(Part 11) Best business & money books according to redditors
We found 42,093 Reddit comments discussing the best business & money books. We ranked the 12,862 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 201-220. You can also go back to the previous section.
If you read his book the basic premise is that right now there is a big focus on philanthropy when instead there should be a focus on fixing the broken system that allows a small group of people to accumulate massive wealth at the expense of 99% of others.
But using their philanthropy they are able to persuade the masses to keep the current system. How else can a democratic system exist where the top 5% own 66% of the wealth (United States).
The richest Americans would easily be defeated in a vote if the remaining population could get their act together.
In the book Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are, Seth Stephens-Davidowitz uses Google Trends extensively to research social shifts. It's not a perfect method and it can't paint us a perfect picture, but it's generally a good indicator of how a social trend has progressed.
A search on Google Trends for "jewish jokes" shows a general downward trend since 2004. "jew jokes" went up around 2008-2012 but then fell and is currently at the lowest point recorded by Google. More blatantly anti-semitic searches like "jews in the media","jews control the media","jews did 9/11","jewish elite", and other similar searches are all on a steady downward trend as well.
I'm not an expert at this stuff but it seems to me that anti-semitism is on a general downward trend overall. There are alternative explanations for these trends, like anti-anti-semitism becoming more common and having a chilling effect on peoples' searches, but it seems to me that the simplest answer is the most likely.
Okay, I didn't want to have to come in here, but I just received my 6th dan in art-karate, and I feel like any good counter argument comes with a counter counter argument.
What I feel is a bad thing for the world in general is that a lot of people just say nice things to everybody to avoid hurting anyone's feelings. However, people need constructive criticism in order to get better at what they do. You could read a nice book about economies around the world which is called The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, but it won't help you do good art or good art critiques.
In short: stop writing flowery bullshit encouragement to every Tom, Dick, and Harry that you encounter in your life. Save the philosphy-major prose about "the will to thrive and create" for your support group.
A good introduction is this:
https://www.amazon.com/Neatest-Little-Guide-Market-Investing/dp/0452298628
Lays it all out in basic understandable terms, and also provides brief summaries of the most significant people in investing: Buffett, Graham, etc
I gift this book to my interns:
Unwritten Laws of Engineering: Revised and Updated Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/0791801624/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_.NCODbW2P4A2D
I don't think any single post can sufficiently explain what "Libertarianism" is. But somebody posted from this article titled Anti-Force Is the Common Denominator just recently in /r/libertarian, and I feel compelled to share it here, to best describe what falls under the shade of the "Libertarian" tree:
>[We] would like to see much less initiation of force in society. We live in a world where lots of misguided people are not satisfied that there’s enough of it yet. They advocate more initiation of force, as evidenced by their desires to deal with every problem under the sun by creating another tax-supported government program...A mature, responsible adult neither seeks undue power over other adults nor wishes to see others subjected to anyone’s controlling schemes and fantasies: This is the traditional meaning of liberty. It’s the rationale for limiting the force of government in our lives. In a free society the power of love, not the love of power, governs our behavior.
>Consider what we do in our political lives these days—and an unfortunate erosion of freedom becomes painfully evident. It’s a commentary on the ascendancy of the love of power over the power of love. We have granted command of over 40 percent of our incomes to federal, state, and local governments, compared to 6 or 7 percent a century ago. And more than a few Americans seem to think that 40 percent still isn’t enough.
>We claim to love our fellow citizens while we hand government ever more power over their lives, hopes, and pocketbooks. We’ve erected what Margaret Thatcher derisively termed the “nanny state,” in which we as adults are pushed around, dictated to, hemmed in, and smothered with good intentions as if we’re still children.
"Anti-force"/"anti-coercion" is the unifying theme which has been perpetually elaborated on since the Age of Enlightenment, so its not like this is anything new. Libertarians may call themselves anarchists, anarcho-capitalists, laissez-faire capitalists, minarchists, classical liberals, objectivists, thin libertarians, thick libertarians, right libertarian, left libertarian, libertarian socialists, mutualists, and many more terms I am unfamiliar with or have forgotten.
The most heavily represented "libertarians" at least within the Internet/United States are of the "right libertarian" mindset. This is a good sample of the thought this particular tree branch shades - though not all members may necessarily advocate. I would consider myself a member of this constituent, though I would prefer to use the term "classical liberal" to differentiate myself from those with an anarchist mentality (and because it sounds more elegant ;) ). As a brief exposition, I recommend reading The Law (available for free online) by Frederic Bastiat or, the book that converted me, The Road to Serfdom by FA Hayek.
In any event, the "anti-force" mentality strongly contrasts with the rhetoric and ideology found on both sides of the congressional aisle - on the one hand you have moralists who want to tell you what you can and can't do with your body, and on the other hand you have collectivists who want to tell you what you can and can't do with your property (i.e. what you own), while both agree that blowing things up makes the world a better place.
That, I think is the best I can describe the Libertarian movement (though as demonstrated, this movement has existed for several centuries).
edit: Here is a list of some youtube channels I subscribe to that can can be classified as Libertarian:
I rather like Unwritten Rules of Engineering. Quite short at 70 pages. While written in 1944 and for Engineers largely before CS was a profession the dynamics that happen in workplaces have not changed all that much. The negatives are fairly minor, it tends to advocate a more formal set of interactions which seem less common in some parts of the industry and that the booklet is written using he/him for the Engineer.
Some highlights
communication skills
interactions with your boss
interpersonal interactions
No offense taken. ☺️
You’re right. Secrets are not safe. Gay, straight, bi, cis... whatever it’s being labeled as these days is not the culprit IMO.
As a recovering/recovered addict, the most damaging secret is hiding a drug addiction.
This book was a fascinating read (well, to me), and it just goes to show that everybody lies.
The "specific problems" are secondary symptoms. They all have the same root cause. It's not a case of them "bungling" socialism. It's exactly what you should expect as an outcome.
F A Hayek wrote the detailed script for this morbid play in the 1940s, and Chavez happily staged it again in Venezuela.
My friend recommended me this when I first started, but the truth is all the reading in the world isn't going to give you real-world experience. Start small, do your research, thorough research. Learn about greeks, IV, when to take profit, ect. Study the stocks you're interested in and know about, don't worry about trying to follow someone else's trades on a company you know nothing about.
Personally, I started small with 250 and made smart choices to bump it up to 2400 in three weeks, but I got cocky and didn't fully research an investment so I lost 1000 in one trade. If I had kept a level head I would have noticed that there was a significant short interest trying to drive the stock down and the low volume added fuel to the fire. Undervalued or not, hedge funds with billions to throw around can influence the stock price of most companies quite a bit, always be aware of that.
Once you gain some experience and understanding, day trading with the current level of volatility is pretty easy albeit risky at times. Just remember to not gamble with money you can't afford to lose. It may be boring but I keep about 5/6ths of my portfolio in equity that I rarely touch. For every one person you see on this sub that turns 40k into 250k on a MU yolo, there are ten others that turned their 40k into 0k. Be smart and goodluck!
Yes, you should be cautious of direct messages, especially if they're trying to sell you a course, coaching, or "use this platform, it's the best, here's my affiliate link".
Some great, free resources for learning day trading:
For some paid resources, I recommend the following books / audiobooks:
>$250 into $5k
Setting goals isn't a terrible idea, however I will say that a 2000% (non compounding) increase is something the best traders would give their arms and legs for lol.
For reference, this is something I was able to do after lots of learning and experience.
https://twitter.com/robswc/status/1093328001243189248
https://twitter.com/robswc/status/1082782861869109253
These were more done algorithmic than manually trading BUT point still stands.
With that said, you could hit 180% gain in one day with options.
The problem you'll find is that being consistently good is really really hard. What you're essentially setting out to do is consistently win an near random "coin toss".
That's going to take a psychological toll, its going to be grueling but not impossible.
>But I would like to learn the market. Any tips on how to start? What should I start researching? Can I even start trading with that little amount?
$250 is fine starting out. In fact its perfect as starting out there's a possibility you could lose it all, so starting with a small amount is fine.
Don't look at $, look at %. If you can make 1% you can make $100 or $1000. Once you consistently hit %'s, you can increase your position sizes. Keep risk in mind while doing this though.
I would start with paper trading first. Since you're 17 you're not legally allowed to trade. Also, with $250 you can't day trade (PDT rules). So paper trading would definitely be your best bet.
You could also give crypto a try, many exchanges don't really have KYC. A lot of the basics can carry over into any markets.
As far as stuff to learn, these are some of the best books I've read on the subject. You may notice they aren't technical or any "strategies" so to speak. I find those books never help, the mindset and thinking is going to be your biggest challenge.
Trading in the Zone, By Mark Douglas - https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
Fooled by Randomness, by Nassim Taleb - https://www.amazon.com/Fooled-Randomness-Hidden-Markets-Incerto/dp/0812975219/ref=sr_1_1?crid=13LH3VBFX62OH
Skin in the Game, by Nassim Taleb - https://www.amazon.com/Skin-Game-Hidden-Asymmetries-Daily/dp/042528462X/
Algos to Live By, by Brian Christian - https://www.amazon.com/Algorithms-Live-Computer-Science-Decisions/dp/1250118360/
A Short History of Financial Euphoria, by John Galbraith - https://www.amazon.com/History-Financial-Euphoria-Penguin-Business/dp/0140238565/
Also, if you're interested in algo or strategy creation at all, I have a youtube channel dedicated to helping beginners make their strategies and learn more. Its on a bit of a hiatus but I'll definitely be getting back to it soon.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxokFZgGpztPTeQvBwIk2wQ
DM me here or on twitter if you have any questions! Love to help, questions also keep me on my toes and make sure I'm learning too!
> My boss is an understanding person and knows that we're stressed, but the larger organization seems uninterested in reorganizing to lessen our burden.
That's all you really need to know. You expressed a concern about the health of the team(s), and the broader org said "no, this is fine". They can live with all the benefits and consequences that come with that decision. All you need to know is whether or not you can live with all the benefits and consequences of that decision.
> Are most jobs like this?
I would say no, but practices that promote burnout aren't exactly uncommon -- toil is one example.
It's not uncommon for organizational practices/structures to foster high levels of burnout, but most orgs who give a shit will tend to fix those problems because turnover tends to be more expensive than simply fixing the problems that cause the turnover. Kinda sorta depends on the business's priorities, though. Showing the value of strategic investment in technical resources is ... difficult at times. I like the approach taken by Accelerate -- numbers and figures are what your manager needs to be focusing on, though it is hard to do when you're drowning already and engagement from leadership is low to non-existent anyway.
The problem isn't the books themselves, it's probably the teacher who is assigning them to you. My English teacher last year was one of the good ones. One of the great ones actually. She didn't just assign a book, give a test, and throw a writing assignment at us like most others did. We actually discussed the book. Not in some childish "oh what did you like about it" way, but actual literary analysis. "What's the meaning behind this symbol?" Prove it. "Was this event foreshadowed by something earlier?" Let me bring up this random scene you thought was pointless and show you how it's actually predicting everything. "Can this be an allusion to another work?" Actually the whole thing is the story of Hamlet. And most of all, why? "What message is being told through all these elements?" "What's the point of this meaning that or that referring to this?" These are the questions that gave me insight into not only the book, but humanity itself, the human condition.
My teacher was also up for discussion. Talks about truthfully, what things like sexism, race, gender, politics, and other hot topic discussions nowadays meant to us. And yet it was always relevant to the story, like when we read The Catcher in the Rye we had an 90 minute discussion about what we thought the difference between arrogance and confidence was, and eventually how it effected our views of others. I've had classmates cry in that class when discussing depression and our futures. Then there's the best part; she was a former off-broadway actor and current comedian, so she's basically putting on a show through her entire class. You can hear her down the halls and you can always hear her footsteps from the room below. Needless to say, it's never boring.
I really hope you can find a teacher even half as amazing as her, because she has changed my life forever. Right now one of my summer assignments from her is actually The Scarlet Letter, so I guess I'll get my own opinion on that. Otherwise, I recommend you read another book I'm assigned, How to Read Literature Like a Professor. It's a very casual, laid back discussion about how to make the kinds of connections I referred to in the questions above. Hopefully it'll give you some insight as to why those books were assigned and what you've been missing from them.
Edit: Dang...I can get carried away with my writing sometimes. Sorry for the block of text.
From the NYT bestseller "Everybody Lies'
https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856
Thanks for posting this. I've been so desensitised by the waves of TED-worthy solutionism way of thinking. Locally, the Yale-NUS kids are especially notorious for such ideas because THIS is the way they gain prestige among their circles. Doesn't matter if the ideas actually work, just need that notch on their CV and they're ready to ride it all the way to an upper management level in McKinsey.
Unfortunately, this will be the norm among the upper-middle and upper classes for a long time to come. Here are some books for those interested to learn more.
Winners Take All
To Solve Everything, Click Here
Geek Heresy
Not to say that people shouldn't strive for social change, etc. But real change requires real grind and understanding. The people doing so aren't usually in the media limelight either.
Negative income tax, as described in The Second Machine Age. A must read for anyone whom I consider voting for.
Pretty sure someone posted this as a joke, but currently am reading this monster. Probably a bit deep of a read if you are just starting out.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0071818774/
That's great and all, but wouldn't it have been better if Gates had been taxed appropriately in the first place and then all citizens (at least theoretically, anyway) could have had a say in how that was allocated?
Relying on billionaires to allocate resources for public solutions seems more likely to just fund whatever billionaires care about, maybe not what is needed most, and definitely not toward anything which might pose a challenge to their status.
(Anand Giridharadas' Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World covers the subject quite well)
I was in your position two years ago. Im 30 now and I couldnt be more happy.
It depends on what area you would like to expertice on but I think you should start with "Pragmatic thinking and learning" https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050
You will learn how to learn anything and how to schedule your learning. If your goal is web development I could tell you how I did It.
Well... I mean, subtext is not the only important thing, but it's still important. I really enjoy poets who create meaning not only through the literal meaning of words, but through the usage of words (and they definitely do so intentionally). I think the real problem is that that kind of thing can feel clinical and detached in the classroom, where you're doing it for a grade. When I'm able to find complexity and deeper meaning in a work I love, though? That's exciting and joyful!
Example: The first works that come to mind when I think are actually songs by my favorite band, The Oh Hellos. Specifically, their EPs Notos and Eurus. They've got this extended metaphor relating God to nature and humanity to man-made structures. Like in the song Constellations -- the central metaphor is the tower of Babel, from the story where humanity tries to build a tower to reach God. God hates their hubrice, so he causes the tower to crumble, and the people to speak different languages so they can't try again. Now, Notos' central theme fundamentalism, the reasons for it, the problems with it, what it's like when you can no longer hold onto it. In that context, the tower of Babel is related to religion. That is, it's something people use to reach God, but it ultimately separates us from him and from each other. The second important metaphor here is constellations. And what's the nature of constellations? Well, they're pictures we see in the stars. But while the stars actually exist in external reality, those pictures only exist in our minds; the actual stars that compose them have no real relationship to each other, and are in fact often light-years apart. (Not to mention, different cultures see different pictures). Their use as a metaphor here seems to be saying that God is something real, but so many our believes about him are just our own human projections.
Can you understand this song without getting all of this? Partially, I think. It took me a while to completely grasp it, but I started picking up on these existential themes from the get-go, like in the chorus, "Like constellations a million years away, every good intention... is interpolation, a line we drew in the array, looking for the faces, looking for the shapes in the silence." I deeply felt that, even if I wasn't really sure what to do with the Tower of Babel references. However! Understanding, rather making the song less for me, made it that much more beautiful! I got chills about it all over again! (I had a similar experience with the rest of the EPs; when I caught how the division between the binaries of God/nature and humanity/structures crumbles over their course, [like with stones being compared to seeds in "Grow"], collapsing completely in "Constellations"' companion song, "Hieroglyphs"... The point is that division between God, nature, and humanity was always an illusion, and... To me that is so utterly beautiful and joyful!)
I guess my point is, you don't have to understand everything going on in a poem to enjoy it. People shouldn't devalue that kind of appreciation. However, I think you shouldn't stop there. It's good to try to understand poems on a deeper level, not because you're supposed to or that it'll make you smart, but because there's so much beauty, love, and joy hidden in between the lines. And how do you get there? It takes learning and practice for most people, because it really is like a code or a foreign language. For me, it started with a book called How to Read Literature Like a Professor that I read for a high school English class (more about prose than poetry, but same idea). Then in college I learned more about different schools of criticism, what to look for, how to figure out where authors were coming from. A lot of this involved... Well, I think one of the best ways to practice is to read other peoples' analyses. Find a poem you love, read it over and over, see what stands out to you about it. Then read what other people have written about it. Overtime, you'll find yourself applying what you've learned to unfamiliar poetry. If you're passionate about it, if you enjoy figuring it out, if you thirst after understanding, then I think you'll discover so much!
These ideas are discussed in great detail in David Landes' book
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0393318885/ref=cm_lm_fullview_prod_3/104-7880136-1164720?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155
There are three major reasons for Wealth/Poverty: Geography, Infrastructure, and Culture.
Economists disregard culture as a economic artefact because it can't be quantified and its politically incorrect. The reason Economists distrust culture is because it is such a 'one size fits all' argument.
Nations are developed not because they are more intelligent but they 'work' better as a society - meaning the co-operate better in the macroeconomic sense (not corrupt, socially responsible, etc). Its cultural traits and values, rather than resources are what make or break a country.
The error comes from focusing on the wrong filters. The "liberal media" is a thing (in two ways, really, but let's focus on the one people generally refer to) when you look at rhetoric. This can be determined through linguistic data analysis, which Seth Stephens-Davidowitz did in his book Everybody Lies. One of the interesting things he shows there is that the rhetorical bias varies not by ownership, for instance, but mostly through the dominant political leaning of the area in which the paper (which was the focus of the study) is sold. That is, a news outlet's rhetorical bias depends on its audience, not its owners.
This analysis is useful, but there is a glaring problem with it: In focusing on rhetoric, it ignores actual policy advocacy and, importantly, publication bias. And that's where the owners have influence. As long as the policy advocated agrees with the owners (and the media's inherent structural biases, re: the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model), how it is presented (the rhetoric) only matters to the extent that it influences revenue. And anything that is counter to these interests, will be ignored.
So, yes, there is a "liberal media" (and they're actually fairly dominant). Problem is, they are liberal in rhetoric only (and sometimes in actual policy, depending on what you mean by 'liberal'). What the media doesn't tell you is usually much more important than what it does.
first this
then this
Two parts, one is Gladwell's herders vs farmers ethnic theory (the descendents of scottish herdsman in the south are an honor based culture because if you didn't stand your own, you'd lose prime grazing spots and possibly your life & livlihood, vs descendents of English & Irish farmers who, despite disagreements, could always go back to their land and self-sustain.)
Second, a lesser known history book by Landes, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, where he includes rice vs wheat as cultural indications of temperament (wheat farmers able to leverage vast swaths of land with scaling labor meant more free time, more aggressive attitudes and more resources to contribute to war efforts, i.e. the turbulent middle ages of Europe, vs Japan & southern China's rice cultures, where labor does not scale well, and maintaining a surplus crop is a dedicated task requiring disciplined and meticulous cooperation, creating cultures that were comparatively less hostile and confrontational than their Western counterparts.)
If you want to pick up some Cryptography, The Code Book is a great intro.
Pragmatic Thinking and Learning is good for learning to learn.
The Pragmatic Programmer is good for project code planning and learning how to write code in a well thought out way.
Ethernet: The Definitive Guide is a good read if you want to get up to snuff on your networking, though it can be a bit dry at times.
According to Accelerate https://www.amazon.co.uk/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
If I could go back in time as a senior in high school, above all, I would just do more reading, and I would read widely. I did not start on the path to English teaching until I was 26, and although I did great in college and I feel that I am a successful teacher now, my weakness is my reading background. I would suggest using an app like Goodreads so that you can track your progress as you chip away at the literary canon, work by work. The texts that are going to help you the most and serve you for the rest of your career are the ones that most authors allude to, so, I would suggest that at some point you familiarize yourself with these from a literary standpoint:
As far as resources that will give you a head start, I suggest:
Considering pedagogy resources, by the time you are in an education program, there will be new research and new buzzwords, so I won't waste my time here, but these are my favorite resources when it comes to inspiring my teaching:
Lastly, if you go into an English education program with a near-perfect understanding of grammar, your life will be so much easier. I suggest these three resources for brushing up:
Good luck, and let me know if you have questions! If you do anything on this list, just read!
How do we know you're really one of the first two redditors, and not just some guy trying to profit by pulling one over on the internet?
> Trappist brews
You got a favorite? How do you spell it?
> White Man's Burden
I assume you mean this one, right? Turns out it's a pretty popular title.
A fucking book.
From what I can tell, the big frustration is the staunching of left-accelerationism by giving the rich a means to generate goodwill, thus depriving the left of an otherwise ideal political villain and causing perpetuation of the status quo.
The biggest thought leader to emerge from philanthropist-bashing seems to be Anand Giridharadas, who wrote Winners Take All and gave many popular interviews about a year ago e.g. this 1hr confrontational lecture at Google. Giridharadas' main punching bag is the Aspen/Davos crowd, who favor market-based solutions to social problems. Giridharadas claims these social entrepreneurs perpetuate the status quo at minimum cost. Norman Borlaug of the Rockefeller Foundation seems like a pretty damning counterexample. The left might counter that the government has also funded breakthrough research and multiple discovery would apply to Bourlag's wheat innovations. Another counter might be that we are now in a low growth zero-sum world, so these multiplicative investments are not realistic. I tend to side with Scott in advocating for more variation in funding sources, assuming billionaires remain as magnanimous and competent as they have been for the past ~130 years.
Vox is also attempting to make this issue more salient. The quasi-EA podcast Future Perfect spent a season arguing against billionaire philanthropy. It's about what you'd expect from Vox. I find biographies of turn of twentieth century industrialists much more compelling and informative than these mini-biographies nested in political arguments, but some might prefer the latter.
I'd read A Random Walk Down Wall Street first. Then Intelligent Investor before Security Analysis.
The first book I read when I was a n00b was The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing. It's pretty simple and basic and made for total beginner's.
Also, you may want to read Reminiscences of a Stock Operator at some point.
Also, check out Robert Shiller's Financial Markets course.
Stock Charts is a good online introduction to technical and fundamental analysis.
Have fun!!
Edit: correction
I saw lipservice paid to mccarthyism in history class and we actually dove into it in english class when we went over The Crucible.
Though I'm sure most other students just read the play and brain dump it without soaking in the context. I actually did the first time around too and it wasn't until I started reading as an adult that I realize how poorly I was taught literature in school.
allow me to make such a recommendation! Ever since my Lit. teacher had me read "How to read literature like a professor" as summer reading, my entire ability to interpret novels on a deeper level--and not just novels, but lots of other media--was changed for the better
I like authors who kind of adopt the Edgar Allan Poe method of writing: don't mention the thing unless it adds to the story
Can you explain how I'm being divisive?
I really do appreciate solidarity. My biggest take-away of the election. I'm uncomfortable with it, but I recognize how powerful something like a >50% swing in Republican views based on a changed party stance is.
I voted for Hillary and told friends to. Over 90% of Bernie supports did, too, and considering some of that 10% were probably never-Hillary or conservatives dipping left, that's some pretty good solidarity.
I'm not personally upset about stuff like super delegates. We wouldn't have Trump if the Republican's used them, and Bernie isn't a Democrat. I don't think some of the reactions of Hillary supporters to people that felt disenfranchised by their party are helpful, though. And if things like the leaked "pied piper" strategy are real/impactful the DNC fucked up real bad.
You're right, "neoliberal" isn't a great term. It's got a good amount of drift from its usage in other areas/historical (not that we aren't using roughly the opposite meaning of "liberal" as the rest of the world). Unfortunately I don't have time to write anything with more depth. The flawed shorthand would be the intersection of Bill Clinton/Obama policies and protested Bush policies, primarily the pro-war, pro-big business, pro-surveillance state policies at the cost of social programs.
I think FPTP is awful and we need to do something about campaign finance reform that both parties are disincentivized from doing (especially when in majority). I think (per this book) an unfortunate bit of politics is that when evaluating what platform to adjust to it is more effective to disregard people that are going to vote for you anyway, so you court people that skipped the previous election.
Sorry, won't be able to reply. Cheers
There's a really good book that delves into this issue, it's called Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are. The author talks about how when someone grows up can effect their favorite sports team, and what political party they identify as. People who came of age during Watergate grew up to be more Democratic leaning, while those who came of age under Reagan were more Republican leaning. Basically who was president when you were growing up, and what that president did, will give you either a positive or negative impressive of that president and the party they belong to.
It's a really interesting book, touches on a ton of subjects. Worth reading.
This is arguably the best book on libertarianism: http://mises.org/books/thelaw.pdf
"No legal plunder: This is the principle of justice, peace, order, stability, harmony, and logic."
"But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime."
This is probably the other classic I'd recommend.
http://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0226320618
Highly effective narrow AI should be a huge long-term boon, but will be a big problem in the short term. Many, many people spend most of their days doing work they do not enjoy only because they must do so to support themselves (and family etc.) Moreover a lot of the least pleasant jobs pay the worst, which has always seemed backward to me. A world in which there are only a small number of unpleasant jobs remaining, and higher compensation to do them, would be awesome.
But it will be tricky for us to make it into that awesome world. Although in the past increased automation has also led to the creation of new jobs to replace the old ones, there is no law of physics — or for that matter economics so far as I know — guaranteeing this. Brynjolfsson and McAfe make a pretty compelling case that we are already seeing heightening inequality resulting from recent automation, and this is very like to continue on overdrive.
I see nothing to suggest that our economic, let alone political, systems are ready for this. Such a society would require enormous wealth redistribution from the company owners to lots of people who are doing essentially nothing for that wealth in traditional economic terms. Its hard to conceive of the idea of something like that happening in the US until/unless there is huge upheaval. It seems almost guaranteed that we will go through a phase of hyper-inequality.
Moreover, AI is unlikely to just stay at the goldilocks state of doing all of our unpleasant jobs for us, without replacing us in the jobs we humans do want to do, and thus essentially replacing humanity altogether.
I really enjoyed Godel's Proof by Nagel + Newman. It's a layman's guide to Godel incompleteness theorem. It avoids some of the more finnicky details, while still giving the overall impression.
https://www.amazon.com/Gödels-Proof-Ernest-Nagel/dp/0814758371/
If you like that, it's edited by Hofstadter, who wrote Godel-Escher-Bach, a famous book about recurrence.
Finally, I would recommend Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright. It's a life-changing book that dives into the relevance of game theory, evolutionary biology and information technology. (Warning that the first 80 pages are very dry.)
https://www.amazon.com/Nonzero-Logic-Destiny-Robert-Wright/dp/0679758941/
I think, well, are you getting interviews?
Your post, you just seem really down on yourself. Once you get one person to trust in you, to trust in your ability, that's what it takes to establish your career. It'll work for you once you trust in yourself and project confidence. I think one of the things, I got my start with a really small company (10 employees) and the post was on craigslist in a different state and I had no internship since I was a transfer student. I had to be adaptable. I remember after that position, I wasn't even in school and went to a different university's job fair and got an interview with the army corps as a result. If you think your cover letter isn't working, that's a fantastic way to meet recruiters face-to-face. It was kinda just trying anything and having perseverance.
Read that unwritten laws of engineering. I think it's a good thing to read about starting out. Don't think a job is below you. I'm out in the field right now struggling with transportation contractors. But it's been fantastic experience.
You're confusing the Industrial Economic Machine with The United States. The United States' power was diminished because power was shifted OUTSIDE the United States, and international global monetary policy was NOT decided by American senators and congressmen; but, rather, by shadowy unelected bankers.
America has NOT benefited from this loss of power and sovereignty. The United States is a debt slave. Every bit as much as the tiniest Third World country. More so.
Compare America's debt to, say, Ecuador. or Bhutan.
The United States has been stripmined and impoverished. In purchasing power, the average American worker used to make (in today's terms) about $100,000/year. Today, it's $34,000.
America has also had its manufacturing base gutted.
It used to be a self-sufficient country. But that scared the international bankers.
If you read Carroll Quigley's "The Tragedy and the Hope," he explains America's titanic natural wealth in terms of resources. He points out that, by 1900, America was producing more wheat than the next five countries combined. It was also dominating industrial production. South Korean economist Ha-Joon Chang asked his son if he thought that China was dominant in manufacturing. His son said, "Of course. Look at Walmart. Everything in it seems to be made in China." Whereupon his father said, "China is responsible for about 15% of America's finished goods. At its height, the United States was at one time responsible for 85% of the finished goods on planet Earth." https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=ha+joon+chang&qid=1570263938&sr=8-2
A great book from 1920 was "Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt". See here: https://www.fadedpage.com/books/20140873/html.php In it, Frederick Soddy says that America's productive capacity is so massive that it poses a threat to the global economy. Due to all the stuff it was producing, the prices of goods naturally fell. (This terrified the international bankers.) That's why, once they seized control of America, they instituted the Department of Agriculture and started paying farmers NOT to grow. They needed to create artificial scarcity to keep the prices of things artificially high.
Soddy said that America could produce all its own goods internally: shoes, automobiles, radios, food, and so forth. Because of this, it had no need for imports. A quote from the book: "When one contemplates a country like the United States, which it has been computed could easily supply almost the entire wants of the whole world without over-exerting herself, a country which has few real wants which it could not as well supply within its own territory, and therefore with little use for imports, but an almost infinite capacity for exports, the problem looks frankly insoluble."
This would cause a "balance of trade" problem, Soddy cautioned.
England encountered one of these in the 18th Century. So much gold was flowing out of England to buy tea from India that the British Treasury didn't have enough gold to carry out transactions domestically.
(The British solved this balance of trade problem by selling opium in China and replenishing the Treasury with drug money.)
Long story short: Since America could export everything (and didn't need to import anything) all the money-flows would travel in one direction: to the United States. All the gold from the world's central banks would be flowing TO America.
The solution? Gut America's manufacturing capacity and make it reliant on imports.
Cripple its productive capacity and you can get the gold to flow OUT of the United States.
In summation: The history of the 20th Century was the history of how to stripmine and enfeeble the United States. How to deplete its gold reserves and transfer them OUT of the country. All the gold that was used to found the IMF and World Bank were from Fort Knox. Fort Knox is now empty.
The IMF and World Bank exist AT THE EXPENSE of the United States. And they were not designed to increase America's wealth, but to siphon it out. In the new Banker-Run post-WWII system, America would no longer be permitted to be independent or self-sufficient. It would be folded into a larger "global grid" and made "INTERdependent". Hint: This was NOT to benefit the American people, who are now poorer, more in debt, and who are forced to pay higher prices for everything. In the process they lost their manufacturing dominance and control of their own economy (and government).
I think we may be looking for the same things. I read a book a few weeks ago called Pragmatic Thinking and Learning that I found really helpful and interesting. Its not too expensive and if you have the money I'd recommend it. Don't be intimidated by the programmer talk, none of it is really relevant.
Last week, I discovered a wiki that gave great advice on learning and memory techniques that seemed like it would have been extremely useful. I've spent the last hour searching for it but I just can't find it. When I come across it, I will let you know.
Another book that I found useful a few months ago was How to Read a Book. Don't let the title undermine the books value; its an awesome book. Definitely worth looking into. I don't follow the advice given in the book very rigidly, but since I've read it, I've found that I approach books much more methodically and absorb the information much more easily.
Its great to see that there is someone else out there looking for the same sort of resources I'm looking for. The way I look at it, learning is a skill that can be developed and mastered. It is an interesting pursuit in and of itself.
I haven't found any single resource for this sort of thing but maybe we can put together a subreddit where we can pool our resources for things that may be particularly helpful.
Read 'Continuous Delivery', 'The DevOps handbook', and perhaps 'Accelerate'.
This website is a good source of higher level information:
Cfapubs.org
This book helped me:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0071818774/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1523193422&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=option+volatility+and+pricing&dpPl=1&dpID=51RxE6P0LkL&ref=plSrch
A lot of those people are being fed by misguided food aid programs. Populations in Africa in particular (where birth rates are the highest in the world) are pushed beyond the carrying capacity of the local economies by perpetual food socialism. It's sort of like the opposite of the Ukrainian famine: instead of too little food, it's too much food, signalling abundance when the local conditions are actually those of severe poverty.
For more on this, books like Dead Aid and the White Man's Burden are great at explaining this phenomenon.
>I've heard of people advocating an "Ideal and stable population size" but I can't see how this would be implemented without the state. So basically, What do you think will happen in the future with regards to the growth of population and the demand it will cause?
This is complicated. One one hand, the people guided by Harvardprincetonyale dogma believe that it's their secular-sacred duty to feed the poor in Africa and to provide advice on how to manage and finance their affairs through the network of international financial institutions, NGOs, and UN-affiliated groups.
On the other, because central planning has a lot of trouble providing for growing populations (it's another variable to account for), they want to control that population growth at least somewhat. The same population growth that exceeds the capacity for those societies to provide for the new people caused by the foreign subsidies creates a problem that the same inept bureaucracy to manage through the promotion of population control programs.
There's no real way to 'solve' this problem in a clean manner. Billions of people are unfortunately reliant on the Harvardprincetonyale Axis of Ultimate Goodness for their continued survival.
Market signals provide critical information to people about whether to expand their families or to not expand them. When those market signals become distorted, people may either fail to produce sufficient children to maintain the prosperity of the society, or they may produce too many for the existing social structure to support to a general level of satisfaction.
The Soviet-Harvard delusion is that by providing food and by suppressing large-scale warfare, 'development' will proceed apace. What has resulted is that populations have exploded beyond the capacity of local economies to provide for them, and the same provision of welfare-food has empowered various dictatorial entities while preventing the emergence of local markets to help genuine society to flourish. Meanwhile, religiously-motivated armies threaten to break up some of the largest states (like Nigeria).
Unfortunately in their attempts to do good, the Axis of Ultimate Goodness has created a fragile series of powderkeg-countries where long-suppressed conflicts threaten to explode into horrific global warfare (see: Egypt). Modern humans in many parts of the world (including the developed world) have been cut off from accurate market information for a very long time, leading to distorted patterns of societal development that are ill-adapted to real conditions in the world.
My speculation that's not a prophecy at all is that three factors will prevent these population projections from being achieved:
These projections rest on a lot of ridiculous assumptions and naive math models. They're best understood at pitches for more funding. "If we don't get another billion dollars to promote condom usage, we're gonna have a big problem!" The problems are much more significant, severe, and inherently political in nature.
Population growth is neither a problem nor an unmitigated boon. It's just another factor for humans to calibrate with their desires and real conditions on Earth and within societies. Distorting price signals prevents humans from coordinating with one another in an effective way. The larger the society becomes, the more important that accurate market signals are to its continued functioning.
I would add (to the chain, not that anyone will look) a read through Anand Giridharadras' «Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World»
It's not that Gates et al are not doing good, it's that their doing good is at the expense of public oversight. When a private interest (like Gates) has more say over a schools technology use, policy, and future than the public it is serving.
Billionaires absolutely need to give to charity—but they should not be able to mould the world with their "gifts."
Consider crossposting this to r/antiwork and r/latestagecapitalism
I would do it myself, but the Reddit mobile app is not working 100% for me right now
Edit: There's also a book called Winner Takes All by Anand Giridharadas that I've been meaning to read, seems pretty relevant to this sub. The author gave an interview on Democracy Now recently.
how about we start with this one.
"The neatest little guide to stock market investing" might be what you're looking for. I haven't read it but I just picked it up off my book shelf and it looks like it covers the basics of how and why the markets work, common valuation ratios, brokers, how to make different types of orders...
I made the same mistake but the comment actually suggests A Farewall to ALms, a "sobering challenge to the idea that poor societies can be economically developed through outside intervention."
... Which sounds exactly as relevant as Hemingway. I doubt Clark argues that poor countries should kill their homeless in order to develop.
> Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore do not have the Communist Party. Their willingness to do whatever it takes to maintain stability, which now means to continue their perfect 5%+ GDP growth means that tactics like these are not out of the question. While my knowledge of Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore are not as in-depth as it is for mainland China, I do no believe their governments can pressure them as much as this government here, which can and will, make sure a company that doesn't comply loses everything in a matter of weeks or months, and make sure that the bosses are scapegoated in a way that makes them sound like completely unsympathetic scoundrels, and then the company must appoint new leaders.
I am very familiar with Japan, South Korea and Singapore's development and their governments. All of them developed under a 1 party or authoritarian government. Growth in these countries have also continued with their perfect 5%+ GDP growth for over 3 to 4 decades. Things changed only after the became developed, not while developing, and definitely not when their economies were at present day China's GDP per capita.
>China did lose its culture in a sense, but it also has not because the one thing that has been constant throughout Chinese history have been the communities. These communities were the bastions of culture, and while the Red Guard did their best to ruin any kind institutes of knowledge, culture, and capitalism, remember that there were still some that were safe, some too remote, and a vast number of other reasons why in different places some things survived.
Yet you chose to pick and choose as you wish to suit your narrative. The "safe, some too remote, and a vast number of other reasons why in different places some things survived" thing tells us that it barely survived but you said earlier that this IS the Chinese culture that's deeply rooted within Chinese society, implying that it's common and widespread instead of being confined to some remote parts of China that hasn't been affected by the Red Guards.
>Simplified platitudes make it easy to label and learn, but I would say that it keeps you from seeing the beauty inherent in its complexity, no matter how much China wants you to believe its homogeneity.
Ironic considering how you just labeled their culture as a homogeneous one that has its culture of copying being deep rooted within the Han examinations even though few people ever made it to the examinations in the past.
>Germany, Britain, France, the US, etc. did not have rules in place where anyone who came to their country and built factories had to have a local in charge of the company and have basic control over everything that work there.
Actually they did, and they did things that were far more protectionist than China. I would recommend the book 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang to learn more about their protectionist policies and state sponsored espionage systems (including a bounty system to steal trade secrets from Europe by the US as ordered by Alexander Hamilton himself.)
Here's the link to the book. Buy it if you like it.
https://marcell.memoryoftheworld.org/Ha-Joon%20Chang/23%20Things%20They%20Don%27t%20Tell%20You%20About%20Capitalism%20(1550)/23%20Things%20They%20Don%27t%20Tell%20You%20About%20Capita%20-%20Ha-Joon%20Chang.pdf
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1608193381/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i1
And excerpt from the book:
>Two basket cases
>Here are the profiles of two developing countries. You are an
economic analyst trying to assess their development
prospects. What would you say?
>Country A
: Until a decade ago, the country was highly
protectionist, with an average industrial tariff rate well above
30 per cent. Despite the recent tariff reduction, important
visible and invisible trade restrictions remain. The country
has heavy restrictions on cross-border flows of capital, a
state-owned and highly regulated banking sector, and
numerous restrictions on foreign ownership
of financial
assets. Foreign firms producing in the country complain that
they are discriminated against through differential taxes and
regulations by local governments. The country has no
elections and is riddled with corruption. It has opaque and
complicated property rights. In particular, its protection of
intellectual property rights is weak, making it the pirate
capital of the world. The country has a large number of state-
owned enterprises, many of which make large losses but
are propped up by subsidies and government-granted
monopoly rights.
>Country B
: The country’s trade policy has literally been the
most protectionist in the world for the last few decades, with
an average industrial tariff rate at 40–55 per cent. The
majority of the population cannot vote, and vote-buying and
electoral fraud are widespread. Corruption is rampant, with
political parties selling government jobs to their financial
backers. The country has never recruited a single civil
servant through an open, competitive process. Its public
finances are precarious, with records of government loan
defaults that worry foreign investors. Despite this, it
discriminates heavily against foreign investors. Especially in
the banking sector, foreigners are prohibited from becoming
directors while foreign shareholders cannot even exercise
their voting rights unless they are resident in the country. It
does not have a competition law, permitting cartels and
other forms of monopoly to grow unchecked. Its protection of
intellectual property rights is patchy, particularly marred by
its refusal to protect foreigners’ copyrights.
>Both these countries are up to their necks in things that
are supposed to hamper economic development – heavy
protectionism, discrimination against foreign investors,
weak protection of property rights, monopolies, lack of
democracy, corruption, lack of meritocracy, and so on. You
would think that they are both headed for developmental
disasters. But think again.
>Country A
is China today – some readers may have
guessed that. However, few readers would have guessed
that
Country B
is the USA – that is, around 1880, when it
was somewhat poorer than today’s China.
Despite all the supposedly anti-developmental policies
and institutions, China has been one of the world’s most
dynamic and successful economies over the last three
decades, while the USA in the 1880s was one of the fastest-
growing – and rapidly becoming one of the richest –
countries in the world. So the economic superstars of the
late nineteenth century (USA) and of today (China) have both
followed policy recipes that go almost totally against today’s
neo-liberal free-market orthodoxy.
--
>As far as Americans used to advertise for people to steal trade secrets, that's a difference in culture. That's something you find out after you take the job. They won't tell you beforehand. They'll wait until afterwards to let you know about the extra responsibilities outside of the contract.
No, it was literally a bounty system set up by one of the founding fathers of the United States (Alexander Hamilton) to go to Europe and steal trade secrets. The US government paid people to steal from Europe.
>I am unconvinced the report at ... really relates to high-quality software.
There are actually two stability metrics in the DevOps report. Mean time to recovery (MTTR) and Release Fail Rate. And while they are not something that people think of "quality" as a developer, I find it hard to believe that software of low internal quality could be released without massive pains. Both of which are lowest for high performers. When you listen to some talks by Jez Humble, who is one of the authors of the DevOps report, he says exactly what this article says. It is actually a core message of most of his talks.
Also, in the full book, they go into more details about actual technical practices and they find trunk-based development, developer-owned tests and refactoring correlates with high IT performance. And all of these practices are what Fowler and Humble associate with software quality. I really recommend reading the book, as the report is mostly condensed stuff for managers and executives to read between meetings.
The easy answer is "because that's where the Industrial Revolution happened".
But that's just pushing the question back a little bit. The next level is "Why did the Industrial Revolution happen in England?".
This is a very well-researched topic, and there are a couple of competing theories. I'm going to summarize one strain of research, which I personallyu know the best and find the most compelling: Greg Clark's theory that English primogeniture laws in the medieval period caused discount rates in England to decrease due to an increase in self-control capacity.
Needless to say, this is a fairly controversial theory.
*
Let's go back a bit to Clark's 2003 paper The Great Escape: The Industrial Revolution in Theory and in History. It concludes:
> The Industrial Revolution remains one of histories great mysteries. We have seen in this
survey that the attempts by economists to model this transition have been largely unsuccessful.
The first approach emphasizing an exogenous switch in property rights stemming from political
changes, despite its continuing popularity, fails in terms of the timing of political changes, and
their observed effects on the incentives for innovation. The second approach, which looks for a
shift between equilibria again fails because there is little sign of any major changes in the
underlying parameters of the economy which would lead to changed behavior by individuals.
> The most promising class of models are those based on endogenous growth. The problem here is
to find some kind of “driver” that is changing over time that will induce changes in productivity
growth rates. Previously these models seemed to face insuperable difficulties in that they find it
very hard to model the kind of one time upward shift in productivity growth rates that the
Industrial Revolution seemed to involve. But as we gather more information on the empirics of
the Industrial Revolution and the years before the discontinuity in TFP growth rates seems less
than has been imagined, and the transition between the old world of zero productivity growth
rates and the new world of rapid productivity growth much more gradual. This bodes well for
endogenous growth models.
Note that endogenous growth models are a fairly recent addition to our toolbox - primarily coming out of Paul Romer's work in the early 1990s.
Clark proposed a mechanism for this endogenous growth in Survival of the Richest: The Malhtusian mechanism in Pre-Industrial England.
Abstract**
> Fundamental to the Malthusian model of pre-industrial society is the assumption
that higher income increased reproductive success. Despite the seemingly inescapable logic of this model, its empirical support is weak. We examine the link
between income and net fertility using data from wills on reproductive success,
social status and income for England 1585–1638. We find that for this society,
close to a Malthusian equilibrium, wealth robustly predicted reproductive succapable logic of this model, its empirical support is weak. We examine the link
between income and net fertility using data from wills on reproductive success,
social status and income for England 1585–1638. We find that for this society,
close to a Malthusian equilibrium, wealth robustly predicted reproductive success. The richest testators left twice as many children as the poorest. Consequently, in this static economy, social mobility was predominantly downwards.
The result extends back to at least 1250 in England.
In his book A Farewell to Alms, Clark shows posits the following model:
The data Clark presents is, in my opinion, quite convincing, and I haven't seen an effective refutation.
While I think the institutional explanation is dominant within economics, it's worth noting that there are some adherent to a geographic explanation, such as the one Diamond explains in "Guns, Germs and Steel". It posits that the main driver of the English IR was geographic - England has more coal, and Europeans were in general more resistant to disease, which allowed for European expansion.
http://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
Buy this book. Read it repeatedly. This is a core piece of knowledge for any trader, it talks about the steps necessary to move yourself to an emotionless state that will help keep you profitable.
Emotions are the reason that traders lose money and fail.
Semi-related to the engineering mindset, this is a really excellent pamphlet/book thing originally from the 60s that contains a lot of timeless advice about being a good engineer:
"The Unwritten Laws of Engineering" by W.J. King
There's a bunch of different versions of it, but here is Amazon and a complete PDF
As much as the title bothers me, (they're literally written laws!!) when I feel frustrated by homework, professors, managers, or other sources of friction in engineering, I like to pick this up and remind myself of my place in the system.
Okay, then how about you read the book the article was based on
Nobody has mentioned The Road to Serfdom [Amazon] by Hayek, probably available in your local library.
(note: this is an argument against a centrally planned economy, which is irrelevant to many forms of market socialism, as CasedOutside has already pointed out)
Nope. 100% have a B.A. in history a B.A. in education and a B.S. in health science. Currently in graduate school.
I didn't respond to your "facts" because you didn't list any. You went on some schizophrenic rant about race. You've completely failed to understand how geography influences the success and failures of societies. If I had handed in a paper with your line of reasoning my professor would have handed it back and said "start over, this is trash."
I'd suggest you read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond or the "Wealth and Poverty of Nations" by David Landes
You're going to have to go into reading those books with an open mind, because they might not fit your predetermined narrative that societies are only successful because of skin color.
Definitely agree with you on the comment that using never is...almost never a good strategy.
Nonetheless I imagine what this overzealous individual is speaking to is a fairly legitimate point regarding how billionaires are highly invested in preserving the status quo. Much of their philanthropy, while coming from a good place (probably where I disagree with Oxytokin), serves to make society think that the current system will look out for the least fortunate when that is really not true. Significant reforms would be needed to do that properly, including but not limited to a return to very high marginal tax rates for extremely high earners.
The book Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World speaks to this.
This is one of the books I used to buy every year, last 4 years, and read it
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1507208944
​
First year, it was very useful and I read a lot.
Later years, I know the stuff, but I always buy this book and read once during the dec holidays as they publish around that time.
Every year, they drop around 10 stocks out of 100 and add new 10 stocks.
Each one, they write 2 - 3 pages analysis, fundamentals, moat ...etc
​
I would also recommend this book for CANSLIM
https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
​
Two excellent titles on the subject are Option Volatility and Pricing: Advanced Trading Strategies and Techniques, 2nd Edition by Natenberg and Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives (10th Edition) by Hull.
The former is lighter, more entertaining read that is easier on math and touches on applied trading. The latter is a more thorough, academic title.
A number of other helpful resources are available. The Ally Invest Options Playbook provides a handy reference for various option strategies. The Interactive Brokers Probability Lab (free version linked at the bottom of the page) provides a modeling tool to visually explore option strategies by modifying expectations of volatility and price. CBOE offers a complete course on the subject. Finally, Tastytrade offers a long running set of shows, tutorials and discussions covering many aspects of options and option trading.
I was inspired by this, but can't make salad dressing. And White Man's Burden is breadpig required reading ;)
I am going to read a book - The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich A. Hayek
If you are interested in Scrum, I'd recommend reading Software in 30 days and/or Scrum, the art of doing twice the work in half the time or at the very least, read the Scrum Guide. For agile in a larger sense, there are plenty of good books, like The Art of Agile Development or Agile with GUTS
Yes, all economists completely agree on this. There isn't ample literature from respected economists saying there is going to be massive unemployment at all...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Work
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0393239357/ref=pd_aw_sims_2?pi=SY115&simLd=1
Many economists disagree that jobs will magically appear this time. That makes sense, because previously much of the work was created by increased demand and urbanization. There isn't enough time in the day to utilize the services of everyone who has been made unemployed by automation when computers can do almost anything a human can do, cheaper.
http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282
I'm not conflating the two, I'm expressly contrasting them. I know there was a long time between the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution... the Malthusian misery that I mentioned occurred precisely in that interlude. Of course that period included societies existing peacefully -- peacefulness is consistent with Malthusian misery, and in fact more conducive to it because spikes in the death rate are (together with drops in the birth rate) one of precisely two things that periodically pulled societies out of the Malthusian depths prior to the industrial revolution.
Clark's A Farewell to Alms covers these topics in depth.
Read the excerpt below carefully.
I even took the trouble of cropping out Figure 14.3 for you. You are welcome.
A better understanding of history might help you.
From Clark's Farewell to Alms:
Chapter 7:
>The Industrial Revolution was driven by the expansion of knowledge. Yet, stunningly, unskilled labor has reaped more gains than any other group.... By 1815 real wages in England for both farm laborers and the urban unskilled had begun the inexorable rise that has created affluence for all.
>Thus modern growth, right from its start, by benefiting the most disadvantaged groups in preindustrial society, particularly unskilled workers, has reduced inequality within societies.
>Land, in the long run, received none of the gains from the Industrial Revolution. David Ricardo, the first economist to focus explicitly on the distribution of income, writing in the England of 1817 during the early years of the Industrial Revolution, foresaw a future in which wages would stay at subsistence, land rents would increase, and the return on capital would decline as population increased, because land was the fixed factor in production. The actual future in England could hardly have been more different.
>Because there is a fixed stock of land, the failure of real rents per acre to increase significantly has meant that, as economic output marched upward, the share of land rents in national income has correspondingly declined to insignificance...
>Physical capital owners also received none of the gains from growth. The real rental of capital (net depreciation) is just the real interest rate. But consider figure 9.1. It shows that the real interest rate, if anything, declined since the Industrial Revolution.
Total payments to capital have expanded enormously since the Industrial Revolution, but only because the stock of capital grew rapidly. The stock of capital has been indefinitely expandable. It has grown as fast as output, and its abundance has kept real returns per unit of capital low.
>We might have expected wage gains to have gone disproportionately to skilled workers with much human capital, especially since innovation and new technology were the basis of growth. But as figure 9.4 showed unskilled male wages in England have risen more since the Industrial Revolution than skilled wages, and this result holds for all advanced economies.9 The wage premium for skilled building workers has declined from about 100 percent in the thirteenth century to 25 percent today. Figure 14.3 shows the real wages per hour for building laborers, the unskilled, in England from 1220 to 2000. The enormous gains even for these unskilled workers are evident.
amazon - $15
some of it
Unwritten Laws of Engineering definitely helps you understand, and transition into, your professional role.
*edit: I guess it has engineering in the title, but there's no math! I swear.
Accelerate - https://www.amazon.com/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339/
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People - https://www.amazon.com/Habits-Highly-Effective-People-Powerful/dp/0743269519
Extreme Ownership - https://www.amazon.com/Extreme-Ownership-U-S-Navy-SEALs/dp/1760558206/
It's kind of dumb but there are two different "CD"s.
The first level is CI, which is committing code and having something that builds it automatically and runs all the tests.
The next level is CD (Continuous Delivery), which is a process that takes your successful integration builds and pushes them out to some set of environments (e.g. UAT or staging or whatever). From there you might have some set of additional tests that run, maybe load tests or integration tests with live external systems.
The third level is CD (Continuous Deployment), which is a process that takes your successful delivery builds and automatically pushes them to production.
In a true continuous deployment pipeline there's no gating step where people sign off on UAT (this doesn't mean there's no people involved anywhere, for example code review pre-merge is fine). You write your tests, you merge your changes, and if everything passes the changes just show up in production.
The part of your process that makes it not "true CD" is the human sign off in UAT.
That being said, TRUE AUTOMATED CD IS NOT RIGHT FOR ALL SITUATIONS! There are many business reasons that you might not want to or be able to apply a true continuous deployment model.
IMO the best book on this stuff that's out right now is https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1942788339
>Evolution is the essential manifestation of war.
I think there are those who would dispute that claim, here's one:
https://www.amazon.com/Nonzero-Logic-Destiny-Robert-Wright/dp/0679758941
​
>In Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Wright asserts that, ever since the primordial ooze, life has followed a basic pattern. Organisms and human societies alike have grown more complex by mastering the challenges of internal cooperation. Wright's narrative ranges from fossilized bacteria to vampire bats, from stone-age villages to the World Trade Organization, uncovering such surprises as the benefits of barbarian hordes and the useful stability of feudalism.
​
Linky for anyone else who is interested: http://www.amazon.com/Nonzero-The-Logic-Human-Destiny/dp/0679758941
No, not really.
In the U.S., life expectancy at age 20 has increased by ~50% since 1850. There are no "official" stats going back much further than this, although some researchers have attempted to guess based on wills, church records, etc.
I'm a huge fan of Market Profile, so here's a handy tutorial: https://www.cmegroup.com/education/interactive/marketprofile/handbook.pdf
Also a big fan of the directional movement index, so here's a tutorial on that: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/technical/02/050602.asp
Heard good stuff about "Trading in the Zone" in terms of covering trader psychology, but haven't read it because the psychological aspects never really caused me much of an issue (I work in real estate investments, so used to it): http://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
Not a fan of ForexFactory, but this thread (Building an Equity Millipede) is pure gold: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=245149
Socialism/Communism
A People's History of the World
Main Currents of Marxism
The Socialist System
The Age of... (1, 2, 3, 4)
Marx for our Times
Essential Works of Socialism
Soviet Century
Self-Governing Socialism (Vols 1-2)
The Meaning of Marxism
The "S" Word (not that good in my opinion)
Of the People, by the People
Why Not Socialism
Socialism Betrayed
Democracy at Work
Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA (again didn't like it very much)
The Socialist Party of America (absolute must read)
The American Socialist Movement
Socialism: Past and Future (very good book)
It Didn't Happen Here
Eugene V. Debs
The Enigma of Capital
Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism
A Companion to Marx's Capital (great book)
After Capitalism: Economic Democracy in Action
Capitalism
The Conservative Nanny State
The United States Since 1980
The End of Loser Liberalism
Capitalism and it's Economics (must read)
Economics: A New Introduction (must read)
U.S. Capitalist Development Since 1776 (must read)
Kicking Away the Ladder
23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism
Traders, Guns and Money
Corporation Nation
Debunking Economics
How Rich Countries Got Rich
Super Imperialism
The Bubble and Beyond
Finance Capitalism and it's Discontents
Trade, Development and Foreign Debt
America's Protectionist Takeoff
How the Economy was Lost
Labor and Monopoly Capital
We Are Better Than This
Ancap/Libertarian
Spontaneous Order (disagree with it but found it interesting)
Man, State and Economy
The Machinery of Freedom
Currently Reading
This is the Zodiac Speaking (highly recommend)
I've posted this before but I'll repost it here:
Now in terms of the question that you ask in the title - this is what I recommend:
Job Interview Prep
Junior Software Engineer Reading List
Read This First
Fundementals
Understanding Professional Software Environments
Mentality
History
Mid Level Software Engineer Reading List
Read This First
Fundementals
Software Design
Software Engineering Skill Sets
Databases
User Experience
Mentality
History
Specialist Skills
In spite of the fact that many of these won't apply to your specific job I still recommend reading them for the insight, they'll give you into programming language and technology design.
Book recommendation: https://www.amazon.com/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
This book is not directly related to agile. But it is rather unique, because it is based on studies and not on authors subjective opinion. It tries to figure out, which mechanics are relevant for modern software development teams.
Most often our rituals are not based on evidence. They are originally based on convenience and afterwards kept up as dogma. Sadly the original introduction was often done by the wrong people.
For example agile was mostly invented by developers, but the widespread adoption of scrum was done by business people (managers as scrum master). As such a dogma was formed that may not be in the best interest of solid software engineering.
I can't cite an exact source, but data scientist Seth Stephen-Davidowitz (author of Everybody Lies, one of my favorite books of 2017) has pointed out that the two most common Google searches coupled with "how to buy Bitcoin" are "how to get rich quickly" and "what is Bitcoin?." It seems to me that, while likely more valuable than a fiat currency inflated to serve special interests (rant, sorry), Bitcoin could have value as a market-determined currency like gold or silver, but not now. People are looking to get rich and that will cause it to crash.
One of my favorite not-super-technical books that can give some insights into the thought process and actionability of analytics and machine learning is "Everybody Lies". https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856
It touches on a concept I really like to rely on data for which is revealed vs. stated intent. People tell you they want what they wish they wanted. Data tells you what they actually want and how they actually behave. There are some good intuitive regression models in there as well.
if you are in the business of larger dollar amount sales (i.e. not hawking cell phones at the local Verizon shop, but are in the business of solutions selling), these are the only two sales books you will ever need:
Spin Selling
Spin Selling Fieldbook
By request, I am reposting this from a comment response further down about disagreeing with the idea that they could have ended poverty with their finances.
The sentiment in the article is wrong. I spent a while studying poverty and foreign aid in Africa and the idea of spending money to end poverty was something we looked at quite a bit.
Poverty is not a simple issue and throwing money at the problem is not just going to end it. For a real end to poverty there is going to need to be a genuine redistribution of wealth. We in the west live in a world of extreme abundance. Many of those who are poor have much more than those in other countries. If the rest of the world lived like we did, we would not be able to sustain our way of life. That would be the first big thing to changing poverty.
The next thing is trade/consumption. The economies of many countries in Africa are not sufficient right now to handle an influx of money. We have seen what happens in countries like Nigeria, where massive corruption meant that the huge proceeds of the oil industry did not do a ton of good. As well, many African countries do not have the geographical location to be a self sustaining country (see Niger). The borders were largely drawn by the Berlin Conference and were based on the whim of the Europeans there. What that meant was borders and countries were set up to benefit the colonial powers, not to actually be self sustaining countries. If we really wanted to end poverty, then corruption and trade issues would need to be resolved. The countries cannot escape poverty through an influx of money.
Lastly, poverty is a very complex issue. There are so many factors that coming in from the outside and thinking we can fix it is a very bad point of view, somewhat in line with colonial thinking (that we know better, etc). To really fix things, the efforts have to be driven by the residents of the countries for the people of the country. We can help, but there is no way as outsiders that we can solve poverty.
This is what I have seen and learned in my time.
Sources: Berlin Conference
The White Man's Burden (Foreign Aid Economics and Ethics book)
Nine Hills to Nambonkaha (Aid in Côte d'Ivoire written by a former Peace Corp Volunteer based on her notes)
Nigeria Corruption
Trying to find one last book on a microcredit NGO in Kenya.
Scrum is a form of Agile.
Having a team come in to teach Scrum is ok. I did that once. However, I got a lot more out of this book: https://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X
You're right, it has been happening since the Industrial Revolution. However, it's never grown at a rate like this before. You should check out the book The Second Machine Age.
You hit the proverbial nail on the head. Make-work bias has been around for centuries and there is usually only temporary unemployment for those whose jobs get replaced by capital. But like you said it's not really worth worrying about at this point.
If anyone has any interest in technological advancement or capital from an economic standpoint, these are some great books to check out:
[Capital in the Twenty-First Century] (http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/067443000X/ref=pd_sim_b_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0ETBP81SYG4890W6R34T)
[The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Machine-Age-Technologies/dp/0393239357/ref=pd_sim_b_6?ie=UTF8&refRID=0N2W244G0SF4XT3Q5MDB)
[The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Lights-Tunnel-Automation-Accelerating/dp/1448659817/ref=pd_sim_b_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0Q1BR5DDQRM29TZPTGBN)
Probably a lot of readers of /r/water have read Cadillac Desert.
I own a copy of, and have made two false starts reading, The King Of California as recommend by the anonymous author of the blog On The Public Record.
I highly recommend A Great Aridness, a worthy heir to Cadillac Desert.
Also on my to-read list is Rising Tide. I would like to find a book that does for the Great Lakes what Marc Reisner did for water in the American West with his book Cadillac Desert.
A few things I've read this year that have little to do with water:
EDIT: Oh, and Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt
At which point I know they haven't read the Wealth and Poverty of Nations. It goes into good depth about what happened when Algeria, an African country, socialized all their businesses and due to that are still in a shithole.
Seeing as I'm replying to you directly I should state that I am usually a big fan of your work, so please believe me that I'm giving this feedback in good faith. And I apologise for implying you ripped off someone else's video.
Bringing this up correlational data (at around 4:18 in the video) immediately begs the question why countries like Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Austria, Switzerland are all very prosperous countries with high percentages of mountainous land and very limited arable farmland. Further, Japan (73% mountains) and South Korea (70%) are the most prosperous countries in Asia. Chile (80% mountains) is the most prosperous country in South America.
The section on temperature was also really problematic for me. The way you brought it up appears to be to create distance between Greece and the other prosperous mountainous European countries, but you then dismiss the theory of how climate effects economies is "massively complex, controversial, and not yet well understood". Why bring this up at all if you're not going to flesh out the argument and then dismiss it? There are valid arguments to be made about climate but it adds no value to the video in its present form.
If you had just limited the scope of what you were saying, ie left it at how Greece's mountainous terrain and climate creates challenges for Greece alone it wouldn't have created these problems with correlation=/=causation.
Both geography and climate effect economic development. But economies are insanely complex and you do the topic a disservice by leaving viewers with the takeaway that you can simply explain it through these correlations between geography and climate. You don't need to paint yourself into that corner if you just focus on how it effects your subject country rather than the rest of the world.
For a more complete look on this subject I would recommend he book The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by Harvard economic historian David S. Landes. It covers how geography, climate, culture, education economics and history effected the economic development of the world. It's also a treasure trove of content ideas.
Hi, former Wall Street-er here. Sounds like you're more interested in fundamentals investing instead of technical? If so, read:
The last two are fairly specific to the equity research career, but if you're doing fundamentals investing you'll be using the same principles.
If instead you're interested in technical investing, Getting Started in Candlestick Charting is my go-to.
Economía e inversiones son dos cosas muy distintas. Los libros de economía que leí están en ingles y son:
Una vez que leas y entiendas los tres primeros libros, las inversiones pasan a ser algo mas fácil de entender: como producir valor a partir del aire.
Unfortunately, I don't have an easy direct source. The assertion was made by Seth Stephens, a former Google Data Scientist that had access to massive amounts of data. It was cited in his book Everybody Lies though if someone here knows how to pull Google search history by zip code/county it can be confirmed or discredited.
Pete, setup informational interviews at organizations near you, professional and college. This is a form of networking that will help you learn who holds positions who will give you 10-30 minutes of their time to learn about duties and skills in different roles at different ballclubs.
You have to ask, ask, ask, but you will learn of many ways you know someone who works at these clubs. Use your networks to find connections that are 1,2,3 levels deep. You will find its likely that over time you'll only have to go 1 or 2 levels of connection. Ask the athletic departments at your university. A lot of clubs have spring training in AZ, so you're likely in a good spot to find connections. Here is an example of what you could ask:
> I'm so_and_soap, a senior here at NAU. I'm interested in working with MLB and am wondering if there are some staff here who can help me setup informational interviews at the Diamondbacks, MLB?
There are three goals (or however many you make up) for informational interviews.
Patience
You might find something at your ballclub within your search timeframe quickly. Most likely, though, you will need to include more companies in your search. Whatever the job, focus on developing those skills you think ae most important to land you at MLB or other targetted companies.
Networking ideas:
Linkedin, parents, university alumni, directories, friends, friends' parents, guest lecturers, professors, bosses
Say Yes
In your replies to comments you have said 3 times that you don't know something or don't have requisite skill for something. That is not productive nor useful to your efforts. Instead think of a question that might get that piece of information answered.
Resources
Highly Effective Networking by Orville Pierson
Use your head to get your foot in the door by Harvey Mackay
Nonviolent Communication
Spin Selling
These are the books that helped me most. I've read many; these were my favorites.
How to Make Money in Stocks by William O'Neill. This book makes the assumption that you want to be an active trader and not a passive "buy & hold" investor. This is the one that got me started.
Trade Your Way to Financial Freedom by Van Tharp. This book addresses the trader rather than the trading. Among the most useful concepts I learned is how to think about Risk.
Phil Gordon's Little Blue Book by Phil Gordon. This is a book about how to play winning poker, but the principles are identical: calculating risk/reward, how to think about sunk-costs, cash management. Very, very helpful.
Markets in Profile by James Dalton. I didn't really start trading successfully till I learned what this book teaches about auctions. One caveat: market profile has been superceded by Volume Profile. This is a technical book, that may not be much help unless you are a technical trader.
And speaking of technical trading: I consider Technical Trader's Guide to Computer Analysis to be an invaluable reference.
How to Make Money In Stocks by William O'Neil is a must read for any investor. O'Neil explains the behavior of stocks and how to read charts to interpret the investor psychology behind the moves. With that information, you can zero in on stocks most likely to go up in price.
If you choose to follow O'Neil's system of picking stocks, How to Make Money In Stocks-Getting Started has more specifics on how to build and execute a trading plan.
Check out this book by William O' Neil, it will change your life!
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0071614133/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1524459229&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=william+oneil
Option Volatility and Pricing: Advanced Trading Strategies and Techniques, 2nd Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/0071818774/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_mm2qDbQRT7CNJ
RTFM before you buy. Chapter 25
https://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Professional/dp/0071818774/ref=zg_bs_2672_3?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=349CSEGTX0DJYR7A26SW
in all seriousness check these out
https://www.amazon.com/Technical-Analysis-Complete-Financial-Technicians/dp/0134137043/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=D74P3MCZFQVYMZ4PBFT9
https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Technical-Market-Indicators-Second/dp/0070120579/ref=pd_sim_14_33?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0070120579&pd_rd_r=WXSXAV2Q884X3RWTYDP1&pd_rd_w=uoVZY&pd_rd_wg=hgPmk&psc=1&refRID=WXSXAV2Q884X3RWTYDP1
https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Guide-Futures-Market-Fundamental/dp/111885375X/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1492128977&sr=1-3&keywords=jack+d+schwager
https://www.amazon.com/Options-Futures-Other-Derivatives-9th/dp/0133456315/ref=dp_ob_image_bk
https://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Professional/dp/0071818774/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1492129026&sr=1-1&keywords=sheldon+natenberg+option+volatility+and+pricing
https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Options-Strategies-Definitive-Practical/dp/0133964027/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1492129036&sr=1-
Oops! Sorry was listening to some 50 copied wrong link. More beginner resources at :
http://education.optionseducation.org/course/?podcasts=1
https://www.cboe.com/LearnCenter/webcast/
Books:
http://www.amazon.ca/Options-Strategic-Investment-Lawrence-McMillan/dp/0735204659
http://www.amazon.ca/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Techniques/dp/0071818774/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1418529768&sr=1-7&keywords=options
For a more thorough exploration of this topic, check out The White Man's Burden: Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good by William Easterly. Title says it all really, this guy is one of the leading economic thinkers in the aid field, but very readable
For God's Sake, Stop the Aid.
It's pretty much all in-kind donations, including the infamous Super Bowl t-shirts. Bill Easterly makes some very interesting points against the Bono/Jeffery Sachs model of "we need just another billion dollars of aid".
I mean I believe you that you want to know more about him. I'm just not sure your post here is genuine. Its the conversation itself I find suspect.
First of all you are not simply left leaning. Its clear from your post history that you are aware of and buy into Marxist ideology surrounding power structures.
Secondly, if you want to learn about Peterson why are you posting here first? There are hundreds if not thousands of hours of video on youtube where he outlines his ideas. You can literally google "Jordan Peterson on X" and get a dozen 5 min videos of him talking about that subject. If you just wanted to understand him or his views you would start there then bring your questions about his statements here.
Now maybe I'm wrong, not like it doesn't happen regularly. In that case I wouldn't start with Petersons arguments against communism. Peterson identifies himself as a classical liberal. So his arguments against communism should generally align with classically liberal or libertarian viewpoints surrounding collectivism. With that in mind read "Free to Choose" by Milton Freedman and/or "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek. (these are my two top choices) Then, understanding the basic arguments against socialism/communism, look into JBPs views with a new perspective. I'm not trying to say reading those books will change your mind, but they will give you the actual arguments and not the typical strawman you get on the internet.
https://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0226320618/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1523154978&sr=8-2&keywords=road+to+serfdom
https://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman-ebook/dp/B004MYFLBS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1523155001&sr=8-1&keywords=free+to+choose
David Landes provides a good comparison of the effect of different European colonial masters in his book The Wealth and Poverty of Nations.
Critics decry some of his comments re cultures, and point to Guns, Germs and Steel, but IMO this book picks up where Jared Diamond finishes, and also provides interesting commentary on the Japanese and Chinese situations too. The two make good reading together.
However, the main point here is the analysis of effects of the different European empires on their colonies' later economic development.
Excellent comment! Also, this book seems right up your alley, have you read it yet?
https://www.amazon.com/Winners-Take-All-Charade-Changing/dp/0451493249
If you haven’t read Anand Giridharadas’s book Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, it’s definitely worth a read. It’s about how the Davos crowd, the foundation people, the consultant class, the market apostles, they’re all about trying to change the world without having their world change.
That thinking created our environmental problems.
You might want to read Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World. I had the author on my podcast, if you want to hear him firsthand.
Check out this book man. I'm just starting as well and its really helped explain things. Well put together and it's pretty cheap.
https://www.amazon.com/Neatest-Little-Guide-Market-Investing/dp/0452298628
Here's a book on stock market investing for newbies that I thought was really great:
https://www.amazon.com/Neatest-Little-Guide-Market-Investing/dp/0452298628
yes because 500k new immigrants and international """"students"""" each year flooding into vancouver and toronto surely has NOTHING to do with housing demand, and thus equilibrium house prices.
here is some helpful material that you could learn a whole lot from
There is no point going on with someone who doesn't understand the Economics 101 of growing deficits in weak economies while cutting deficits during good economies, like the one Obama left to Trump.
You are fundamentally too economically ignorant to grasp the basic principle when you insist on trying to draw a false equivalence between the idiocy of current growing deficits after the sub 5% unemployment Obama left Trump, and the quite reasonable deficits implemented in the bottom of one of the worst recessions the nation has seen since depression.
I'd suggest an Econ 101 class, or even Economics for Dummies. Your basic lack of fundamental knowledge makes discussion pointless. I'd have more luck discussing quantum physics with a 3 year old.
Aren't transacting BTC disincentive for its users then?
Great read for you: https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1520547403&sr=8-1&keywords=economics+for+dummies
Wenn du mir mit dem kauf einen Gefallen tun willst
Hmm I look at it this way. Indeed morality is simply a product of the human mind, and this is exactly what makes it objective. And I don't mean like "I think this is right, therefore it is". It is bigger than that. Morality is real, natural and objective the same way water is wet and planets are things. There isn't anything wet individual H2O molecules. Yet through their interaction a property we call 'wet' is presented. The same goes for planets. They are really just big balls of elementary particles. But it doesn’t help anyone to think of it this way. There are still laws like Newton’s law of gravitation that describe how planets work. This is the idea behind reductionism. While things are really made out of ever smaller parts (until you hit quantum mechanics), it is still useful to describe reality at higher levels of generalization.
For morality the same works in two steps (ending the line of reduction down at the human individual). Imagine two strangers meeting each other. They both need medical attention due to a civil war. Now the other could provide the medical attention but also pose a threat. When these people interact one of two things can happen. Either they cooperate or they oppose each other (cooperate/defect in the Prisoners Dilemma as it is called in game theory and economics). Now when people oppose each other nothing really changes compared to when they didn't interact with each other. All participants are still selfishly trying to achieve their own goals regardless of anything or anyone else. But when they cooperate something new is created. A unit of several individuals that works together towards a common goal. This unit of people is similar to water being wet. But this is not morality yet. This is more like selfish cooperation.
The difference lies in the fact that humans can do one thing that water molecules can't. And that is reproduce, both sexually and intellectually (by changing other people’s minds they in effect let you copy a part of you, namely your thoughts, into them). This gives rise to a second level of effects due to evolutionary theory. We find that there is another more general way to look at human behaviour that can be described using scientific laws just like planets can. Not only do people sometimes cooperate, but whenever they do they also generate profit. In fact they generate more profit compared to when they had worked alone. The only additional route to this is in a perfectly competitive market, but as anyone who has taken econ 101 may remember there are at least 12 separate conditions that need to be fulfilled in order for this to work. Making cooperation the dominant mechanism by which people become rich.* Because cooperation=profit there is a force acting towards individuals, small groups of people and societies to cooperate more with each other. There is ample evidence for this (see for example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Morality is therefore (at least in my mind) the tendency for more cooperative societies* to grow and flourish while societies which exploit, oppress, oppose each other and their members are retarded, stagnant or collapse.
From this follows what I think of as objective morality. In societies where no cooperation at all takes place society is destroyed, civilization collapses, and humanity is reduced to a collection of wandering individuals constantly trying to survive and kill each other (basically an unending version of the Purge but more extreme). In society where everyone cooperates to rationally find the best solution to bring everyone happiness, individuals live longer and the amount of suffering, pain and death is minimized/eliminated. I would call the first Evil and the second Good but really I don't have to because humanity as a whole has already done this by. Words are defined by the majority of opinions after all (Luckily regardless of what name we give this phenomenon the effect remains real).
Incidentally these 12 conditions basically never occur so whenever someone says “the market will solve everything” I recommend to take a very very close look at what they are actually proposing.
**In the sense of the prisoners dilemma not the communistic/socialistic sense. The communists didn't in fact base their society on the community but on the communist party. And everyone else got kicked into the dirt.
I found the book nonzero to be similar in scope to Guns, Germs, and Steel, meaning the whole of human history, but a very different way of looking at things.
Read them both.
I think downward social pressure is an important point in this discussion and raises a bunch of interesting economic and ethical issues .
Side stepping those issues for a moment, an interesting data point is Gregory Clark's book A Farewell to Alms which is about how downward social pressure impacted England in the 1600's. Clark's argument is that limited land and the Malthusian trap (which was more prevalent in England than Europe because England is an island) caused the children of rich children in England to move down the social ladder which crowded out the poor and essentially pushed them off the ladder. Clark also claims that these new lower class workers had more upper class values which made them more industrious and better works which in turn provided England with the labor force necessary to get a jump start on the industrial revolution, though this second claim clearly has issues (e.g. did the morals really make that big a difference; couldn't economic incentives teach people to be industrious rather than the values needing to be taught by wealthy parents or grand parents). That said, I think the first claim is spot on as a positive claim (though I don't endorse the normative claim that it's good since that smacks of social darwinism).
Jumping back to today, we were already seeing some of this happening prior to the great recession where lower middle class men aren't able to get married and start families because of poor financial prospects, driven partly by lack of education. I think the great recession though is only making things worse as the generation that graduated from 2008 to today is seeing similar diminished opportunities and will increase that downward pressure.
So it will be very interesting to see how this plays out. There's clearly huge economic concerns at stake (e.g. how do you stop people from investing $200k into education for a career which pays $30k and how do you stop the educational arms race) but there's also huge ethical issues too (e.g. is there an intrinsic value to education? who deserves to be educated and on what basis? what do you do about those who get left behind?).
Coming to this a little late but wanted to say that (a) I completely agree, and (b) I'd take it a little further.
The thought that there was some Valhalla of wonderful food in earlier days is easily proven wrong. We live in the best time for eating there has ever been. For instance this article explains at some length and convincingly to me that food has only improved. Think about it - name one major city in the US where food was better 15 years ago. I can't think of any.
And if you go back further in time, you find that agriculture is coincident with higher population but also with malnutrition. This book is awful in some parts but it explains at length the accepted knowledge that agriculture = more people, but is also = disease and malnutrition at significant levels.
Skipping forward, I think 'modern' agriculture starts with crop rotation, Source, and pretty soon you have the British Agricultural revolution that kickstarts the industrial revolution.
Coincident with that you have the greatest rise in per-capita GDP there has ever been. Source, The Great Divergence.
And then that's why I get to work at a desk instead of doing mind-numbing, back-breaking work in the fields, and that's why I enjoy more material plenty than anybody could imagine 200 years ago, and why I can choose among multiple places, in my major urban center, to get pretty damn good pho. Lo those many years ago when I was young, sushi was a foreign concept. Now I can get it (or a rough approximation of it) in a strip mall in the middle of nowhere.
There is a downside to removing people from their food. There is also a downside to industrial agriculture. A lot of folks eat out more often. We have lost the spiritual connection to our food in large part that is created by hunting for your food or growing it and shepherding it the whole way through. We don't take food as seriously, and we don't contemplate as closely where it came from. We are complicit in the dead zone at the mouth of the Mississippi and in the overuse of antibiotics in, and ill-treatment of, our livestock, to name but a couple examples.
But come the fuck on. I more than likely owe my life to my forebearers moving away from the fields and working in factories. I certainly owe my material comforts to that. I don't have to wonder whether I'm going to have a crop failure and starve to death.
That some of us can turn back and re-discover a better connection with food is a wonderful luxury. Appreciate it as such.
There were four different econ history courses at mine! One of them is on iTunes U, if you're so inclined. And/or you can buy the professor's (very reasonably priced) book. It's a light read.
^(Please ignore the normative policy implications of the title. The author just wanted to be clever. Source: I took his class.)
Read it, don't be lazy, there is also a free PDF download out there.
I’d like to recommend “Unwritten laws of engineering”. Great little book detailing workplace dynamics, accountability, and how to be an integral part of an engineering department. Here’s the amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/Unwritten-Laws-Engineering-Revised-Updated/dp/0791801624?crid=1MCO22MGNU72H&keywords=unwritten+laws+of+engineering&qid=1536126994&sprefix=unwritten+&sr=8-1&ref=mp_s_a_1_1
Further reading/research: (Not all of which I've gotten to read yet. Some of which may be quite tangentially relevant to the discussion at hand along with the books and sites I mentioned above. Consider this more a list of books pertaining to the history of technology, machining, metrology, some general science and good engineering texts.)
Dan Gelbart's Youtube Channel
Engineerguy's Youtube Channel
Nick Mueller's Youtube Channel
mrpete222/tubalcain's youtube channel
Tom Lipton (oxtools) Youtube Channel
Suburban Tool's Youtube Channel
NYCNC's Youtube Channel
Computer History Museum's Youtube Channel
History of Machine Tools, 1700-1910 by Steeds
Studies in the History of Machine Tools by Woodbury
A History of Machine Tools by Bradley
Tools for the Job: A History of Machine Tools to 1950 by The Science Museum
A History of Engineering Metrology by Hume
Tools and Machines by Barnard
The Testing of Machine Tools by Burley
Modern machine shop tools, their construction, operation and manipulation, including both hand and machine tools: a book of practical instruction by Humphrey & Dervoort
Machine-Shop Tools and Methods by Leonard
A Measure of All Things: The Story of Man and Measurement by Whitelaw
Handbook of Optical Metrology: Principles and Applications by Yoshizawa
Angle of Attack: Harrison Storms and the Race to the Moon by Gray
Machine Shop Training Course Vol 1 & 2 by Jones
A Century of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT, 1882-1982
Numerical Control: Making a New Technology by Reintjes
History of Strength of Materials by Timoshenko
Rust: The Longest War by Waldman
The Companion Reference Book on Dial and Test Indicators: Based on our popular website www.longislandindicator.com by Meyer
Optical Shop Testing by Malacara
Lost Moon: The Preilous Voyage of Apollo 13 by Lovell and Kruger
Kelly: More Than My Share of It All by Johnson & Smith
Skunk Works: A Personal Memoir of My Years at Lockheed by Rich & Janos
Unwritten Laws of Engineering by King
Advanced Machine Work by Smith
Accurate Tool Work by Goodrich
Optical Tooling, for Precise Manufacture and Alignment by Kissam
The Martian: A Novel by Weir
Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain by Young Budynas & Sadegh
Materials Selection in Mechanical Design by Ashby
Slide Rule: The Autobiography of an Engineer by Shute
Cosmos by Sagan
Nuts, Bolts, Fasteners and Plumbing Handbook by Smith Carol Smith wrote a number of other great books such as Engineer to Win.
Tool & Cutter Sharpening by Hall
Handbook of Machine Tool Analysis by Marinescu, Ispas & Boboc
The Intel Trinity by Malone
Manufacturing Processes for Design Professionals by Thompson
A Handbook on Tool Room Grinding
Tolerance Design: A Handbook for Developing Optimal Specifications by Creveling
Inspection and Gaging by Kennedy
Precision Engineering by Evans
Procedures in Experimental Physics by Strong
Dick's Encyclopedia of Practical Receipts and Processes or How They Did it in the 1870's by Dick
Flextures: Elements of Elastic Mechanisms by Smith
Precision Engineering by Venkatesh & Izman
Metal Cutting Theory and Practice by Stephenson & Agapiou
American Lathe Builders, 1810-1910 by Cope As mentioned in the above post, Kennth Cope did a series of books on early machine tool builders. This is one of them.
Shop Theory by Henry Ford Trade Shop
Learning the lost Art of Hand Scraping: From Eight Classic Machine Shop Textbooks A small collection of articles combined in one small book. Lindsay Publications was a smallish company that would collect, reprint or combine public domain source material related to machining and sell them at reasonable prices. They retired a few years ago and sold what rights and materials they had to another company.
How Round Is Your Circle?: Where Engineering and Mathematics Meet by Bryant & Sangwin
Machining & CNC Technology by Fitzpatrick
CNC Programming Handbook by Smid
Machine Shop Practice Vol 1 & 2 by Moltrecht
The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer from First Principles A fantastic book with tons of free online material, labs, and courses built around it. This book could take a 6th grader interested in learning, and teach them the fundamentals from scratch to design a basic computer processor and programming a simple OS etc.
Bosch Automotive Handbook by Bosch
Trajectory Planning for Automatic Machines and Robots by Biagiotti & Melchiorri
The Finite Element Method: Its Basis and Fundamentals by Zhu, Zienkiewicz and Taylor
Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines by Brown & Sharpe
Grinding Technology by Krar & Oswold
Principles of Precision Engineering by Nakazawa & Takeguchi
Foundations of Ultra-Precision Mechanism Design by Smith
I.C.S. Reference Library, Volume 50: Working Chilled Iron, Planer Work, Shaper and Slotter Work, Drilling and Boring, Milling-Machine Work, Gear Calculations, Gear Cutting
I. C. S. Reference Library, Volume 51: Grinding, Bench, Vise, and Floor Work, Erecting, Shop Hints, Toolmaking, Gauges and Gauge Making, Dies and Die Making, Jigs and Jig Making
and many more ICS books on various engineering, technical and non-technical topics.
American Machinists' Handbook and Dictionary of Shop Terms: A Reference Book of Machine-Shop and Drawing-Room Data, Methods and Definitions, Seventh Edition by Colvin & Stanley
Modern Metal Cutting: A Practical Handbook by Sandvik
Mechanical Behavior of Materials by Dowling
Engineering Design by Dieter and Schmidt
[Creative Design of Products and Systems by Saeed]()
English and American Tool Builders by Roe
Machine Design by Norton
Control Systems by Nise
That doesn't include some random books I've found when traveling and visiting used book stores. :)
> As a conservative, I believe that businesses should be free to make the optical decision guided by economic principles, not government meddling
Yet they pay taxes and live in the real world. Not a theoretical free market.
> I find many of Trump's comments to be rude. Further, his "lockerroom talk" or comments about John McCain's service are beyond reproach. To be blunt, I think he is a disgrace to the office and more importanty, I feel I share no moral values with him
Life is messy. PC speech is just another propaganda tool to shut down communication when peoples ideas get threatened.
> As a conservative, I believe in free trade. I know this view isn't unilaterally shared among all conservatives, but whatever happened to the days where we believed that governments only created problems.
Hopefully they grew up and figured out we live in the real world.
> How could tariffs possibly help american workers/consumers?
Tariffs are a corner stone of economic policy of every developed economy. It is how EVERY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET DEVELOPED. If you are actually interested in learning about how economies actually work I suggest reading: https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
African countries that have free markets forced on them due to taking world bank loans have all been stagnating economically for decades.
In 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism Ha-Joon Chang goes over how the invention of the LLC (which is what all of these corporations are) basically reinvented economics, which obviously massively effects the state.
The period between the Civil War and WW1 was not at all laissez-faire. There were extremely high protectionist tariffs, as well as the whole Reconstruction and Transcontinental Railroad being both huge government funded projects. The Heritage Foundation and everything they come up with is a load of crap if you think about it for longer than half a second.
There's an excellent book by Ha-joon Chan (yes he is a capitalist) called 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism, chapter 7 is specifically about the so called "laissez-faire markets".
> Ulysses Grant, the Civil War hero-turned president in defiance of the British pressure on the USA to adopt free trade, remarked that "within 200 years, when America has gotten out of protection all that it can offer, it too will adopt free trade".
If you don't like reading, there is a lecture on the book he gives at the London School of Economics here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56RndDFRnH4
http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Languages-Weeks-Programming-Programmers/dp/193435659X?ie=UTF8&keywords=pragmatic%20programmer&qid=1464727456&ref_=sr_1_7&s=books&sr=1-7
http://www.amazon.com/Exercises-Programmers-Challenges-Develop-Coding/dp/1680501224?ie=UTF8&keywords=pragmatic%20programmer&qid=1464727456&ref_=sr_1_5&s=books&sr=1-5
http://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050?ie=UTF8&keywords=pragmatic%20programmer&qid=1464727456&ref_=sr_1_4&s=books&sr=1-4
http://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Programmer-Journeyman-Master/dp/020161622X?ie=UTF8&keywords=pragmatic%20programmer&qid=1464727456&ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/Programming-Logic-Design-Comprehensive-Farrell/dp/1285776712
There are drugs that can help with specific problems but not everything.
If you have the chance, I'd recommend three books for meta-learning:
Failing that, you can check out Thomas Frank.
> Should we start learning how to build for Android, iOS, or some cross-platform tool? What are trade offs for each?
For instance https://ionicframework.com/
But honestly, as long as you don't need to develop native, as /u/Xen0_n mentioned, I'd go with a progressive web app. You write it once and it runs in all modern browsers. You also have access to e.g. GPS, can send push notifications, etc. But make sure, a PWA provides all the technical features you need! (Proof of Concept! -> I need to decide on the tech stack by the end of this month)
It's also important to consider your team's abilities. If everyone is a python developer, don't use c#. If everyone knows angular, React is probably the wrong decision. If there's not enough knowledge and experience present in the team - the people of a team can usually give quite good feedback about technologies (complexity, learning curve, if it's fun to work with it)
​
>What are common components of an app's architecture that we will likely have to think about? I know we'll need a front end and a back end with a database, but I'm guessing we'll need to consider things like communications with the server storing the database? -How do apps link these components together/let them talk to each other?
Usually Multitier architecture. E.g. the front end communicates with a REST-api, rest API with a business layer, business layer with a persistency layer. What you use (programming language and back end) will determine how the communication will work. With Java and a relational database it will be most likely be JDBC with the given driver of the DBMS.
But also think about the cloud - this has some impact on the software architecture (aka could readiness).
​
>What are common mistakes when making early design decisions that cost you down the line in efficiency and maintainability?
From my experience:
​
> What should our development process look like? Simultaneous front end and back end development? Back end before front end?
Don't split the team into front end and back end if you can avoid it. Only if the team is getting too large to be effective, a split should be considered - having two teams will usually end up in finger pointing. Better is to code by feature. And split up a feature into smaller tasks (work in small batches), think about MVP: A small batch which already generates value to the customer and also generates feedback. It doesn't need to be feedback from production, but can be from a customer.
How you write and deliver software - from requirements engineering, UX testing, actual coding and whatnot to deployment into production - is a really large subject. And there's no 'one size fits all'-approach - every environment is different. I'm a disciple of agile software development: The Manifesto for Agile Software Development and Continuous Delivery (and: Accelerate).
Important is, that you guys always improve the process (as in continuous improvement). Not only within the team, but also and especially with the customer.
​
Another thing: Don't forget security. The outcome of a security audit can be painfully expensive.
Oh wow, great question! I've pondered this quite a bit and am currently reading up on two resources to deepen my understanding:
Stripe's Developer Coefficient report: https://stripe.com/files/reports/the-developer-coefficient.pdf
Accelerate: The Science of Lean Software and DevOps: https://www.amazon.com/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
It's kind of a wordy title for that book, but it's interesting to see what the authors deem to be the really key things for safely accelerating development velocity. We've addressed a lot of the things in the book via intuition over the years but I really would love for us to start being more methodical and process oriented in trying to improve things. I'd be interested to hear what you think!
I'd love to have some metric that represented how "sure" developers feel when they are developing new services/features and estimating timelines as well as how "sure" they are about deploying changes without having unplanned reverts and things of that nature.
That sounds tricky. I think you're starting with the right place: visualizing workflow;
A suggestion is that you focus on building trust by addressing pain points. What pains does the team have with the current process and can you concretely improve those in the short run (as opposed to abstractly saying "if we adopt this whole enchilada that will get better, trust me").
Another thing to focus on is measuring some of the health indicators in Accelerate. Honestly, you might be doing awesome already and the problem to be solved is recognizing and celebrating it. Good luck!
A good book: http://www.amazon.com/Nonzero-The-Logic-Human-Destiny/dp/0679758941
I don't think there's an "equilibrium" - I think there's chaotic directionality. I think equilibrium is just a human concept that attempts to circumscribe "action-reaction".
I'm not sure how I can elaborate really; I just don't agree with the premise. That equilibrium exists outside of anything but physical systems in regards to things like air pressure. IMO, this is really sort of mental detritus from Zoroastrian/Judeo-Christian concepts of Good/Evil. The desire for cosmic justice is strong, but I don't think it exists outside of the context of human consciousness.
The short version might be that you ask:
>Do you think humans are out of equilibrium?
And to begin a serious conversation, the question is simply: out of equilibrium with what? Why? How?
Although I agree with you and not so much the OP, I want to toss in an idea for pondering. Do you believe in consciousness? I believe I'm self-aware but its a metaphysical belief science can't prove. Science tells me I'm an electrochemical state machine, which I fully believe. In theory, a world could exist identical to ours with evolved two-legged creatures, TVs, even the internet but completely lacking consciousness. How would we explain this concept to such foreign creatures? I'm not setting out to prove the existence of God but trying to highlight most of us have beliefs without absolute proof.
I didn't cook this up on my own, I just read Rober Wright's Nonzero. It wasn't as good as The Moral Animal but makes an intereseting case for deism.
> I understood it to be the ACLU’s goal to delicately balance competing rights to ensure that any infringements are narrowly tailored
What? This woman actually believes it is possible to "Narrowly Tailor" ANYTHING that happens in the public sphere?
Where do liberals get this belief that the world of human behavior CAN controlled? It's the same belief that lets them look at something as mind-numbingly complex as the economy and think that it can be centrally planned. It's the same hubris that causes them to believe that passing a law to ban a fire arm will actually cause people to not own it.
It's SO AGGRAVATING. The foundation of my conservative political views is the simple consequence of two facts:
Therefore, I conclude that Human Nature can not be changed by human intention... and we shouldn't try!
First, for many systems (such as the economy) sufficiently accurate and detailed information can not be collected fast enough to predict the consequences of that information before it actually happens. This feeds into Chaos Theory.
Second, for many systems (such as the economy again) the fact that predictions are being made from data is itself altering the system... this creates a feedback loop where looking at the system alters it to the point where your tools to look at it are no longer effective.
Third, all systems are subject to the incompleteness theorems that in non-mathematical-terms means that they always have either a flaw in their own rules, or their rules are incomplete. Connected to this, there are certain classes of problems that are literally "unsolvable"... that is they have properties that simply can not be derived except by experimentation... no amount of computation, even with perfect data can ever derive the answer, and as has recently been proven, this includes material properties of at least some things in the real material world, not just abstract math problems.
Fourth, humans have a proven inability to figure out complex systems with multiple interlocking feedback loops leading them to attempt simple direct fixes that have unpredicted and disastrous effects well out of proportion to anticipated effects. Perhaps the most classical solution is Rent Control... a policy meant to increase housing availability that actually reduces it.
Therefore, we should never assume that we can simply figure something out by looking at it and assuming that we're smart enough to manipulate it.
Seriously, accept these two ideas, both of which are incredibly well supported by history and math, and small government conservatism is the natural result.
Also anything by Andre Kostolany. You will get great insight on how the markets work.
You'll always have small fish and big players. Big players will use their power to profit, will try to manipulate as much as possible. If you're small, try to stay out of the big player's frequency. Usually big players manipulate markets shorter term. Try a mid to long term strategy. Don't get overwhelmed by short term price swings. This is a huge topic and these are very general recommendations, but still worth to ponder on. Develop a profitable strategy, then stick to it. Then change it.
My own pension strategy: buy bitcoins from 10% of my monthly personal income and do not care about its price. End of strategy. (I am saying this after 3 years of profitable FX daytrading and algo trading).
(edit: formatting)
I think it's a lot about ego vs money. People cling to their ego("I'm smarter than the market and I wanna prove it") instead of thinking of what is most profitable in R/R scenarios.
Books like this writes nice about those topics https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
General TA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlZRtQkfK04&list=PLyG201CX9K8Xwp2fsarUncC4jUlR-prad&index=3
Futures: https://www.youtube.com/user/PATsTrading
Books: https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
https://www.amazon.com/New-Trading-Living-Psychology-Discipline/dp/1118443926/
Trading in the Zone: Master the Market with Confidence, Discipline and a Winning Attitude https://www.amazon.com/dp/0735201447/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_Un1zCb13ZT5Y5
A good free ebook - http://www.rockwelltrading.com/day-trading/free-day-trading-ebook-1/
A good book to buy - http://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
Do not trade unless you learn how forex works first. Remember, there will always!!! be opportunities. After you learn how trading works, open a demo account. Practice on the demo account, you will surely make mistakes like everyone else. Demo account is the best practice platform. Then move to a real account. After you are done with babypips, as people suggested, checkout a book called Trading in the zone. This book will pay dividend when you start trading. I think the biggest hurdle is managing risk. You will learn a lot. Good luck!
This book is what I get every one of our engineering interns - https://www.amazon.com/Unwritten-Laws-Engineering-Revised-Updated/dp/0791801624
Have you read this yet? If not, it's time: https://smile.amazon.com/Unwritten-Laws-Engineering-Revised-Updated/dp/0791801624?sa-no-redirect=1
Unwritten Laws of Engineering: Revised and Updated Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/0791801624/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_iEXYub12PRS8Y
A must have in my opinion
Este es muy bueno. Unwritten laws of engineering
The inverted bell curve is also pretty common for controversial and polarising issues, for example A People's History of the US, God Is Not Great and 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism.
The way I see it, the inverted bell curve is a warning sign for novels (especially best-sellers) and technical books, but not necessarily for opinionated non-fiction where it may just indicate that many jimmies were rustled.
Start with this one:https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
Trying to avoid the Obvious Krugman and Chomsky examples. (The latter is not an Economist really)
How about this guy. 23 Things they don't tell you about Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang
Check his wiki page for his credentials, now obviously he is just one Economist (though a widely acclaimed one), but in the book he lays out in laymans terms exactly why the world economy isn't going to work, and why everyone knows it, but nobody can do anything about it. Why Austerity measures, which everyone knows does not work (he sites historical examples) is still used by politicians today, despite their proven lack of effectiveness.
Pragmatic Thinking and Learning: Refactor Your Wetware
This is an awesome book that covers this topic pretty well. I re-read every once in a while o give myself a refresher. It's really great and is applicable outside of CS as well.
Check this book out: http://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050
Also there is a class called learning how to learn on Coursera which can be helpful.
Pragmatic thinking and learning
Talent is Overrated
The first book explains the Dreyfus learning model. It builds off that with other models of learning like the sports model, chess model, and writing model. The authors explain the different ways you should learn for the different type of activity you're involved in. E.g. for chess, you study the moves the masters would make, compare it with the move you would make -- figure out why the chess master made his move, why you made yours, and which is really better.
The second book basically breaks the myth of talent, as its title implies. And it isn't just hard work or a lot of work that separates the knowledgeable or skilled from the unknowledgeable or unskilled. It's intentionally designed deliberate practice which makes the difference. The practice or learning you do has to have these characteristics to show considerable improvement:
These ideas have a wide application, and if you're serious about learning or acquiring new skills you will definitely find them valuable.
Lastly, check out something like Anki, a free spaced repetition tool. It basically reminds you of things you're about to forget, so you don't forget them. But you do have to actually use the program to get its benefits.
Oh, and make some oaths and principles so you don't just give up on this stuff. Temporary setbacks are all part of the gameplan -- but complete failure is not. Example oath here
Great book for focused working and learning -> Pragmatic Thinking and Learning. Geared a bit towards software developers but works for anyone.
Scuse my ignorance... What does OM mean? 😁 But yes, we're trying to optimise for overall flow of customer value. The other metrics account for "de-risk deployments by doing it a lot", "don't break production" and "if you do fix it quickly". These are not of our own design by the way... Completely plagiarised from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
The overhead for measuring feature lead time is minimal thankfully. I put a label such 'value-marker-1' against the first and last stories in a Jira epic. A new valuable thing inside an epic just means I increment the number on the labels I use. Also means you can have measure multiple valuable things in an epic with overlapping timelines. My cronjob gathers this up daily along with a bunch of other metric information. I owe a detailed blog post to https://medium.com/onzo-tech by the end of March.
We're seeing a healthy tension across the route numbers and it looks hard to game one without sacrificing elsewhere. I am measuring deployment leadtime too but haven't set a target there as I can see it leading to bad behaviour. One thing I am currently wary of is the short term temptation to reduce technical quality in return for lower leadtime. It would eventually manifest in higher change failure rate and increasing lead times
Have you read How to Read Literature Like a Professor? I wonder how it compares. I know, for example, it doesn't take a historical perspective, and might not even count as Literary Criticism at all...
I know little about literary criticism, but I would be interested in learning - did you learn about it in school?
> On the whole I'd say it's great and I've really gotten something out of it.
That's great, I will have to check it out.
That's actually kind of a funny prompt. In part of the summer reading book How to Read Literature Like a Professor, by Thomas Foster I actually did read, he mentions that the characters surrounding the main protagonist suffer (usually die) to advance the plot by evoking action by the main character.
I'm a literature enthusiast, and this book is amazing in teaching how to be a mindful and in depth reader specifically in literature. It's also super entertaining.
How to Read Literature Like a Professor: A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between the Lines, Revised Edition
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062301675/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_-hmqDb0RVRCQM
Hmm, that's a hard one. The best way to learn how to tell a story is to consume stories. But I've been reading for so long, I'm not sure how to point you in the right direction. But, I imagine you like movies. Movies tell stories, so if you understand what's happening in a movie, you may be able to translate that into other forms of storytelling.
One book that was helpful for me in high school was How to Read Literature like a Professor It kind of breaks stories into smaller, meaningful pieces and analyzes them.
This is a pretty fantastic guide to solving your problem.
I highly recommend it to all readers!
So, a summary is like a short review of the material. You don't explain anything differently, you don't add anything, you simply condense the material into smaller bits. For a story/literature, this is like the synopsis you would read online for a movie, or an extreme case would be the back of a DVD case (although those are intentionally vague).
 
Analysis, on the other hand, is where you interject meaning that you think is behind the text. This is you opinion on what the author/director/artist was putting forth with their work. If you are having trouble with this, think about Sparknotes. They usually have both a summary and analysis section for each chapter they cover.
 
I highly recommend the book How to Read Lit like a Prof. This book is fantastic, and will help you learn to analyze things.
https://www.amazon.com/Barking-Wrong-Tree-Surprising-Everything/dp/0062416049/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=7VVXAWNB2M8WP1R84JKQ
and
https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856
I have no degree but sales experience and I cold called the hiring manager at a big firm directly which got me in and hired. That shows them you can do what needs to be done: prospect the decision maker. Good book for big dollar sales: SPIN Selling https://www.amazon.com/dp/0070511136/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_eGOFDbC0R5AGA
Here at the links to the books I have recommended.
https://www.amazon.com/Art-Selling-Zig-Ziglar-2012-06-03/dp/B01F81PFOG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1488290235&sr=8-2&keywords=zig+ziglar+art+of+selling
https://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Selling-Increase-Thought-Possible/dp/0785288066/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1488290247&sr=8-5&keywords=brian+tracy
https://www.amazon.com/Predictable-Revenue-Business-Practices-Salesforce-com/dp/0984380213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488290267&sr=8-1&keywords=predictive+revenue
This is highly recommended for anyone in Saas sales.
especially in a BDR or management role.
https://www.amazon.com/SPIN-Selling-Neil-Rackham/dp/0070511136/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488290305&sr=8-1&keywords=spin+selling
I second this. A fairly quick read on the concept is the book SPIN Selling by Neil Rackham. [Link ](http://www.SPIN.com/ Selling https://www.amazon.com/dp/0070511136/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_TRoOBb2FCNT8J)
I'm late to the game, but just saw your question. This book helped me out a lot with managing objections during the sales process. https://www.amazon.com/SPIN-Selling-Neil-Rackham/dp/0070511136
This is very good too.
http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
This was recommended as one of the best books on investing in general by a blog on Forbes. Not a self proclaimed technical analyst (uses CAN SLIM), but uses a lot of chart reading, etc. Too bad it's by the founder of Investor's Business Daily and he spends quite a bit of pushing IBD (I'm currently reading it...). Regardless, it does have a lot of good insight about locating the correct buy points via charts.
The best thing for you now to Educate yourself by reading FAQ and few starter books
https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0471269654
Well, first, again I'm not a CFA and these are just recommendations you'll have to consider and figure out if the risk is acceptable to you. I'm not liable for any financial decisions you make.
With that being said, you should be researching every means of investment opportunities available: rental properties, careful long-term stock investments, potentially starting a business (different than a sole proprietorship or being unemployed—the business, once set up, should effectively run itself). If you want to start simple, you could do a mall pop-up store or a local service of some sort and employ high-schoolers.
But if that's not for you, 7% is the approximate amount you can expect from sticking your money in an index fund and letting it sit there, so that's what you're looking to beat with other investments. If you can get a 10% or 15% return from an apartment rental, for instance, then that's a better place to stick your money.
But at the very least you want to be getting some return on your money so long as it beats inflation. Putting it in well-performing index funds or exchange traded funds to get a 6-7% return is a good start. I'm pretty bullish of self-driving cars being huge after 2020, so Tesla and other manufacturers of self-driving cars might be a good bet.
If you want to get really crazy you can invest in buying stuff like the crypto-currency Etherium (Reddit.com/etherium) as that seems to be taking off. It took me a while to realize that a crypto-currently like Etherium (ETH) or Bitcoin (BTC) are not "funds" like on a stock market but are the actual product, like an actual bar of gold, that you're buying and holding on to ... it just happens to be stored on your computer in a digital wallet instead of a safe.
I've also heard of people making lucrative over-seas trades on Japanese or other foreign stock exchanges because of the time zone difference from the US, but I have no idea how that works.
Anyway, two good books to start with are
Rich Dad's Guide to Financial Freedom https://www.amazon.com/dp/1612680054/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_rs2nzb2S9WABC
And
How to Make Money in Stocks: A Winning System in Good Times and Bad, Fourth Edition (Personal Finance & Investment) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0071614133/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_xL2nzbJRN9YA5
The first edition is from 1988, and the Amazon reviews for the second edition say that there are a lot of errors in the new version. How well does the 1988 edition hold up to current trading strategies? Or is there another newer book that you would recommend?
EDIT: Any thoughts on The Rookie's Guide to Options; 2nd edition: The Beginner's Handbook of Trading Equity Options by Mark D Wolfinger? Or Options as a Strategic Investment by Lawrence G. McMillan?
You are fundamentally misunderstanding markets in the second part. If every buyer has a seller then the transactions are "closed" and nothing happens at expiration day. If you're left holding the bag on expiration day you'll be forced to take issue of the underlying (in the case of a long) or find the stock to give to the counterparty (in the case of a short).
Not just about vol trading but the ultimate option bible "Option Volatility and Pricing: Advanced Trading Strategies and Techniques" by Natenberg. Might be a little bit more broad than what you're looking for but this book is phenomenal. Was recommended to me by an option trader at a BB.
https://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Techniques/dp/0071818774
I started with this...
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Options-2E-Michael-Sincere/dp/0071817840/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452437941&sr=1-2&keywords=options+for+beginners
Then after a year or two I moved on to this...
http://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Techniques/dp/0071818774/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452438013&sr=1-1&keywords=option+pricing+and+volatility
This is a good reference to keep by your side when thinking about strategies....
http://www.amazon.com/Options-Playbook-Expanded-2nd-strategies/dp/0615308147/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452438066&sr=1-1&keywords=option+playbook
https://www.dough.com/
https://www.tastytrade.com/tt/shows/wdis-season-1-tom-case?locale=en-US
(I recommend doing doughjo first. You will have to watch WDIS videos to get the certificate)
http://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/1k6481/sheldon_natenbergs_option_volatility_and_pricing/
NEW VERSION: http://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Techniques/dp/0071818774/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1420568538&sr=1-1&keywords=sheldon+natenberg
OLD VERSION: http://terredegaia.free.fr/ppics/Trading/Mcgraw-Hill%20-%20Option%20Pricing%20And%20Volatility%20-%20Advanced%20Strategies%20And%20Trading%20Techniques%20-%20Sheldon%20Natenberg%20-%20(1994).pdf
Take that $100 and buy this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0071818774/ref=dp_ob_neva_mobile
Use the remaining $25 for a case of whatever shitty beer people your age drink today. In my youth it was the beast. Not sure that even exists anymore.
>Just 1% of people could meet the needs of everyone and don't!
If it were only that simple, then it would have been done long ago. Money is fleeting and doesn't last. The truly poor third world nations have structural problems that need to be addressed, because they are the real road blocks to ending poverty.
Despite billions in aid, most African nations are actually WORSE OFF today than when they declared independence. There's an eye opening book on this subject, "White Man's Burden" by William Easterly. . He points out all the colossal ways that African nations have squandered aid by lining the pockets of corrupt politicians, purchasing equipment that the locals can't maintain, buying things they don't need, and even worse, putting African farmers and entrepreneurs out of business by donating food and goods so no one will buy them locally anymore.
To the points brought up in the book I would add overpopulation and subjugation of women as barriers to development as well.
This is the equvalent of giving a homeless person money, if you know he is going to buy alcohol with it. Have you really helped him?
Of course we need to help the world's poor, but we also have to be realistic that its not going to be solved by the billionaires handing over their cash.
I don't particularly like Dead Aid, although I think Ed Carr articulated its many, many problems better than I could.
As alternatives, I would recommend:
I definitely agree with you on fiction as a great source of learning about Africa. Along with your recommendations I would add:
> It seems like you are trying to blame poverty on assistance programs
I think poverty is a very very complex social problem that has scores of causes and assistance programs that are not designed well (and maybe even ones that are designed well) are a factor in some peoples poverty yes. Do I think it's a primary factor? Probably not, I'm not sure. Do I think we don't study the long effects of government programs closely enough. Absolutely.
>but I don't think you understand who uses them. Most people on assistance DO work.
I think your trying to toss me in with a lot of old people that bought into the welfare queen myth of the 80's which I am not one. I've seen the statistics and I do understand that many people on welfare work. My concern was on how welfare is structured and it's potential to trap people and not encourage them to work into higher income bracket where they can support themselves without assistance. My other concern was it's potential unstudied effects like destruction of fatherhood, class conflict, incentivizeing fraud, victim mentality, etc. I'm pro or con black or white issue. Again, I'm not completely against welfare programs I just think we should be very very careful about how they are used and should closely study outcomes. For the record I was raised very liberal and support welfare programs and called for more of them for years but have sense altered my position.
> And a large portion of the users are lower enlisted military families
I've actually never heard this. Most military families I know are not rich but are not hurting because of generous banking terms (very low loan rates), healthcare supplementation and housing/food support if living on base or near it. If this is true the military should look into this and possibly adjust wages. No military family should need food stamps (unless of course it's a single earning parent at the lowest rung of the military with a non working spouse who has chosen to have more then 3 or 4 kids and in that case that's incredibly irresponsible and should not be allowed or encouraged with benefits.) I'm also wondering if this is due to higher cost of living in certain areas? Which the military should again look into...
> Assistance alone isn't enough for someone to abuse the system.
I don't know what you mean by this. People abuse systems all the time regardless of what you think is worth abusing based on your moral compass.
> This country has a relatively efficient system.
This might be true but I'm highly highly skeptical. How would you really measure this. Is there a non biased non profit that's looked at efficiency of welfare systems and ranks the US highly on gov efficiency?? My original comment wasn't just about efficiency but about long term societal cost of creating potential people trapped in systemic poverty and welfare being a 'factor' in that trap.
I again want to just stop here and tell you I'm not against welfare and if you press a lot of conservatives many aren't for a complete break down of welfare either. Let's say you designed a government program that gave people a free bus ticket and housing stipend to move to areas with lower cost of living and more jobs. I think you'd find more support for a program like that. Or maybe you wanted to redesign the tax system and take benefits away but also pay people a small universal income. This idea actually came from conservative economists and is also called a negative tax. It saves a lot of money because it gets government out of a lot of administrative and enforcement costs of running these programs and stimulates the economy. I know that these programs also have drawbacks and potential pitfalls down the road but they should be on the table and the conservative talking points should be discussed not dismissed as racist or heartless. People go into fight or flight when they are dismissed and attacked. That's what's going on in our country we've completely stopped talking to people with opposing viewpoints and simply gone into attack mode, in group out group mode.
> Spending tax dollars on weeding out the abusers is an over glorified witch hunt.
Is catching speeders a witch hunt? Is fining litterers a witch hunt? I'm not sure I support the drug tests but you have to at least understand why people might want a drug test?? They don't want their hard earned dollar going to people sitting around all day doing drugs or doing drugs and working. If most people using welfare are normal working people then a drug test shouldn't be a big deal right? Again I'm just playing devils advocate.
> They came up with nothing significant and used millions to do it.
Agreed. It was a basically a stunt and the drug testing company was owned by one of the politicians pushing it. So it was just a way to fleece the conservative base. This is also a bad thing. But just imagine if dems would have come to the table and tried to make a compromise? Maybe it wouldn't have been such a fiasco.
> I don't want to pay for the road that gets you home but I still have to because you should have a road.
I think now you're trying to straw man me. I'm not stating that we shouldn't have taxes that pay for items for the common good. I'm saying that using guns to take peoples money and give it to someone else is not right it's a privilege that was given to the government through contractual consent. The people that founded this country agreed to be governed and they can un-agree if they feel that the contract is broken. (I know I sound like a bit of a militia nut with that statement but that's what our country was founded on, contractual agreement by men that really didn't like powerful central government controlled by a king or a massive populace).
> Gather multiple sources and educate yourself.
I'd like to believe I have actually (because I grew up reading and thumping it to people). I feel like I've heard both arguments but feel free to recommend pro welfare literature/sites. Personally I'd highly recommend you try out these books for starters.
https://www.amazon.com/Framework-Understanding-Poverty-4th/dp/1929229488
https://www.amazon.com/Life-Bottom-Worldview-Makes-Underclass/dp/1566635055
(This second book is very biased and written by a guy that was overexposed and probably burnt out by really shit people but at least he's honest about his bias)
https://www.amazon.com/White-Mans-Burden-Efforts-Little/dp/0143038826
https://www.amazon.com/Death-Common-Sense-Suffocating-America/dp/0812982746
> As for what affects culture, our President, the figurehead of our country, is stumbling through the presidency like a toddler
LOL. Totally agree. I grabbed a bottle of rye at 7am and watched the hearings and I think this guy needs to be impeached. Please don't assume because I'm critical of welfare design and long term societal impacts that I'm a Trump voter.
> He is not just using tax dollars, he is flagrantly wasting tax dollars. That is what affects our culture.
Yes. I agree with this as well. Lots of things waste our tax dollars. Waste will always be part of the system but that doesn't mean we give up the fight tpo monitor and adjust it.
> Who can trust government when they cut healthcare with one hand and sign up for millions in travel costs with the other?
You bring up a very interesting point here. Neither side is really getting it's way in the government and we are having such wild swings of political ideology that the next leadership team is undoing whatever the last one established. Trust of government is completely broken but this has only served to allow astro turf corporate candidates infest our government. Corporations have more say in our government then it's citizens and the plebs are busy having a bullshit culture war and arguing at each other while the golden goose is getting robbed. Neither base is really getting any answer or solutions to their problems because of graft, corruption and income inequality/class warfare.
You seem like an intelligent person. You might like this analysis written by a programmer named Michael O. Church about class in the US.
https://web.archive.org/web/20151006183427/https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/the-3-ladder-system-of-social-class-in-the-u-s/
> Maybe what you are saying is the reasoning behind certain ways of thinking but it just doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense because our political beliefs are largely influenced by deeply ingrained schema on how we see the world taught to us by our families. It's really difficult to see that the other-side has a legit argument without understanding their worldview.
Lakhoff nailed this in his book 'Don't Think of an Elephant'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4UfGZOPJjE
> Maybe it's easier to tear apart nameless "freeloaders" than accept one more problem with the President.
LOL. Why not both?? ....Just kidding. I don't think most welfare abusers see themselves as freeloaders. I think people in poverty are living day to day and think that abusing the system is just surviving and I think the white collar criminals are probably in a very warped way thinking the same way. Humans are gonna human.
In closing I just want to say that you can have a lot of compassion of other humans and want to see a better society with happier, well fed people and be against certain welfare programs. Humans are hell-a complicated and there are other ways to make people health and happy besides cutting a segment of them a check or a rebate or a voucher.
If you do read any of my sources and want to chat feel free to save me and PM me anytime. Have a great night!
A few books
Reflections on the Revolution in France by Burke
The Law by Frédéric Bastiat
The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirke
The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek
The Righteous Mind by Haidt, not a conservative and not really a conservative book but interesting research by a social psychologist researching morality and it's impact on political opinions.
For websites, magazines, blogs
National Review not quite as good nor as influential as it once was in decades past but still worthwhile.
Instapundit blog by libertarian law professor Glenn Reynolds. Usually links to articles posted elsewhere with a bit of commentary.
I like the The American Interest. Walter Russell Mead is a self declared liberal editing a self declared centrist publication. But much of his writing consists of a critique of what he calls the "blue social model". At this point I think he's well on his way down the road to becoming a (moderate) conservative but just can't bring himself to call himself one.
>One of my friends who is a "limited government" libertarian told me the problem with anarchy is that it will lead to more government. I of course responded, well that seems to be the problem with limited government too.
So, anarchy leads to government (probably always to an extent, but there are examples of anarcho societies that have existed longer than the United States has been a nation). Limited government leads to more government. And more government leads to more government. Therefore we're all fucked?
>There seems to be noway in preventing this band of criminals from taking over society. It seems that man is just doomed to live in tyranny.
Eh, not really. History is cyclical -- it has no (universal) end. Fukuyama was wrong about that, and an asshole. Mises, Hayek and Flynn were right: government leads to more government, and liberty is abandoned at home. Such societies reach a stage of cultural and economic stagnation.
Heinlein probably nailed it best in -- or at least perhaps most famously -- in speculative fiction. Various works of his explore political systems as changing depending upon how far away from home you are. People join together to form tribes, and they live in villages. Villages grow into towns, towns into cities, cities into kingdoms / nations. Nations into empires. Empires collapse, and political life becomes more local again.
And, as people become politically frustrated, economically or religiously oppressed, or more adventurous (as a result of accumulated wealth), they begin to explore the frontier, and so the process starts all over again in another place. That's the cycle of history.
For western civilization, the exploration took Europeans around the world, and founded colonies in the Americas. Wealth accumulated. Government grew, as economies were able to support it. And much of the developing world was lifted up with us. So now we're starting to explore the next frontier: space.
Liberty will again reign, just not here. The beauty of it this time, however, is that space is practically infinite. Space will be free.
I'd probably bundle this with this; the former so each survivor can take care of himself and the latter so they'll understand how to treat each other to prevent another apocalypse.
>Is there any actual evidence backing this claim?
http://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0226320618
http://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Freedom-Anniversary-Milton-Friedman/dp/0226264211
http://mises.org/books/socialism/contents.aspx
> i know that extremely high taxes would be detrimental but im thinking about taxes like 30-40%.
30-40% taxes are extremely high. Michael Caine and many others have vowed to leave England if the top tax rate exceeds 50%.
It hardly matters what they want:
"If only Stalin knew".
Also see, for example, Hayek's fairly short although dense "The Road to Serfdom", or perhaps the Reader's Digest condensed version, which he found to be marvelous, see the "Why the worst get on top" section.
Although based on a quick skim just now of the latter, it looks like avoids a serious treatment of the information theoretic explanation for why planned economies are impossible (there's to much information, as represented by prices, for a few planners at the top to grok, and constantly adjust for). I suppose that's fairly well know by now, but it was the single most enlightening thing I took from it when I read it in the early 1980s, back when our betters were sure the Soviet Union would win the Cold War, and that that was for the best.
A noob who wants to read a textbook, or a noob who just wants to read something interesting in the economics area?
Textbook noob - The Economic Way of Thinking
Novel noob - The Price of Everything
Libertarian noob - The Road to Serfdom
Like anything, the textbook will be the least bias, and everything else you will want to understand the bias of the author to get an accurate picture of the profession.
Some additional information can help a lot in recommendations. I'd like to know the following:
What is your team size?
Is your team co-located (all in one place)?
Can you describe the type and flow of your work?
Do you have open channels of communication with your customer, and if not, do you have people who can stand in and more or less speak for the customer?
Do you think the leadership would be on board for a drastic change?
It is unlikely that the visibility and continuous improvement of an agile framework will not bring about significant improvements within your company. Also, if you are the type that thrives on facilitating a team and helping them grow to excellence, then this will be a great career change. Personally, I love my job and enjoy every day. With the above simple questions answered, it would be a lot easier to spark a conversation.
Jeff Southerland's book (already mentioned) is a great intro for Scrum, and not a boring read. I also like David Anderson's Kanban, if you have a more steady continuous workflow like a compliance or support team, this can fit better. Also, a good read. The Scrum Guide is rather short and is the definitive guide for the Scrum framework. Exactly how you execute under that framework is largely up to the team, but everything is based on the idea of iterative continuous improvement. Once you get this idea down in practice, you'll be hooked.
Thanks for the resource – bookmarked! I'm currently reading Sutherland's book, it's surprisingly really well written. https://smile.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X?sa-no-redirect=1
Our dev team thinks they work in agile, but they're definitely 'scrum but'. Also it's a sensitive political situation for me. The times I've even remotely showed interest in integrating our teams or getting involved, I've been reprimanded. So unfortunately I don't think my current situation is going to provide much in the way of opportunity to learn hands-on. I'm going to continue to see if I can find a creative solution outside of the dev side, but I'm more resigned to making the change wholesale with a new place. Also, I did sign up for the 2-day training in a few weeks, so I am committed, and hopefully soon, certified.
Curious - what kind of stormy waters have you experienced?
I agree with the other comments here.
What are you trying to achieve by getting your directs to put more time in at the office? Are they not getting projects done on time? In most cases, working additional hours past the normal results in a dramatic reduction in employee effectiveness and satisfaction. Jeff Sutherland (one of the founders of Scrum) has an entire chapter on this in his latest book.
Also, the sandwich feedback method is terrible. It is totally transparent and your directs will not respect the lack of candor. I personally prefer the Manager Tools Feedback Model of 1)asking permission to share feedback 2) stating the action 3) stating the consequences of that action. It is super simple and straight to the point. It works for both positive and corrective feedback.
https://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X
Good idea. Currently selling for $13 used on Amazon.
The Second Machine Age is a book.
Google Scholar search for articles related to The Second Machine Age.
Will Humans Go The Way of Horses, an article by McAfee and Brynjolfsson, and related articles on Google Scholar.
Here's an article/collection on AEI.
Google Scholar search for basic income has lot's of great articles.
funny that you mention the MIT.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Machine-Age-Technologies/dp/0393239357
Both guys are from the MIT and all my arguments are from this Book.
You should read it.
You probably don't want to read books like The Second Machine Age or Rise of the Robots then. Self-driving cars are the least of our problems. Consider what we're going to be faced with when automation replaces roughly half of all jobs in the United States over the next 30 years. Truck driving is already headed that way.
Anyway, I work in automation, and unless there's a major (like life-altering) change in government policy, we are all going to be proper fucked in a short amount of time. But at least we'll get there faster in our self-driven cars.
everything he says makes sense to me. I like his explanations better than the alternative, which are culture based (which is a typical conservative argument).
here's another book with different ideas, more cultural arguments:
http://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Poverty-Nations-Some-Rich/dp/0393318885
Oh boy, this is a biggie. It's kind of a combo of a lot of factors.
David Landes wrote a good book on the subject, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations
Some of it can be due to government leadership, some due to actual availability of natural resources. It's really a case by case basis, and some countries that are poor may actually be successful with some minor changes, or if certain things happened years earlier.
If you have a case you are interested in, ask away.
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations is a very good look at macro-economics. At least, as a non-economist, I thought so.
As already mentioned, The Map that Change the World is an excellent introduction to the early stages of geological science. Simon Winchester is a very successful and well regarded popular historian.
Absolutely serious. Philanthropy isn't inherently a bad thing, but when it comes from billionaires, it is just a means to keep control over their exploitative gains and prevent fixes to problems that would undermine their businesses.
Thanks for the recommendation. I've got a lot of "left-leaning" books (well, some of them) on my list now that all sound interesting, and Debt is definitely a high priority because people keep recommending it.
Have you read any of his other work? Bullshit Jobs sounds really interesting but a couple reviews said the original article he wrote on the topic pretty much sums the book up in a much lower word count.
A few of the books on my to-read list in case anyone sees this and is interested:
Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World
Bullshit Jobs: A Theory
The Moral Landscape
Team Human
In my personal opinion, Jason Kelly's book linked below was a great Stock Market 101 book, very easy to read:
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0452298628/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_6KEpDbFEAJ12Z
I highly recommend it!
https://www.amazon.com/Neatest-Little-Guide-Market-Investing/dp/0452298628
This is a good intro book. Watch investopedia videos as you read the definitions in the beginning. After that its a pretty easy read. He summarizes all the major investors books and strategies, highlights his, and ties them all together.
Buy this book.
You mean you want to understand the basics of economics?
I haven't read this particular book myself, but the "for dummies" series have always been very easy to read. So try Economics For Dummies.
My Senior English teacher recommended us to read/skim through "How to Read Literature like a Professor" during the summer before classes start as to get "basic" understanding of literature and/or scholarly journals. I personally didn't read it as the English classes I've registered for were more seminar-lecture based, where the professor talked about everything we're supposed to know about what we've read and gauged our understanding through class discussions. However, I found the book to be helpful as a reference guide when I didn't know how to read/digest specific texts. (I remember seeing a PDF file of the book, but I'm not sure where it is at the moment.)
​
I think skimming the book and reading random articles (whether it be the NYT or Teen Vogue) can help you build your reading comprehension and thinking skills. Also, talk to your professors during office hours! There were moments where I didn't know what to make of the reading and went to office hours to talk about the confusion/concern I had about what I've read.
​
As for writing, my professors from my English and Writing classes recommended me to utilize the writing services (though that's when college starts). My Writing professor also made us read "They Say, I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing," which offered different perspectives on how we should look at academic writing. However, the price doesn't justify the content that's provided in the book. There's also "The Elements of Style," where my friends, professors, and relatives all swear that it's the holy grail for writing (I have never used it, but I guess it doesn't hurt to read/skim through the book).
​
If your school offers writing seminars/first-year writing course, then I suggest on taking those courses first before taking English classes since it may help you on conveying your thoughts/shaping your arguments for your audience. Also, as I said earlier, your professor (or TA) is going to be your best source as they can give you advice on where to improve. Hopefully, this answers your question!
I found the book How to Read Literature Like a Professor: A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between the Lines helpful when it comes to symbolism. If you have time, you might want to skim through it.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Literature-Like-Professor/dp/0062301675/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539261035&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+read+literature+like+a+professor
1.) Your courses will give you enough of a reading list to keep yourself busy; I wouldn't try to cram in too much more, at least not during the school year. I'd check out How to Read Literature Like a Professor if you find yourself struggling with your classes, and On Writing Well and Elements of Style if you're struggling with your essays.
2.) I wish I'd done something non-writing related. I had internships and work study positions and worked for the campus newspaper and all of that stuff so I almost got... burned out? on writing and books. It took a little while to recover.
3.) Marilynne Robinson's Housekeeping was great. I also had a class where the only book we read was Ulysses. I wouldn't have been able to make myself read that book without a semester long class, but I'm glad that I did. Now I never have to again.
4.) Learn how to skim your readings. If you've got a couple hundred pages of reading each week, there just aren't enough hours to do it all.
5.) See #2
6.) See #1. Also: go to office hours. I know professors can seem intimidating, but they don't want you to fail. Most of them are just sitting there during their office hours, twiddling their thumbs.
Maybe try this one:
How to read literature like a professor
http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Literature-Like-Professor/dp/0062301675
Setting yourself the goal to improve your skills is a great first step.
If you'll be working on your own, find a subject you like and read a LOT about it, at every reading level. Notice how the various authors present the subject. It can be really interesting to see how different people perceive the same thing.
Going back to school is also an option. A friend of mine went back to school and got a degree in LIberal Studies. Basically, it's a little bit of everything on the curriculum. Art, history, literature, science ... .
Another thought is to take up meditation. Training your mind, learning to focus, quieting the inner voice are all useful, no matter what you hope to achieve.
I mean there are basically two ways. One: improve your fundamentals. That's like the long-term strategy. Basically, read like crazy. New Yorker, the Atlantic, New York Times, non-fiction books, and what not. It's like if you don't even have the muscle to throw a three-pointer, then it's pretty much pointless to practice 3pts.
Second is to learn some reading skills. Annotations, skimming & scanning, etc. Personally I'm not a big fan of these, but they do come in handy if you don't have, like 5 months to incrementally improve your reading.
If you do have the time, I would recommend the following two books:
https://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Literature-Like-Professor/dp/0062301675/ref=pd_sim_14_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0062301675&pd_rd_r=35Q5NY3NKYMXGNRRAZZ6&pd_rd_w=4BP03&pd_rd_wg=oJkPO&psc=1&refRID=35Q5NY3NKYMXGNRRAZZ6
https://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Classic-Intelligent/dp/0671212095
Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are
This book is really great for getting a surface level understanding of how big data can be harnessed. It also delves into how big data is being used as a buzz word to scam companies out of money.
I listen to audio books, so this might be a little dry for what you're looking for. The narrator was great. He definitely added to my sense or enjoyment
I think an important point to mention here is that these viewers SAY they would cancel Netflix in this instance. It's easy to say whatever you want to a hypothetical poll.
​
This book about Google was an interesting read expanding on how people lie about what they're doing online because we're anonymous on the internet and it's easy:
https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856/ref=sxts_sxwds-bia?keywords=everybody+lies&pd_rd_i=0062390856&pd_rd_r=729c95c5-ba9c-4db4-b452-fa8c605a57e5&pd_rd_w=FB0Em&pd_rd_wg=IdYcs&pf_rd_p=f0479f98-a32d-45cd-9c12-7aaced42b1ec&pf_rd_r=5265D5ZMZNAX0FQW8AP5&qid=1557866692&s=gateway
Although internet filter bubbles do exist, people are much more likely to see opposing views on the internet than irl. I don’t have a source but I read about it in this book everybody lies Think about the comment section of any newspaper.
I don't know why you said alt right, especially because it's been confirmed that Freudian slips aren't a real thing. If you want to have a conversation about an anti-fascist movement, how do you plan on doing that without mentioning fascism?
Fully 25 percent of female searches for straight porn emphasize the pain and/or humiliation of the woman,” he writes, citing search terms inappropriate to reiterate here, but featuring words like “painful,” “extreme” and “brutal,” and often focused on nonconsensual sex (depictions of which, he emphasizes, are not permitted on that site).
https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856?tag=nypost-20
I thought the same until I read Everybody Lies which set out, for me, a convincing argument based on big data that people get more ideological diversity and come into contact with with more differing viewpoints thanks to the internet.
I've read a ton. For some reason the only one that comes to mind is SPIN Selling
Just starting in sales? Read this.
Spin Selling
Also, agree with successissimple on Million Dollar Consulting if you're selling services.
Mandatory reading:
Mandatory practicing, for people watching:
Mandatory practicing, for getting the PHB to agree with you:
Hey, mods how about putting these in the sidebar?
here is the book It teaches about how to present your product/service as a valuable solution for the client!
Sure! The best resource are blogs; here's some I read every day:
Books:
There's lots more out there, but I think this is some of the best.
Sorry, formatting. It's three books
http://www.amazon.ca/SPIN-Selling-Neil-Rackham/dp/0070511136
http://www.amazon.ca/Made-Stick-Ideas-Survive-Others/dp/1400064287/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_y
http://www.amazon.ca/Ziglar-Selling-Zig/dp/0785288937/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-9&qid=1426803718
If you want a good overview of larger sales, I'd start with Spin Selling. Not the most fun read of your life, but it does a very good job of describing how to sell effectively, and why it works.
There are a few books on spin selling, but I only know of one that bears the title. I'll search for it on Amazon and post a link.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0070511136/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1369973846&sr=8-1&pi=SL75
Before buying anything, read through"How To Make Money In Stocks (4th ed.)" by William O'Neil
and "Secrets To Profiting In Bull And Bear Markets" by Stan Weinstein
Edit: I suggest reading the simpler old Weinstein book before the modern O'Neil book
I am reading "How to make Money in Stocks" by William J. Oneal http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
I have been writing down many notes and taking my time with the read. My girlfriend's father is a successful investor and bought this book for me. For someone who didn't know much about the market at the start of the read, It's answered all of the question's I've had and then some. William J. Oneal is the founder of Investor's business daily, which is a revered source for stock analysis and data.
The book's value far exceeds its 10 dollar amazon price. I highly recommend it!
if...and ONLY if...you are willing to put the work in and try to develop a skill instead of looking for get rich quick shortcut money....ill leave this here.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
read this book is the best advice I can give you...it goes against logic at first but its correct.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Investment/dp/0071614133/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1497992274&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+make+money+in+stocks
P.S. you can write a book on this but I won't get into it more detail than this, read this book if you want a crash course. http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
A great place to start learning would be the book "How to Make Money in Stocks" by William O'Neil.
http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133
Here is the mobile version of your link
> Natenberg's book
The "advanced" one? I noticed there's a "basic" and also a "regular" version.
https://www.amazon.com/Option-Volatility-Pricing-Strategies-Professional/dp/0071818774
on the surface I know my stance sounds absurd but it's actually something I'm involved with and very passionate about. I direct you to some accessible reads from William Easterly White Man's Burden and The Tyranny of Experts or there's a recent popular documentary, Poverty, Inc, which I'm a fan of. Things like the Gates Foundation do not help long term.
Do you agree with William Easterly's theory that all international aid, including the Gates Foundation, is bad?
Read The White Man's Burden amazon. Easterly has a lot to say about helping the world's poor and why many efforts have failed in the past.
Yes "The Road to Serfdom" is a truly prolific work, and absolutely worth the read. It's very approachable, and only talks about the economics of socialism in the first few chapters - most of the rest of the book is dedicated to the morality of collectivism VS. freedom.
https://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0226320618
I would also try to read "Ideas have consequences" by Richard Weaver. It's a bit more condensed - but extremely valuable insight for our current political trends
Of course I'll read some books. Perhaps you should do some reading as well. May I make a few suggestions?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0226320618/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1400034094/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/140009593X/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0195051807/
A serf.
I think a start with SCRUM requires understanding of roots of this methodology, that is why I would start from reading (or re-reading if you are already familiar with the book) of Doing Twice the Work in Half a Time by Jeff Sutherland.
Then go for the Scrum Guide, it is all there.
I believe that right implementation of SCRUM requires 2 things: discipline (military roots) and shuhari concept from martial arts. In simple words, you need to start doing it step-by-step and it is obligatory to do it by the book, you will not master it in 1 day and SCRUM is always a process of a continuous improvement.
Start with the things that are simple to implement and give the best results:
- working in sprints (1 week is great);
- daily stand up;
- sprint review;
- retrospectives;
- backlog and user stories;
- deliver to production at the end of each sprint;
- focus on 1 user story at a time, etc, etc.
then you can go for certifications: CSM is a good way to start and understand if you want to keep on getting certificates and you would understand that there are many ways to keep on improving your SCRUM further.
don't forget that Jeff Sutherland has a bunch of online lectures about SCRUM @ https://www.scruminc.com ,
someone already recommended to read Mike Cohn, I double that.
Jeff Sutherland's book Agile: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time is a great read for anyone that hasn't practiced Agile.
http://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X
One of the first books I read which brough my attention to the subject was:
Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time
https://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X
After that - take anything google throws at you ;)
Well, it's not a complete guide of "how to be a good manager" but this is the canonical (I believe) book about Scrum, which is a specific implementation of the vague mess known as "agile."
https://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X
It's pretty short, 256 pages. I think that after the first few chapters you'd have a pretty good sense of whether or not you think it's interesting or if you think it's bullshit.
If you want to know how to be a good manager, I'd suggest this book. It's not about management but it's pretty good primer on how to work with people.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671027034
If I could pick two books for all my managers to read and really take to heart, it would be those two.
I'm just now implementing Scrum formally within our company. For me, at the time, it's all upside. I have a CEO & COO that are non-technical (at least as far as software development is concerned), that have really been struggling to understand the team's productivity in a meaningful way.
For me, being able to plan sprints and develop a velocity has been a game-changer. It's very easy now for them to prioritize work and know with a high degree of confidence where we will be after our sprint is finished. That's very important to them, so Scrum really simplifies my life because it's much easier to plan with them using the tools it provides.
I personally purchased Jeff Sutherland's book "Scrum", who was a co-creator, through Audible. Worked pretty well as an e-book, since the complexity is pretty low and most of it was conceptual. https://www.amazon.com/Scrum-Doing-Twice-Work-Half/dp/038534645X/
SCRUM! a good overall book is SCRUM
This scrum book specifically values regular time off, and even espouses a 4 day week.
A couple of related books are:
a) [The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies] (http://www.amazon.com/Second-Machine-Age-Prosperity-Technologies/dp/0393239357/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407946623&sr=1-1&keywords=the+second+machine+age)
b) [The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future] (http://www.amazon.com/Lights-Tunnel-Automation-Accelerating-Technology/dp/1448659817/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407946576&sr=1-1&keywords=the+lights+in+the+tunnel)
They are both pretty sobering
Thanks...he (and that same co-author) recently came out with a newer book, too. FYI
Actually, the argument is a bit different now than it was in the past. I can recommend several books on the subject that can explain it more eloquently, specifically "The Second Machine Age" and "Robots will Steal your Job (but that's OK)", but in a nutshell it is because of AI.
We are automating thinking, in the same way that the first machine age automated mechanical labor.
The issue is, you are thinking of the past technological unemployment scares and comparing the human position there to the human position here, which theoretically makes sense.
The problem is, this Machine Age is with us in the positions of horses circa 1860. They were for centuries the source of physical labor and transportation. Then the engine replaced them entirely because it was better in absolute terms.
AI is getting better and better. It's already better than us at a great many things, and that list only gets larger as time passes (driving being a recent grab). As it moves into general intelligence instead of specific situations, more and more people will be rendered effectively obsolete.
How's the horse employment rate these days?
As an aside, the other industrial revolution also resulted in widespread social unrest, many people who dropped out of the work market from automation simply blankly starved because they didn't have welfare programs back then. Society is much better off if we offer a safety net.
The Second Machine Age, by Erik Brynjollfsson and Andrew McKee.
Explains everything about this jobless recovery, the real nature of the coming time of plenty, and what we might want to do to avoid revolution. Goes deep into impacts of AI and automation.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Machine-Age-Technologies/dp/0393239357
I agree macroeconomic prediction has a poor track record. I believe this is because it generally tries to extrapolate from past trends, rather than looking at the first principles causality - e.g. macroeconomics through extrapolation could not have predicted the impact of the internet, but looking at the underlying capability of the technology could (and did).
I think we're already seeing service sector jobs being obsoleted. See http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Machine-Age-Technologies/dp/0393239357 for examples and data backing this up.
Job sectors relying primarily on perception will be the first and hardest hit, since perception is what computers are most rapidly improving at thanks to deep learning.
It really couldn't have. It was far away and had no ability to figure all that stuff out. It was hard enough for the other countries and they were right there and actively trying to get in on the action. France and other countries spied heavily and the Brits did whatever they could to deal in their knowledge advantage. I'm reading a book on it now: https://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Poverty-Nations-Some-Rich/dp/0393318885
Indian colonization was horrible. To the extent anyone thinks it wasn't, its because the Brits could have been worse colonizers. They weren't Belgian foot choppers for example.
Still, the idea that railroads or, even more laughable, "civilized society" were contributions that made it all a wash, is some sacred cow level bullshit ;)
Read this
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, attempts to answer the same questions as Guns Germs ans Steel, different conclusions, interesting to look at together and compare (took an entire course that did just this).
For me, one of the most eye opening books was The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor - it really thought me to look at the less fortunate people in this world with the understanding of the root causes of their misery. It also explained the rise of America, failure of Argentina etc... A scholarly work...
stillandonly32 wrote:
Islam is the reason the middle east didn't develop like the West did. Profit is seen as a bad thing in Islam. Their contract-enforcing (which was important when markets were emerging) wasn't as strong as it should've been. We learned all about this in Economic Development Before 1900 (I took it last semester).
-------
Edit from 2013-07-07T01:03:41+00:00
-------
Islam is the reason the middle east didn't develop like the West did. Profit is seen as a bad thing in Islam. Their contract-enforcing (which was important when markets were emerging) wasn't as strong as it should've been. We learned all about this in Economic Development Before 1900 (I took it last semester).
Here's an article I found about the matter: http://business.time.com/2011/10/18/is-islamic-law-to-blame-for-the-middle-easts-economic-failures/
-------
Edit from 2013-07-07T01:15:41+00:00
-------
Islam is the reason the middle east didn't develop like the West did. Profit is seen as a bad thing in Islam. Their contract-enforcing (which was important when markets were emerging) wasn't as strong as it should've been. We learned all about this in Economic Development Before 1900 (I took it last semester).
Here's an article I found about the matter: http://business.time.com/2011/10/18/is-islamic-law-to-blame-for-the-middle-easts-economic-failures/
Also read this.
-------
Deleted
This isn't about original thoughts, it's about engaging legit critiques of philanthropy. I'm not going to pretend I know more than I do, which is why I'm citing original sources to thinkers who've done more research on this than me. You're just going full reactionary on the internet.
https://www.amazon.com/Winners-Take-All-Charade-Changing/dp/0451493249
Spot fucking on! Check out Winners Take All, which speaks directly to this. Rich shitbags donate millions while the government they bought off cuts their taxes to the tunes of billions. Then the shitbags turn around and express concern that Universal Health Care will bankrupt the country.
It's just a game to these pricks, and we're the pawns.
Have you read Winners Take All by Anand Giridharadas?
I know you're a big reader. Have you read Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas ?
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0451493249/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0452298628/ref=rdr_ext_tmb Great book to learn the basics.
I personally like The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing.
The author goes over the basics as well as styles of the greats.
The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing.
The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing
It is a variation of the dogs of the dow strategy. Part of the value of your described strategy is dividends.
Jason Kelly discusses your described strategy in his book "The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing".
The strategy seems to have merit. Basically the argument is that any stock stable enough to be listed on the dow is a safe investment but since these stocks are at the bottom there is room for growth.
http://www.amazon.com/Neatest-Little-Guide-Market-Investing/dp/0452298628/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376756281&sr=8-1&keywords=jason+kelly
I read and skimmed a bunch of books on investing and stocks. The only one that seemed to really stick with me also happened to be the shortest one. Perhaps because its brief. This was a really good launching point for me. The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing by Jason Kelly
If your unwilling to learn for yourself the causes of a problem how can you talk about a solution?
I suggest you start here:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
Don't worry, the up votes have spoken for who's post is ludicrous, and it is yours.
Here are some reading resources for you:
http://www.amazon.com/Stochastic-Methods-Economics-Advanced-Textbooks/dp/0444862013/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309949494&sr=1-6
http://www.amazon.com/Econometrics-Financial-Markets-John-Campbell/dp/0691043019/ref=pd_sim_b_2
and, to ensure you can understand one of these:
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Business-Personal-Finance/dp/0470879483/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309949559&sr=1-1
lemme help u out babby girl
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0470879483
>The US has a minority rule in the sense that the constitution protect the minority from the decision of the majority. Context? Give some examples.
Where in the Constitution supports your argument? Cause if you did know you would have posted that section of the Constitution rather than link to Amazon.
What is your argument again and what section is it? https://constitutionus.com/
>We have an example of limited government. It’s ours. You and people like you have and are changing that by confiscating lawful property to give to others whom you deem more worthy of it.
Your answering an argument I didn't make. Changing zoning laws isn't taking away any ones property. Having affordable housing that allows all San Franciscans to raised and die isn't some fantasy, like ending slavery, protection of indigenous Americans, women's right to vote, civil rights, disabled rights, and rights of gays. The right to affordable housing is civil right considering the importance of ones home.
>Throwing out feel good platitudes doesn’t change 1. The constitution. 2. Basic laws of economics and 3. Human nature.
Thomas Sowell the Libertarian, would rather read "Economics for Dummies,
Yes
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
So not only have you never read an economics book, but it seems you never learned how to read in general. You being unable to read properly explains why you never read an economics book.
Since you have trouble reading beyond a 3rd grade level I'll try to explain this as simply as I can.
China no communist or capitalist. China have elements of both. Capitalist elements good for China economy. Make it second largest economy. Communist elements bad for China economy. Prevent it from being largest economy.
Do you understand now little guy?
>By your logic, capitalism has never worked either
See, there's your inability to read at play again. Or maybe you just don't understand logic in general. Makes sense, after all, all communists are illogical. But if we play by actual logic, you'd see that there are hundreds of examples of capitalism working. Can't find a single example of communism working though :(
It was fun but you're starting to bore me so I'll leave you with this:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
Read that, and when you finally acquire even a basic grasp of economics, hopefully you'll be able to produce something that remotely resembles an intelligent thought.
I'd recommend Sean Flynn's Economics for Dummies. But then again, it's the only pop economics book I've read. Maybe check Amazon reviews on it and related books have bought along with it.
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
I don't assume everything will be gone forever, but many will be, at least, very uncomfortable (water, food, shelter, safety, will be difficult) for months or longer. That's enough for me to give post collapse consideration.
Regarding the continuation of ideas, however, I'm currently reading a heady book, NonZero by Robert Wright. Its about how ideas survive collapse, and more on history/philosophy than survival skills for postcollapse.
the moral animal and non-zero by robin wright.
I believe that there are objectively good tricks for getting along well in communities.
This is, in part, what Game Theory studies. There are win-win ways of interacting that are mathematically, provably, better — at least in the long run — than zero-sum or negative-sum interactions.
In the book Nonzero, the author Robert Wright talks about how civilizations become more successful as they figure out how to implement more and more positive-sum (win-win) ways of interacting.
Some light reading to broaden your perspective
Trump's 'Mental Impairment Means He Cannot Think Strategically or in Abstract Terms,' Claims Professor of Psychiatry
Daily reminder that game theory is the abstract science of strategy. The Right plays checkers (King me KING ME KING ME KING ME!) while the left plays trans-dimensional Go. That's just Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny which can be read by someone who cannot hear.
However your problem has made me consider adding subtitles to my videos to increase accessibility. Thanks <3
See also Robert Wright's books The Moral Animal and Nonzero. I can't recommend that guy's stuff enough.
The Moral Animal by Robert Wright
Nonzero by Robert Wright
Open Veins of Latin America by Eduardo Galeano
...just my opinions.
You are really stupid. Let me quote from your response, "Africa and Mexico did not have the same resources as Britain". Britain got cheap resources from America and Africa. Remember colonialism? Africans had cheap resources, they just didn't know how to exploit them like the British did. The Industrial Revolution happened in Britain due to a hundreds of years of eugenics. http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1393692365&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=a+farewell+to+alms Half your post is also off topic and irrelevant to the conversation.
I found this data after getting interested reading this book (which is great so far)
https://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1486831380&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=farewell+to+alms
If your local library has a copy it might be worth checking out
A Farewell to Alms by Gregory Clark. It's about economic growth throughout human history. I don't want to portray it as some seminal work in the field of economic history, because evidently it's debated intensely. It is however one of the most thought-provoking books I've read in recent memory.
A lot of good ones have already been said but here are a few less famous ones...
A Farewell to Alms
The Mystery of Capital
The White Tiger: A Novel
So the two books I read that helped me TREMENDOUSLY understand options are:
https://www.amazon.com/Options-Trading-QuickStart-Simplified-Beginners/dp/B01EZ50QO0/ref=sr_1_19?keywords=options+trading&qid=1568413077&s=gateway&sr=8-19
https://www.amazon.com/Options-as-Strategic-Investment-Fifth/dp/0735204659/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=options+trading&qid=1568413077&s=gateway&sr=8-3
These two books alone should get you comfortable enough to trade profitably or at least to simulate it and make sure first.
McMillans is a HUGE actual textbook used in University. It's not PERFECT but very close. Treat it as your options Bible.
The starter book will get you familiar with all basic concepts, jargon and associated entry level knowledge.
Options trading is the opposite of day trading although they can be day traded successfully in my experience. Options is better performed, however, as a Swing Trade assuming your Technical Analysis plays out.
If you aren't very familiar with Technical Analysis then I'd suggest watching Mitch Ray's instructional videos on youtube for a basic grasp.
Also here is the BIBLE of swing trading Technical Analysis, it is another textbook but well worth the time and cash investment. Bulkowski is basically god.
https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Chart-Patterns-Thomas-Bulkowski/dp/0471668265/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=bulkowski&qid=1568413255&s=audible&sr=8-1
Before making ANY trade I HIGHLY recommend reading Trading In The Zone by Mark Douglas :
https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=trading+in+the+zone&qid=1568413295&s=gateway&sr=8-1
He also has it in free audio book on Youtube if you can do audio books. I listened at the gym which worked but really just needed to read.
There's many more resources, books, etc. but this should get your rabbit hole started.
For basic market info as a newbie i recommend Investopedia.com
I believe they also have a free simulator. Not sure if options are available on there.
https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447
I discovered this book thanks to r/ethtrader. Giving it a boost here.
Trading is a stream of infinite possibilities. You can't enter it with a mindset of "I must always be right to make money," because you will never be always right.
&#x200B;
Trading In The Zone
Trading for a Living
The Universal Principles of Successful Trading I've read this one twelve times and not because it's fun.
Think and Trade Like a Champion by Mark Minervini
Higher Edge with a Single Candlestick
Everything Written by CrucialPoint in Here
Building an Equity Millipede
Just a Few
Tip: If you don't fully understand the writing to the point you can explain it to a 5 year-old, DON'T MOVE FORWARD. Keep reading and researching the particular topic until you can.
edit: FORMATTING
I think my Silver strat (see the details I've posted in my OP comment) is very similar to your DAX strat.
At the end of the day, it takes money to make money. With small accounts of say <$25k it's very difficult to start off especially if you run into a bit of bad luck and experience a string of losses only to then correct itself and start making money.
Is this the book you mentioned to read? HERE
not about swing trading in special but i liked this one much:
https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1527510924&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=trading+in+the+zone
Trading in the zone by Mark Douglas.
There's a great book written about this very topic
https://www.amazon.com/Unwritten-Laws-Engineering-Revised-Updated/dp/0791801624/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1484838190&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=unwritten+rules+of+engineering
An oldie but a goodie.
Excerpted/summarised from Unwritten Laws of Engineering (worth a read in any case - it's good stuff). Mostly obvious, but enough managers screw some or all of these up that it's always worth reposting...
Pick your favourite 5.
For Engineering Supervisors
Constantly review developments and other activities to make certain that actual benefits are commensurate with costs in money, time and manpower.
What Every Supervisor Owes His Workers
when they are in trouble.
The Unwritten Laws of Engineering https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0791801624/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_HjgvybVGQCMBJ
Skunkworks is great. Super good insight into the growth of a career and how an engineer thinks.
https://www.amazon.com/Unwritten-Laws-Engineering-Revised-Updated/dp/0791801624/ref=mp_s_a_1_fkmrnull_1?crid=3VPKBNEXYOHHK&amp;keywords=unwritten+rules+of+engineering&amp;qid=1555021569&amp;s=gateway&amp;sprefix=unwritten+r&amp;sr=8-1-fkmrnull
Here's this book. I hear it's good. Haven't read it myself
Thank you for your reply. You bring up some good points and ill try to clarify male with these in mind.
>Yet they pay taxes and live in the real world. Not a theoretical free market.
I should be more clear. I concede that taxes must exist at some level. My concern is disortionary intervention. I don't want business strong armed into making bad decisions. I'm glad you're a patriot, but I would rather Ford be profit/competition driven, especially because I need to but a new car soon!
>Life is messy. PC speech is just another propaganda tool to shut down communication when peoples ideas get threatened.
My post was admittedly more of a lamentation, "how the times/party have changed". I do see PC as dangerous in some cases, but I think we're well beyond that. And things have changed over the last few years. If Obama had spoken ill of McCain's service record while running against him, stream would have come out of the typical republican's ears. But Trump is widely excused, even lauded. That's why I asked this question above, what's changed, or what happened to the republicans I used to know?
>Tariffs are a corner stone of economic policy of every developed economy. It is how EVERY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET DEVELOPED. If you are actually interested in learning about how economies actually work I suggest reading: https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
That's very true. Most developed countries started out as mercantitist, and I suspect that Trump can best be described as mercantilist today. The general trend coming along with development has been lower tariffs. Countless studies in the economic literature advocate the lowering of tariffs. It's hard to write a theoretical model in which tariffs benefit anyone except the large domestic companies, and almost impossible to find any empirical evidence of benefit to the citizenry. This anti trade sentiment seems anachronistic to me. It indeed harkens back to when we were still a developing country- decades or centuries ago.
I teach economics for a living, which is not to say I know how the economy works. I'm always very suspicious of authors who claim to. Economics is a difficult field. You really need a phd to even talk about the macro economy, and even people with phds know next to nothing individually (i count myself as one of these know nothin economists). However, I'll eagerly look at the title you suggest.
>African countries that have free markets forced on them due to taking world bank loans have all been stagnating economically for decades.
African economies stagnate because of constant civil unrest, faulty rule of law, and corruption. Free trade has little or nothing to do with it. And America isn't some backwater $1000 per capita economy, it's a fully developed and industrialized economy. I don't see your point in bringing this up.
Again, thank you for your response. Can I ask, do you think that domestically, Trump will make the government larger or smaller in terms of spending and power?
Have him read this book. It might help.
Communism is nothing like laissez faire (literally meaning "let [them] do") capitalism. Although the United States is touted as a capitalist society we are very far flung from a purely free market system.
Free market implies there is no interference or meddling into any market, whatever that may be. Many people, especially in the US, will say that capitalism is the best system ever invented and that we should allow the market to act on its own because it is the most efficient method of organizing people, capital and wealth. For example, instead of some bureaucrat deciding how much bread should cost and how much of it should be produced the interaction between buyers and sellers of bread will determine the price and quantity produced.
In the USSR there actually was someone in charge of determining how much bread should be made and how much it should cost. But it was not just bread but everything that could possibly be produced was also determined centrally. Communist Russia therefore had a centralized or command economy, as there were a few people at the top deciding how goods and resources should be used and distributed. This, as you may have heard, ended pretty terribly, to put it lightly, for a lot of the people of the USSR and eventually brought on the Soviet collapse of the early 1990's.
So seeing how the many communist states have failed in the past, the reaction of many people is to say that not only is capitalism better than communism, pure capitalism is the best form of economy possible. In my opinion this is definitely not the case. And indeed, the US does not have a pure capitalist, Lassaize faire economy. Social security, medicare, and medicaid are all social welfare programs which aim to redistribute wealth. The FCC regulates television and radio, the FDA regulates food and drug production safety and standards, and the DEA keeps you from doing the 'bad' kind of drugs. There is immigration control and zoning laws. Like you said, countries impose taxes and tariffs on each others goods. The list goes on and on. All of these are examples markets constrained by some type of central agency.
An interesting book about the mix of economic policies and their success or failures is "23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism" by Ha-Joon Chang http://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
He has been posted on /r/lectures but I feel does not get much attention:
They Don't Tell You About Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang
https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ti3rjogF_VU
His talk at Google:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5j5EW933Kw
The animated RSA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdbbcO35arw
SeekFindKnockOpen: ^^original ^^reddit ^^link
Required reading for knowing about the corruption:
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
The Secret History of the American Empire: The Truth About Economic Hit Men, Jackals, and How to Change the World
23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism
The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism and the video
You wrote all that stuff but you missed the point.
Taxes get applied to profits, not revenues. As long as the tax rate is not 100%, it has no effect on whether a business is profitable or not.
Given that, businesses should always seek to arrange their business to generate the maximum profit, because no matter the tax rate, they will get more money if they have higher profits. If the tax rate is lowered, and they make somewhat higher profits, is there additional incentive to rearrange their business and hire more workers? No, a change in corporate profit tax rates does not change the revenue-cost curve, so the optimal point would not change.
>Science, bitches.
Science is based on evidence. There is no evidence that lowering tax rates increases employment.
If you're interested in reading things based on evidence I recommend this, this, and this.
Heh :-)
In fact, I still put off things. Though they explain why that is, and that's very important I think, so you don't get frustrated because you're suddenly supposed to be a high-achiever (at least by your own unrealistic expectations).
Habits get ingrained more and more over time. They use the analogy of a slope in the winter. When you slide down you carve out a little path, then another. Over time though, you carve out one path the most and you're less likely to take another route. You don't get rid of procrastination by reading a silly book. You gain awareness though and are given the tools/techniques to battle it, which takes time and effort. But I already notice that the discomfort I feel when putting something off has lessened quite a bit. That alone makes it more likely for me to follow through.
While we're in that new-agey mood I'd also like to recommend mindfulness meditation to my fellow hackers. I first heard about it in Pragmatic Thinking and Learning where it was suggested as a way to increase concentration. When I glimpsed a little bit through the procrastination book, I noticed that they recommend mindfulness as well in a later chapter. Mindfulness meditation, to me, really seems to be a magic bullet. One that works. :-)
If you read this and think it's bullshit, feel free to voice your opinion. Maybe we can sort out some misunderstandings.
When meditation is discussed I have the feeling that to some people it seems to be a wishy-washy esoteric practice. It is not. I have avoided it for a while for that concern, but it turned out to be very helpful in quieting the mind and gaining focus. The problem here also is: meditation is an active process (you don't just sit around doing nothing) AND it needs practice. Now we're back to that procrastination thing. ;-) It sucks when you put something off that you know is helpful to you and only takes 15-30 minutes (or how long you decide to practice).
That depends on how you personally learn. Maybe have a read of https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050/
Pragmatic Thinking & Learning is a pretty good overview of different topics about learning and study skills.
Learn more, study less also a good book to use as an overview of topics.
LEARN MIND MAPPING
Accelerate (book)
Planning methology
The 12 Factor App
Tooling: Go google for Continuous Delivery.
AWS Devops cert is not as useful as practical system design experience. Try other clouds as well, they are pretty good
> How do you go about debugging this situation
A combination of monitoring dashboards (new relic, datadog, rollbar etc.) and looking at the codebase and recent releases to see what may be the problem, the solution is usually either a restart/rollback/fix-forward
> Are there system wide graphs that are viewed first before narrowing down to specific component or microservice?
Yes, these are critical. If you don't have monitoring in production, you're flying blind.
> what specific metrics would you evaluate, and how would you use those to go down to the component that has problem?
A combination of service availability (is service up? receiving requests?) and what I call "functional correctness" (is service doing what we expect? is the DB being filled with garbage data?)
> Is there an article or video talk that you can provide for me to dig deeper?
I suggest you start with this: https://www.amazon.com/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
And like others have mentioned, do some google searches on "Software/Site Reliability Engineering"
Edit: one thing I forgot to mention, we are alerted to problems automatically, and this automation is critical, you need to set up your monitoring dashboards to alert when you start deviating from your baseline, like another comment said, if customers complaining is what's alerting you to a problem, then that's a monitoring and alerting gap that needs to be fixed!
Edit2: this alerting can happen through phone calls, slack messages, emails, etc.
TL;DR Google "Cost of Delay", Puppet's 2016 State of DevOps Report page 43 for rework calculations, and compare &#37;C/A improvement to increased &#37;Innovation (&#37;I).
This has been a major
challengeopportunity for us. I would start by aligning the conversation to Agile Principle #1's three main tenants: Customer Satisfaction, Valuable Software, and Early and Continuous Delivery. If you are in a large (and old) IT organization such as mine, these tenants are loosely held to, barely understood, or simply dismissed. However, in order to measure the success of a digital transformation, these three things must be measured. For the sake of our VSM effort's MVP, we've focused on measuring Early and Continuous Delivery. (You can also discuss this in the context of the 3-ways of DevOps. Early and Continuous relates to the first way. Customer Satisfaction and Valuable Software are feedback loops of the second way. And getting us there is the third way.)For our first pass at measuring Early and Continuous Delivery, we discussed how we could reduce total cost of change by reducing overall lead time (LT). A simple calc is team member count * hourly rate ($/hr) * 6 hrs/day * overall LT in days. You can get specific and do that calculation per value stream process block and add it up, or keep it high level and you'll be in the ballpark - off by 10-15&#37; at the most. If you're working in hours, then you can adjust the formula by dropping the "6 hrs/day" part. (If you're working in minutes, you should just make the case for purchasing Google Nap Pods or something. =))
The problem with relating overall LT reduction to a cost of change reduction is it's not completely accurate unless the lead time and process time (PT) are the same. So LT = PT + QT. And unless we propose that queue time (QT) is spent doing nothing related to other value-add work (which would be tough to argue), then really the PT is the total cost of change. (I'd imagine we'd both agree that context switching has some non-value-add overhead, but how much? Maybe 10&#37;?)
What we've found is that if we're talking about reducing overall LT the best measurement to catalyze the improvement conversation is to consider Cost of Delay (also check out here and here). You can show that by reducing overall lead time, we can capture the first-mover advantage, thus reducing or eliminating Cost of Delay. We are in a competitive capitalistic market after all. Our business measurements are relatively immature, so we used hypothetical numbers to demonstrate this. Obviously real numbers would be more impactful.
Next, consider &#37;C/A. Rework (aka waste work) is potentially one of the biggest wastes of IT budget (and more importantly a development team's time) that a VSM can capture - a low &#37;C/A is most certainly creating rework. Check out page 43 of Puppet's 2016 State of DevOps Report as it provides a simple calculation for rework cost. It may also be important for the group creating the VSM to perform RCA on a low &#37;C/A process block as this may actually be the principle constraint of flow.
Moreover, a &#37;C/A problem in Production has a direct impact on Customer Satisfaction. Framing improvement work with a risk-based mindset will inform you that solving a low &#37;C/A problem in the Prod process block has a measurable impact on Customer Satisfaction. (Two before and after short surveys to your customers, internal or external, should show a diff in Customer Satisfaction if the &#37;C/A in the Prod process block is improved.)
The last point is more of a qualitative measurement, and that is around &#37;Time for Innovation (&#37;I). I hope your organization doesn't devalue development teams as I have seen from time to time, but remember, development teams contain some of the most creative and capable women and men in the entire company. It's important that they move away from doing work a machine can do through automation and focus on innovative (aka creative) work. If you research HP's printer firmware transformation, you'll see that they related &#37;C/A work (warranty) to &#37;I. It makes sense that if the team is not doing rework, then they have time to focus on innovation. While this doesn't directly relate to Agile Principle #1, it will likely map to Customer Satisfaction and/or Valuable Software, since &#37;I time can be spent doing A/B testing, spiking new and relevant technology, or simply interacting with customers directly thus gaining empathy for their jobs to be done.
I also highly recommend Accelerate: The Science of Lean Software and DevOps. The first part gets into some numbers and is essentially targeting middle management and up. It will give you some scientific foundations for some of these improvement conversations.
The business justification of VSM and improvement work is a big subject, and I'm still learning. Remember that finance is as much art as it is science. I hope this gives you some ideas!
Check out Greg Clark's work on this question. His hypothesis is that a change in primogeniture law in England led to a higher evolutionary advantage to high self control.
> Why are some parts of the world so rich and others so poor? Why did the Industrial Revolution--and the unprecedented economic growth that came with it--occur in eighteenth-century England, and not at some other time, or in some other place? Why didn't industrialization make the whole world rich--and why did it make large parts of the world even poorer? In A Farewell to Alms, Gregory Clark tackles these profound questions and suggests a new and provocative way in which culture--not exploitation, geography, or resources--explains the wealth, and the poverty, of nations.
> Countering the prevailing theory that the Industrial Revolution was sparked by the sudden development of stable political, legal, and economic institutions in seventeenth-century Europe, Clark shows that such institutions existed long before industrialization. He argues instead that these institutions gradually led to deep cultural changes by encouraging people to abandon hunter-gatherer instincts-violence, impatience, and economy of effort-and adopt economic habits-hard work, rationality, and education.
> The problem, Clark says, is that only societies that have long histories of settlement and security seem to develop the cultural characteristics and effective workforces that enable economic growth. For the many societies that have not enjoyed long periods of stability, industrialization has not been a blessing. Clark also dissects the notion, championed by Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs, and Steel, that natural endowments such as geography account for differences in the wealth of nations.
> A brilliant and sobering challenge to the idea that poor societies can be economically developed through outside intervention, A Farewell to Alms may change the way global economic history is understood.
>So what? People are also pissed of at the pricing of HBO and still people pay for it.
People would like all prices to be lower, but they still pay them. That isn't evidence that consumers don't have power in the industry, as they clearly do, even in cases where people still wished that costs were lower. If the cost was high enough, they'd stop watching HBO.
>Until you realize you have to pay more, but don't get more in the end. And when you don't have net neutrality it also questionable if they even want to improve the infrastructure.
This might be true if we were only talking about poor customers who aren't able to move. However, many are able to move, and BUSINESSES can move even more easily. A company that offers fast speeds and lots of infrastructure will get the richest customers. As they continually upgrade the infrastructure, faster speeds are eventually passed onto lower paying customers as well. Net Neutrality actually takes money away from the suppliers of infrastructure and transfers the benefits to content creators, which consists of powerful companies such as google and facebook. I'm not seeing how that rewards more decentralized markets.
>At least they will make a wage they can live of in the end and aren't exploited by some corporations making billions in profit.
If you take the job voluntarily, and the government isn't preventing you from getting a better job, then you can't say that you were "exploited" in any malicious sense. Yes, it is important for people to have money to live, but this is not manna from heaven, and the economic process if very important for producing enough wealth to take care of all of these people.
>I rather pay some taxes to provide for people who can't get a job instead of subsidizing big companies who cut wages and then giving out foodstamps to the people working there so they can make it rough the month.
Okay, this has little to do with what we're talking about here.
>And who pays the bill in the end when they end up in a hospital without insurance?
Nobody should be forced to pay for a bill for something they never asked for. That was the chance the worker took. It isn't our job to now take care of people who didn't have foresight to find a less dangerous job, even if it meant making less money.
>When a parent might even become unable to care for their children trough an accident?
Personally, I don't think that anybody should be having kids unless they are already very comfortable in life, but for these freak scenarios, charity often used to step in, before the government crowded them out. Their are also family members to turn to, as well as your local community.
>Yeah well tell that to the person who works in unsafe conditions not getting minimum wage. Or look to China, I bet some people would rather have their old farm live back instead of living in a small room near some factory.
For many, no, that isn't true. Statistically, and according to the evidence of the migration patterns within CHina, that's simply all false. For some, maybe so, and if they were forced off of their land, the government probably had something to do with it, which is usually the case when 3rd worlders are forced off of their land.
>Not if you would have passed it along with foodstamps.
Okay, I seriously suggest that you read some history from the time period. This is a good start:
http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282
People starved back then because there wasn't enough food. Even if the upper classes donated all of their money to charity, millions would still have starved.
Anything by Ha-Joon Chang.
http://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/1608193381
edit: insert amazon link.
I have ADD too, it may take you longer to learn programming than some other people and that is ok. I highly recommend Vyvanse if you can afford it, if not I would ask your doctor about Adderal. Write down your programming goals and proactively minimize distractions. If you get too distracted programming at home, go to the library, put on some headphones and listen to Bach. Writing things down helps a lot, keep a notes.txt or goals.txt on your desktop and keep them open. Look into ways to manage your time better. There is tons of help out there on the internet. I also recommend the book Pragmatic Thinking & Learning (http://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050)
Good Luck, remember programming is something you have to work on your whole life and each day you just get a little bit better.
If anybody wants to read about this topic in more detail and more learning (instead of performance) oriented, try this book: https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Thinking-Learning-Refactor-Programmers/dp/1934356050
Hell, there's even a life-book that focuses on the two selves: https://www.amazon.com/Untitled-Mark-Manson/dp/0062888439
> Lol, what do you think all those containers and instances run on? Magic?
That's what you pay the cloud provider for.
> That is not what Devops is...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DevOps
https://smile.amazon.com/Accelerate-Software-Performing-Technology-Organizations/dp/1942788339
Wrong again.
I highly recommend picking up Spin Selling by Neil Rackham. Well worth the cost and it will help you to develop not just your cold call but all aspects of your sales approach.
Read this: http://www.amazon.com/SPIN-Selling-Neil-Rackham/dp/0070511136
Here's a high level look: http://changingminds.org/books/book_reviews/spin.htm
yea you could do this. there is education involved. you have to learn about relative strength, trend following, and risk management.
here are some books for you to read
http://www.amazon.com/Trend-Following-Updated-Edition-Millions/dp/013702018X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1414408329&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=michael+covel
http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-Stocks-Winning/dp/0071614133/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1414408378&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=how+to+make+money+in+stocks
there are other books you will have to read but these will give you the right foundation to build on.
ignore when people tell you its not possible to beat the market or time the market. these are people who cant do it themselves so they think its not possible for anyone else. it is possible, in fact it is probable when you have the right knowledge.
Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time is the most important. It is Scrum broken down by the creator of Scrum. It’s filled with some good empirical data and is pretty trade-agnostic. Not super specific for tech work just work in general. If you want a good tech use-case of scrum and agile methodologies The Lean Startup is pretty insightful and convinced me that documenting every detail of a product before developing never works.
The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee.
Once thought the same, evolved from it after reading The Second Machine Age: Work Progress And Prosperity In A Time Of Brilliant Technologies
The only people you do need in times of an aging population would be medical professionals and caretakers, the first is not happening at all, the second to a small degree. Canadians though are not becoming doctors in sufficient numbers and definitely not become caretakers. All the rest could be automatized, the inefficiency that you can see in Canadian companies is beyond explanation.
I will try to make this short and sweet. (I failed)
What you're talking about is tongue-in-cheek referred to as "The Rise of the Robots" in the economic and technological discourse. To be clear, it's not so much that robots will "take people's jobs" so much as having robots do those jobs will be more cost-effective than having humans do them at a politically acceptable wage.
The thing to understand about technological progress and automation is that all of the previous waves of industrialization (the so-called "first" and "second" industrial revolutions) all involved technology that was complementary to unskilled labor. Whereas before a man would have likely done hard labor out on the farm, because of industrialization one man with farming equipment could do the work of dozens or hundreds before. This freed up labor to go work in efficient assembly lines. So previous waves of industrialization were consistent with high demand for low-skilled labor and thus, rising wages at the low-end. When your grandpa talks about how back in his day you could graduate high school and then go work at the factory or mill or whatever, that's what he's talking about.
Why was this? Well, to summarize this Brad DeLong post, previous industrial technologies were able to substitute for brute force, but they still required a human brain to serve as a sort of "cybernetic control loop," which is to say, you still needed crane operators, tractor drivers, assembly line workers, truck drivers, retail and fast food employees, etc.
So for a long time people such as the Luddites have protested that labor-saving devices were "taking their jobs." Economists have long regarded those fears as unfounded. On the contrary, labor-saving machines freed up labor to be put to other uses. The transition period could be painful as businesses rise and fall and people find themselves in and out of work, but the greater prosperity gained thereby was more than worth it.
But now, we seem to be entering a "Third Industrial Revolution." McAfee and Brynjolfsson call it The Second Machine Age in their book. What separates the current round of automation from previous ones is that they are substitutes for low-skilled labor rather than complements to it. Each passing year we seem to be getting closer and closer to the point where smart computers can drive cars and trucks, run warehouses, stores, farms, and factories, run fast food restaurants, either by themselves or almost entirely by themselves. In fact there is a running joke in certain circles that "a modern manufacturing plant only has two employees: a man and a dog. The man to feed the dog, and the dog to stop the man from touching the machines." In addition, technologies such as the internet are creating a "superstar economy," in which a handful of successful people (think Taylor Swift or the guy who invented TurboTax) get ALL the moneyz because their "product" can be scaled up almost without limit.
What are the broader societal implications of this? Probably the best source to check out is Tyler Cowen's Average is Over. He argues that we will increasingly see a divergence between the roughly 20% of people who are either superstars or able to interact well with machines (data scientists, computer programmers and engineers, etc.) and the 80% or so who won't. The depressing implication is that many people are today what horses were 100 years ago: on the brink of obsolescence.
My own personal opinion is that we do have a non-trivial problem on our hands as we plow ahead into the 21st century. If managed correctly we can ensure that robots are by-and-large beneficial to most people instead of detrimental. This is a topic where it's very hard to tell who is a crank and who is being reasonable if you're just reading about it for the first time, so I'm trying hard to give you a balanced approach.
Erik Brynjolfsson and Tyler Cowen have both done podcasts on their books if you are interested in listening to them. Brad DeLong also discusses this occasionally on his blog, which in my opinion is one of the best econ blogs out there.
Hope this helps. If I wasn't clear about something I'd be happy to clarify.
Actually Islam is the main problem. Read about it here and here.
> No. I have much more experience with universities than you do. I can guarantee that.
Emptying trash cans doesn't count.
> This is just illiterate in every way.
No, you just have a hard time understanding big words. Currency is part of an economy, not the whole of it. I realize that sounds complicated, it isn't. Perhaps you should try a book at you're reading level.
> You have absolutely no idea what "modern economists support" or don't support. Nor would you even understand how to judge or contextualize such.
Really, because there's about 5 universities in the entire world that have actual coursework regarding the Austrian School. And you're knowledge of the school is clearly broad, given that you named exactly 1 economist from the school that actually influenced mainstream economics (Menger and Wieser actually influenced modern economics, Mises didn't).
Given that the Austrian School is literally considered non-mainstream economics, I'm pretty sure I can say that modern economists don't support the school of thought or it would fucking be mainstream, moron.
> So fucking transparently stupid. Go back to your league of legends subreddit you fucking manchild.
LOL. Nothing like a combination of drivel followed up by creepy shit looking at my post history.
> "Widely held" among your dumbshit "friends" on the internet. Not by academics or anyone else with real educations.
Yes, my friends include Wikipedia, modern economists like Krugman and Skidelsky, Friedman.
When the Chicago School, Keynesian Economists AND fucking Marxists all agree that something is wrong, you can safely assume it's wrong. And had you read anyone besides Austrian School authors, you'd know the over-fucking-whelming majority of economists suggest that many of it's principles are downright harmful.
But keep insulting me without a shred of information because that would require you actually having any fucking idea what you're talking about. But like the Austrians before you, you're on the wrong side of this one. And much like Mises, you'll refuse to believe you could actually be wrong. The difference is, Mises was actually smart. You're a complete moron who can't even defend the very subject you are discussing because you have zero fucking idea what any of it means.
That's a monster of a question. Hell, development economics is an entire academic field, you might as well ask 'ELI5: Physics'. Anyone who seriously thinks they can give you an answer here is lying to you, and probably to themselves as well.
That being said, for my money there are three books that are really required reading on the topic of how countries end up poor, plus two books that are required reading on why it's so hard to fix. I'd call them the bare minimum to call yourself literate on the subject.
Two that you should read on why it's so hard to fix global poverty (Poor Economics sits at the intersection).
You clowns are not normal. You should read this: https://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0226320618
The fantasy is the success of centrally-planned economies. There is tremendous evidence suggesting that liberty works best:
This debate was settled (again) when the Berlin wall fell, at yet socialist ideas continue to rise from the grave. I'll never understand the public's lust for tyranny.
Recommend Hayek's Road to Serfdom
There is a lot of literature about it. Do your own research.
Koffi Annan said that "And yet research is also clear that when girls reach their full potential, through improved status, better health care, and education, it is the most effective development tool for society as a whole. As a country's primary enrolment rate for girls increases, so too does its gross domestic product per capita." It also has to do with being able to control population growth, etc etc.
Of course "better income distribution" is a way of fighting poverty (srsly?). The point is that microfinance, and more specifically microfinance programmes that target women, have shown to be the most effective method of reducing poverty in communities where it is endemic.
We can all see the sky is blue - that's not special. And it doesn't carry the implication that "the system is not that complicated" - think about what lies beyond all that blue.
Your first sentence is pretty interesting. i read a book, Nonzero that basically asserts that this has been the teleology of all of human existence. That this is, indeed, an almost necessary condition for the growth of human society.
No it isn't, it's senseless insanity. Find out why the Christian Illuminati death cultists are such ignorant assholes.
Christians are the most retarded people on the planet. They could all be exterminated with no net loss, but in fact a net gain.
Faça bom uso
So much for reasoned debate & facts & logic. Proving how ideology indoctrinated and compromised you are.
Here's just a FEW of my sources on agricultural policy. As you can see, none but 2 are from left wing sources.
https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/farms-and-free-enterprise-blueprint-agricultural-policy
https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/how-farm-subsidies-harm-taxpayers-consumers-and-farmers-too
https://www.cato.org/commentary/should-united-states-cut-its-farm-subsidies
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/bringing-economic-sanity-agricultural-trade
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8268.00020
https://www.amazon.com/White-Mans-Burden-Efforts-Little/dp/0143038826
https://www.cato-unbound.org/2006/04/02/william-easterly/why-doesnt-aid-work
https://www.rt.com/usa/414931-ron-paul-america-meltdown/
http://priceofoil.org/2017/10/03/report-trumps-energy-dominance-plans-rely-on-billions-in-fossil-fuel-subsidies/
https://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/food-agriculture/advance-sustainable-agriculture/subsidizing-waste#.WueNqtMbNfY
http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries/planetary-boundaries/about-the-research/the-nine-planetary-boundaries.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/federal-dollars-are-financing-the-water-crisis-in-the-west/
https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/08/Subsidizing-Waste-full-report.pdf
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/farm-subsidies-trump-budget-cuts-has-agriculture-industry-worried.html
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/175292/2/11%20EP%202%202014-11.pdf
https://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8073.pdf
https://www.thenation.com/article/totalitarianism-famine-and-us/
https://isreview.org/issue/79/politics-famine
Edit:
Here's four more AnCap Sources
https://c4ss.org/content/25615
https://www.mutualist.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/MPE.pdf
https://www.mutualist.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/otkc11.pdf
https://c4ss.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/intellectual-property-a-libertarian-critique.pdf
A critique of IP Monopoly that's relevant:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/imbookfinalall.pdf
Some Leftish work on how state sanctioned monopoly starves the world
http://resistir.info/livros/imperialism_john_smith.pdf
http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/4625512/917882442/name/michael_parenti_against_empire.pdf
https://books.google.com/books/about/Extracting_Profit.html?id=WYqZnQAACAAJ
https://vimeo.com/259759925
Edit: Since this is getting heat here's an excerpt from a book covering research done on this:
>Trunk Based Development
>Our research also found that developing off trunk/master rather than on long-lived feature branches was correlated with higher delivery performance. Teams that did well had fewer than three active branches at any time, their branches had very short lifetimes (less than a day) before being merged into trunk and never had "code freeze" or stabilization periods. It's worth re-emphasizing that these results are independent of team size, organization size, or industry.
>Even after finding that trunk-based development practices contribute to better software delivery performances some developers who are used to the "GitHub Flow" workflow remain skeptical. This workflow relies heavily on developing with branches and only periodically merging to trunk. We have heard, for example, that branching strategies are effective if development teams don't maintain branches for too long - and we agree that working on short lived branches that are merged into trunk at least daily is consistent with commonly accepted continuous integration practices.
>We conducted additional research and found that teams using branches that live a short amount of time (integration times less than a day) combined with short merging and integration periods (less than a day) do better in terms of software delivery performance than teams using longer-lived branches. Anecdotally, and based on our own experience, we hypothesize that this is because having multiple long-lived branches discourages both refactoring and intrateam communication. We should not, however, that Github Flow is suitable for open source projects whose contributors are not working on a project full time. In that situation, it makes sense for branches that part-time contributors are working on to live for longer periods of time without being merged.
The book if you want to check their methodology / biases