeasures now all that more frustrating. "

If they wanted a clean win, then countermeasures would have been researched already.

Instead, in 2017 we get articles about how "drone warfare is just the beginning of things to come". Instead it should have been "Opponents attempt drone warfare, subverted by 10 years of defensive research revealed today".</comment></comment></comment>