To be fair: titles and headlines are often written in the tense you used, often to give a sense of energy and intensity. In fact, this is the most common form in news headlines, like "Smith wins 2022 election" or "new statistics show increase in employment rate."
That's definitely true, but just for the third person.
For the second person, "you start taking the bus at age 30" is an imperative statement, which has a totally different meaning from the observation "You started taking the bus at age 30".
And for the first person, "I start the project on Monday" refers to the future, "I started the projected on Monday" the past.
> There used to be a site that categorized boot camps by results. Maybe try that?
I think you're talking about either the Council on Integrity in Results Reporting (CIRR) [1], or Course Report [2] (both still up). CIRR is a body run by the code school industry itself to monitor its own results; Course Report has over 50k reviews by students as well as articles with tips about how to pick a code school, "top x code schools for y" lists, etc.
CIRR seems to be reasonably rigorous and honest. Their reports are easily available on the site. I've poked around in their reports, and there's a huge range of results, from less than 50% employment at 6 months to 80%+. There seems to be little to no correlation between the reputation of a given school and the actual outcomes (some of the most reputable schools had employment rates of 50%-60% at 6 months).
A big trend I noticed was that the schools with the highest employment rates were relatively low-profile schools teaching unsexy technologies that are low in SV buzz but nonetheless have high demand, like Java and C#.
I love the idea of CIRR but it is largely a failed institution. Their measures have changed dramatically over the years (the last CIRR event anyone at BloomTech attended resulted in the notion that anyone who adds anything new on LinkedIn could be considered "hired," even if it was a portfolio project or self-employment), and are used very differently from school to school, resulting in every major school I know of stopping to work with them.
For example, we used them for our first outcomes report and paid extra to have them "verify" our outcomes report, but they literally never opened the Google Drive file we sent them.
I think it was a great idea set up by well meaning people, but the self-governing aspect and comparisons created ended up in weird incentives that resulted in it falling apart.
The review sites are perhaps marginally better, but the positivity of reviews are almost 100% correlated with how hard schools work to farm for positive reviews, and their business model is selling leads to the schools, so the incentive isn't for objectivity there either.
Honestly the best way, though it requires more work, is to find a handful of recent grads on LinkedIn and ask them about their experience.
Ah, OK. Now I wish it wasn't too late to edit my original post :)
The stats on the CIRR site across schools did always seem a little... odd to me, with differences in outcomes too big to believe at times. Sounds like I would have found the same thing if I looked at any individual school over time, as the rules and practices changed.
Thank you for pulling these up. I am in fact talking about both of these (admitted in my head I had mixed them into one site). I know at one point Course Report was flooded by Lambda Students as they were encouraged to leave positive reviews.
To Chalmers' credit, he's been writing about this stuff at least back to 2003, when he had a paper called "The Matrix as Metaphysics" defending the idea that the claim that we're living in a simulation is not a skeptical hypothesis, and that such a world would be just as real, just one layer "in." (Probably not as wild of an idea now as it was back then.) Also a couple of other papers on VR since then and many on AI going back to 1990 [1].
"Rightsizing" is a weird one, because it's occasionally used for benign stuff like reducing the rate of hiring. Much like "enhanced interrogation techniques," the broader meaning provides shelter for what it's really used for most of the time.
Here's a business model for successful open-source projects—one that's already in use, but I think is rarely seen as a business model per se. I'd be interested to see if there's a blog post or the like about this already.
If you're the head of a successful OSS project and you believe it's helping your career in the way of industry notoriety, good demo work to show potential employers, etc.—then give a cut to cover the project's expenses, or even hire folks for freelance work.
There might be stretches when you're not going to make any extra money from the project; say you've reached the point where the project isn't a top line-item in your resume and is probably not responsible for your next salary bump. You can still honor what you've gotten from the project by voluntarily investing back a portion of the money. It has a "benefit corporation" flavor.
If this sounds like too much generosity to expect of people, consider people like Thibault. He's very, very deep into the "generous" side, in that pretty clearly he could work on the project _far_ less and still get a dream job. What I'm describing is a way to make an overall profit and still feel like you're giving back to the world by nurturing the project you've built.
Obviously, this is an overwhelmingly common thing in practice already, whether it's someone who made an OSS project to get a good job and then continued to work in their spare time to maintain it, or language BDFLs who maintain the project on a volunteer basis, but as a result of founding the language they have amazing and well-paying day jobs. But so far I've never seen it described as an actual business model, where you can feel great about helping to keep up your project, but still come out ahead overall.
Agreed. I whinge about this all the time. The C-based system is convenient for piano players but it's a mess for guitar players, violinists, and other instruments where there are no
There have been many attempts at a chromatic music notation, but nothing has caught on so far [1].
Things are a little better with solfege -- there is "chromatic fixed do" solfege, where every note has its own name, rather than only having a name for the "white notes," which leaves you to mentally calculate the sharps and flats.
It's a minority thing--maybe 5-10% in Europe? Even regular fixed "do" is rare in English-speaking countries, so I would assume the chromatic fixed "do" is almost unheard of in the US, Britain, etc.
At any rate, there're are at least seeds of hope for a chromatic fixed-do solfege to catch on more. I use it for my own learning.
I find the paino-roll notation on DAWs to be a lot more intuitive. Not much good for perfomers of course, but it helped me understand things better. Each semitone is given the same amount of space.
Here's that one weird tip that you were looking for all your life but didn't realize it: pretend the front part of the piano keyboard isn't there, and just look at the part closest to the fingerboard. Presto: chromatic keyboard.
I find piano roll a lot easier to write/produce but a lot harder to sight-read.
I actually find hooktheory's system, where it's diatonic and accidentals are based on the active chord, not the current key, to be the easiest to understand relationships, but also hardest to translate into concrete notes to play.
For me it's simply a matter of convenience of searching; even pages with great and comprehensive docs can be hard to search. And the average is so poor that I often don't even bother to check if a particular project actually has a good search feature. If my search takes me to the actual doc page, (and it's good) then all the better!
The easiest way to think about Tcl is simply, "it's a Lisp, but with strings instead of lists."
It turns out that when you make a language like that, you end up something where your code looks and feels like a list of commands (much like a shell script) but is also capable of doing "real" programming stuff where needed without much pain.
The test suite for SQLite is (still!) written in Tcl, I think partly for this reason. You probably wouldn't want to write a test suite in bash, but you don't quite get that feeling of "it's just a list of commands."
This is glorious. The only way I could tell with any confidence it wasn't real was the clean, modern HTML and CSS (get with the program folks, this should be non-validating XHTML 1.1!)
using many apps with sound enabled is shocking after long periods of app silence. Social media apps sound like slot machines! So much pavlovian conditioning... Not sure how all that is still legal.
