Edit: should be fixed now. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Keep adding to it. You're gonna for sure write bad code thats going to be trashed, but keep working at it. The whole project might even be trashed but such is the expense of a creative.
Code, ship, fail(or succeed!), repeat.
In no particular order:
Desire to have more control over my own fate / not have a "boss" in the conventional sense
Desire to build something bigger than myself
Desire to leave a legacy behind that would outlive me
Desire to change the world / improve people's lives by creating jobs, creating a place to work that reflects the values of the kind of place I'd want to work
Desire to be wealthy
Desire to prove doubters / critics wrong
Desire to build a great team and do fun things together
etc. It's hard to weight those and say which are most relevant compared to the others, but the "desire not to have a boss" is definitely up there, along with the fact that I just like building things (in this sense, I'm referring to "building" company).
And yes, before somebody says it, I know that "you always have a boss" in some regards. But a "boss" in a metaphorical sense, referring to "the board", "the market", "your customers", etc. is still qualitatively different than having one discrete individual, who has you under his/her thumb, and can yell "jump" while expecting you to say "how high" and who can fire you at will, and generally boss you around.
1) Large amount of idle intellectual capital.
2) Changing affinity between employer and employee.
3) High acquisition cost of intellectual capital.
4) Inefficient pricing of expertise.
5) Inefficient validation of expertise.
Further explanation: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/uber-your-brain-fitih-cinnor-...
An easy thing to export to other cities
Please somebody find a way to do this affordably for laundry. There's Wash.io and local laundromats that deliver, but it can't possibly cost several hundred dollars to wash and fold a few dozen tees, hoodies, and jeans.
This is essentially what Task Rabbit has become already, but their review system is lacking and there's no guarantee someone won't steal your TV. There an established market here, but it needs a reputation system and some sort of small insurance backing.
Yes, I need to clean my apartment right now.
> I (or we as a company) faced pretty similar situation just a few weeks ago.
> The app is called ______, and it was our first app ever, our child - app that constituted our company brand and still is pretty useful for many small business owners (_______ is an invoicing app, making something like $20k/year on our domestic market).
> Unfortunately(?) business is business, so finally I decided to decline it. Now were making some final touches and will release it as open source project - again facing similar problems - the codebase is almost 6y old, app is not trivial, build procedure is not single click etc etc.
> Besides all those risks and problems, I still believe that opening the source code is worth doing. That way we can help other (less advanced) programmers to start their own mac products/businesses. Im sure that youll agree that after a certain point you need to look inside something bigger than a trivial app from examples folder, something that is/was a real thing, something alive'. Thats IMHO a single priceless source of practical knowledge.
> Thats my 10cents :)
Your software doesn't have bit rot, it's just old. It was useful at one point in time and it is just a bit less so now. Consider the value proposition of a Magic Maps 2.0 to your users and what sort of feature list you could create. Decide an upgrade price point, and send an email to your users and create a newsletter allowing them to sign up for the new version. If you get 500 sign ups, cost out the features and have a freelancer develop them. If you get no sign ups, pack it up or sell it to someone.
If it was me, my financial situation may be different, but, I'd drag myself up by the scruff of my neck and set aside some time to fix it......$10k a year!
If its generating a profit, maybe its worth it?
You get 3 benefits:
1. Continued income from it (people aren't going to continue to buy it if the bad reviews keep coming in).
2. You keep/improve your reputation. If your software isn't working well for any reason at all, it can give a bad reputation to the person/company attached.
3. You increase the chances of a good buy-out in the future, over what it would currently bring now.
We all know it can be difficult to get traction on a project, not to mention paying users. You already have proved this one can get both.
If you truly believe there's no chance of it ever growing larger, than by all means, retire it. I've sunsetted many apps that never caught on. But don't give up on it too soon!
You said you're concerned about how much it might cost. Surely you can afford to try someone out for a short amount of time, given the app makes $10K a year. If you shut it down or open source it, that income's gone anyway. So why not try to keep a good product alive?
One good place to look for a programmer might be the monthly HN threads by whoishiring - https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=whoishiring
(1) I think its worth trying to sell the app - you did a good job, obviously it has a user base, and I think its fair you get paid for it and have someone continue to maintain it.
(2) If that's a hassle and you lose control of the project's trajectory - why not open-source? Your users would still use it, it would be free, and there might be some power user willing to take it on and improve the code base.
(3) As someone else mentioned in the comments below, maybe find a contractor to maintain it? This only makes sense if the cost of the contractor is less than what you're making off it, of course.
It benefits both parties, you know what features the project needs to implement and what direction it needs to take to make more money, while the new owner/developer gets ramped up. You guys can even agree to a one year period of help and then separate, but at least the project keeps running and making money.
Not sure if this is usually done, but it seems like everyone wins :)
Or just throw off this project and focus on another one. It's old. It's kind of liability not a money generator.
Crowd source further development and continue to participate in revenue and product direction.
Are there many active competitors?
Is it written in all Objective C?
To prevent repeating myself, I wrote a comment in the above discussion that you might find helpful:
Instead, use Gun.io. I'm not affiliated with them in any way other than being a happy user of the service. The jobs on there are very high quality from vetted customers that expect to pay good money for good work.
Put on your Sales/Business Development hat and go direct. Identify CIO/CTO's, Directors of Engineering (people you can help) at companies you're interested in. Linkedin can be a useful tool for research. Then call/email them to make an introduction via Skype video.
Might suggest reading Weiss on client acquisition> http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/142757.How_to_Acquire_Cli...
I don't know how much do you spend monthly, but oDesk for me really works and it's good alternative to even local jobs for me. Additionally it helped me reach the global market and work for customers outside Russia where I live.
Most of the companies I list are in the US; that would be a problem if you had to take a face-to-face meeting, come in to integrate your deliverable, work closely with the QA staff &c.
Most of my work since 1998 has been remote; of that, most of my clients I never met in person, some I met just once or twice.
I have many more that I will add soon, particularly for countries other than the US.
My experience is that oDesk and eLance are not worth the time required even to browse their websites, let alone do the work they offer.
Some background on when it failedhttp://www.somebits.com/weblog/tech/bad/leap-second-2012.htm...
0 outbound marketing yet, and already have 22 customers at $100/month. This year my goal is to scale up to 200 customers.
It's a really weird market niche where no one has built software for in 10 years. Pretty neat.
inquicker.com started as a hobby / learning opportunity (2005) and grew into a side project with about $20k/yr in recurring revenue from corporate customers (2008).
Eventually, it turned into a full-time job (early 2009) and I found a co-founder (late 2009). We hired our first four employees in 2010. In 2011 we signed our 100th customer and hit $1m in recurring revenue. In 2013 we hit $5m in recurring revenue.
It's done about 80k in sales in 3 months - I'm in the process of writing a blog post about how I did it, what worked and what didn't. It's not inexpensive, but it pays for itself quickly so people are fine with spending the $45 on the book + videos.
Feel free to ask questions here so I have content for the post.
The description says that it is for novelty purposes, but the reviews show people believe it works and it has a placebo effect. Most reviews say things like "I drove past a police station and it went off! 5/5".
It's funny to see it up in the top 20 of the Transportation category on Play, alongside companies that are heavily VC funded. https://play.google.com/store/apps/category/TRANSPORTATION/c...
I didn't pay much attention to it at first, but people liked the site and kept coming back. Year later the site generates around $30k a month and the operation costs are around $90 (close to nothing).
The site is very lightweight as it doesn't really downloads anything. It just extracts direct links to the files.
There are a great challenges that I have to deal with (like YouTube blocking IPs, sites changing designs all the time, etc.).
It reached the reddit front page for a day, and earned 3,000 during that day. Since then, it's averaged ~150 per month, with only small input from me (minor updates)
Quite a change from my day job working in software but I enjoy the diversity.
Edit: If you'd like to read a preview, you can do so here: https://www.masteringmodernpayments.com/read
The first year, I sold for $0 of librairies. In 2014, I've made ~$45,000 and it's 100% passive income. I'm not proud to say that I've worked a total of 30 hours on the site last year (it sounds as if I'm lazy, and I'm not). Moreover, I've never spent a single dollar on marketing, no matter its form.
It works so well that I've taken the decision to leave my daily job to work on the site full time. I (perhaps naively) think that if I make that much money while doing practically nothing, I can surely make a ton more by actually working on it every day for a year. On Feb 1st, I'm making the jump.
It has been tough to get there though. The first year has been a disaster. I nearly abandoned the site. Then, one day, I started to gain traction. To this day, I have no idea why. Then, months after months, the sales went up. It took me weeks and weeks of work to create the libraries I'm selling today. I also did a lot of variations, based on the feedback I received from my customers. My customers are the best, I think. They like what I do, they give me a lot of feedback. In the course of my business, I also did stupid things I regret immensely, like copy a competitor (but honestly it was not intentional), and I'm really, really not proud of this.
Sales have reached a peak of $7500 for the month of May 2014.
The site is based on http://jekyllrb.com/ and is hosted on https://www.webfaction.com/, on a 9$ per month plan. As the site is static, I just need Nginx. That's it. GetDPD allows me to collect payments with both Paypal and Stripe.
To let people pay and downlaod, I use http://getdpd.com/. They are fantastic. I've tried a lot of other options and even though GetDPD looks terrible, it's a great product, well worth the tiny monthly cost.
I hope my story will let people know that it's totally feasible to do a great business as a side project. I honestly wonder EVERY.SINGLE.DAY how come it worked for me, but well,... it worked :-)
I've successfully stopped 1 full blown exploit (admanteumcoin) where there was code that allowed a block to mine any amount of coins desired, (and had RPC calls modified to hide this).
I started out doing it to try to help the altcoin ecosystem, because it's pretty interesting, and because it's a great way to learn more about cryptocurrencies and all their implementations. My code review directory (that isn't actually up to date) is on github: https://github.com/Earlz/coinreviews
Temporary email. Got lucky with traffic, and run two Google Adsense ads.
I've been very successful in the technology world, including running my own scientific and software consulting company for many years, but as a novelist and poet I've been a complete failure, despite approaching the two in very similar ways. Maybe the markets are simply very different, or maybe it's just luck, or something else. So I think it would be interesting to see some side-by-side of projects that took off and projects that didn't.
There are lots of really interesting things people are posting here, but I bet for every success story there is a story of failure that involves a great many of the same elements, yet somehow never grew beyond the "that was an interesting way to spend my spare time for a while" stage.
It currently makes about $1,200/mo. I do somewhat detailed income reports over at http://www.it-engelhardt.de/income-reports
I only launched the book about 1.5 months ago, and I'm at about $1500 in revenue. I'm definitely hoping to see greater income with the higher tiers (including video) and greater marketing. I'm also speaking with some companies about them buying site licenses of the book, which would increase the revenue even more.
I am, today, skeptical that it's worth anyone's while to try to make money from ads published alongside one's articles. At one time that was widely accepted as the very best way to make money online, but no more.
I'm getting ready to do a KickStarter project so I can devote myself full time to this:
So far I have some remote employers and clients, and some employers in a few large US cities. After I have lots more remote employers, as well as some in a few other countries, I'll do the kickstarter.
Someone managed to make fifty-six grand from a KickStarter in which he said "I'm making potato salad". Not that he was going to sell it commercially, or had come up with a killer potato salad recipe. I mean like he was fixing his lunch for the day.
Just a couple days ago, I read that three times as much money is raised from crowdfunding than from VC.
Consider that with crowdfunding, you don't lose any equity. You also don't have the problem with a bad VC giving you bad advice, or even demanding you do stupid things.
There are some VCs who are very, very good. Despite having to fork over lots of equity, the good VCs are very worthwhile, but IMHO a bad VC is far worse than not getting funding at all.
Have an assistant that helps curate freelance/contract positions from around the internet and through opportunities I hear about offline. I'm a mobile developer, so it's an effective side business to be working on.
Many people have scored new clients and worked on interesting projects through the service. Some people find it's not for them. Definitely offer a money-back guarantee if you're working on something digital/saas. No reason to be taking people's money if they're not getting value out of your product.
Another valuable lesson: we did really well with podcast advertising thanks to Release Notes (http://releasenotes.tv/). If you can find a podcast with 10,000 - 20,000 listeners that serves a niche, you should be able to produce a nice return. IMO our landing page is terrible, but it converts quite well.
My wife has always hated the meal planning/recipe organization and sharing process and available tools (she'd used a few different products). After asking lots of friends for recommendations and hearing enough times, "I use X, but I don't like it, so if you find something better, let me know." it seemed like a promising lead for a side project!
Worst case: I make no money, and my wife finally has the meal planning tool she's always wanted.
bots4 is a freemium text/browser-based robot fighting game. It was making $3,000/month at one point, but revenue has dropped significantly since then (and it fluctuates a lot based on the activity of whales). Operating cost is $25/month for Linode VPS hosting. Here's the revenue history as of August 2013:
It makes money purely through in-game purchases. Players can buy what are known as "stars" for $10 USD each. Stars let you order items for your bot so that you don't have to camp for them. The alternative if you don't have stars is to wait for your item to appear, so stars ultimately don't enable you to do anything you couldn't do without them, but they are a big convenience, especially in late game where certain items appear very infrequently (still only O(hours) though).
If you want more info, you can read through my posts here (linked to archived version because it's not loading on the original domain):
I have a small directory website. It's pretty boring stuff, but it is a good source of almost passive income. Never published it. I just created the website and sent the sitemap to Google Webmasters. It's 8 months old and I have 400k pageviews/month.
I have lots of projects in idea stage, I want to execute at least two in 2015. My plan is to reinvest all money from this first side project to create others.
Among that, I started selling Prestashop modules on May 14, and now I get around 800/1000 per month from this.
Getting money on your side project is (imho) the best feeling in the world. You get notifications (email for Prestashop, SMS that I configured for VoilaNorbert) at every sales, and when you receive them, oh that feels great! :)
This lead me to learn something very important : you have to finish what you start. It's my big default, I always stop in the middle. Norbert and the modules for Prestashop was an exception, and now they make money!
The amount you make from the Job Board post is heavily dependent on the amount social followers (drives traffic and makes purchasing more appealing).
https://www.angularjobs.com started making ~$1000/month in revenue with a highly targeted social reach of ~10k followers.
Technical co-founder type? Take what you know about programming and offer recruiting services to the early users of your site. Both companies and developers visit job boards, providing both the clients and talent needed to collect recruitment fees(over 10K in major US cities).
My main gig is http://www.LinkPlugApp.com where I play a technical role.
LinkPlug is how I drive traffic to the JobBoard from social media accounts like the ones below(click a tweeted link to see an ad for the JobBoard):
edit: added Twitter account examples.
It's free to download and try it out, but then I charge for additional puzzles.
I was keen to give a complete version of the app for free (without ads) so that people understand clearly what I'm offering. This strategy seems to be working with good and returning custom. Not $1k yet but some reason for optimism ;)
My method is simple and has only four steps. 1. Write something cool and put it online for free. 2. Wait 4 to 5 years. 3. Gather all the emails asking if they can license it or pay you to adapt it. 4. Then slap on a price/marketing page emphasizing what everybody asked for.
http://websequencediagrams.com is my SAAS business. When I was working on 3GPP at RIM we had to spend hours in Visio moving boxes around, and pasting the results into word documents. It was a challenging layout problem. By 2007 I made a python script that did sequence diagrams automatically and put it online. I began to get emails from companies saying they wanted to license it, so I obliged. After I left RIM, I converted it into a freemium product. I have about 400 users paying $9 to $15/month.
My favourite is http://rhymebrain.com because I don't have to do anything. Google just transfers $1-2K into my account every month for Adsense.
TBH, the worst part about this is that it's so easy, I got pretty lazy about it. This is why I haven't answered the "what did you make?" question - I got so lazy about it in 2014 that the side projects brought in about half what they made in 2015. Kinda painful in retrospect.
Likewise, if I had web sites for this stuff, if I built email marketing systems, I'm sure they'd make more money. I even have a Kindle version of one of my books, and I still haven't gotten around to sharing it with my customers. Kind of embarassing, actually.
But even then, I'm well over the $1K/month mark. No worries there. All you really need to do is create stuff that people find worthwhile.
The site generates >$1.5k per month at the moment from AdSense alone, without any marketing other than SEO and broadcasting to the social followers we've accumulated. This revenue is secondary to the real and long-term value being generated in the form of large numbers of membership/email subscriptions and social followers.
Im working on a similar service using SMS.
http://undupe.com was something I spun up one day, it gained a little interest and now it runs around $400+ a month(with under 10 users). Not very much, but a nice start.
I'm working on moving this one up a notch past $1,000/mo while adding other small products to my portfolio.
$1k/mo is still a milestone I've been working on reaching. Up until now, I've been an active contract developer.
Still have lots of product tests running and seeing what will be next. Eventually, this will turn into a nice portfolio of digital assets and income.
Today it has 1mio pageviews/month, PREMIUM Membership, Photoshop Plugin, AdSense and some "30-days" ads.
And photos are still FREE :)
It's not passive income, but I only use ~ 1 hour a day on it (packaging etc.)
It's doing about 1.5k/mth. Launched it 2 months ago. Took me 6 months to create it. Still adding content to it though, will probably take about 1 year more before I complete it.
The site that hosted the course did most of the marketing for me so I just focused on the product. Startup cost was about $150. Spent it on microphone and digital writing pad.
I'm not making anything close to that but I've worked on a side project of mine for months with no gain. At this point I'm debating if I should just move on. It's not revolutionary but but any advice would be beneficial.
I owe a lot to Feedback Army. It was the first thing I made where I made money without putting an hourly value on a unit of my time. I learned to think of my business as a system for fulfilling what I promised and collecting money from customers. This side project was a great way to cut my teeth on some business and service fundamentals.
I got into this stuff because I am very interested in domains - especially .io domains
At first domains were just a fun hobby - to collect for future projects. But then I sold a few and bought a few more and scaled it out.
I created park.io to automate things.
Currently the videos generate about $3,500/month in revenue. There's little out of pocket expense for the initial production of each video (stock imagery, reference books, etc) and no ongoing expenses after production is complete.
I started out just focusing on topics that I was interested in but didn't have a lot of success. Once I started approaching things as a business my return improved dramatically.
It's got a standard F2P model for the collectibles aspect: you can get everything for free by playing the games / posting in the forums, or you can pay for it. It probably doesn't make as much as it could as I refuse to employ "dirty F2P Tricks", but that's a personal choice.
Check it out if you care to :)
Neither app has any server-side components, so they don't cost me anything but squarespace fees for my website and my iOS dev program membership.
Edit: Oh yeah, they're both paid apps and I don't fiddle with the pricing
Growth was slow but steady, and the site now receives ~1.4M pageviews per month. The money to keep things up and running comes through banner ads - it's not a huge amount (have only started hitting just about $1000/mo in recent months, and don't know how long that'll last for), but it's still a nice revenue stream to have.
This is the quick (1 min video) version of how I did it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0y28HmcqUo&feature=youtu.be
This is the longer version: http://blog.quickmail.io/category/journey-to-1k-paying-custo...
It's an inventory/career management platform for working Artists. Slow but steady growth, mostly word of mouth and recommendations by influencers in the space. Me and one other business partner. We had our first $1k month in our 4th month of operation. We are well over that now and with current growth it should match the income of my full time job in the next year or so.
+ pc builder site http://assembleyourpc.net I created ~1.7 years ago, generates revenue from Adsense and few affiliate programs, 2-6 hours of work (per month))
+ other niche tools : http://portchecker.co and http://signature-maker.net weekend side projects, 0-2 hours of work(per month))
Source Code: https://github.com/rainmaker7/locator
I've been running it for the last 5 years. The first 2 years, it was just a blog that I maintained for free. 3 years ago, I started selling access to audio recordings of the lessons as a subscription.
The site generates about $2K per month off of around 300K monthly visitors. It continues to grow but very slowly.
I wrote a site creator for non-profits that allows them to create customized fundraising sites.
Will complete it by next weekend.
Although I haven't spent a single penny on promotion and selling it for less than I should I guess.
I also operate some "for fun sites", which are all small projects for example a video-game discount aggregator (just scapes sites for discounts) all together ~$200/mo.
It's a SaaS app and a Chrome Extension. It has tens of thousands of monthly active users and makes $x,xxx per month.
It's a lot harder than you might think.
My clients give pretty reliable recurring revenue, so much so that it's gone from a side project to a full time gig for me.
Currently I'm working on scaling very hard.
It was a good year, and it feels good that 15 years of insanely hard learning have paid off... It feels surreal, like I'm dreaming and I'm going to wake up.
Not to say that it's not a risk, but it's one most people are happy to take (and largely get away with).
On windows you can get hit by many different attack verticals, where on android it is mainly from installing bad apps. As long as you aren't installing bunk apk's you are relatively safe.
On PC code can execute and do arbitrary things (Window 8 "apps" excluded). The only security protections on PCs is either ring 0 or not ring 0. It doesn't matter if you're Windows, Linux, or OS X the very nature of x86/x86-64 is either "root or not root." Virtualisation might change that equation one day, but containers still aren't commonplace day to day.
So on PC application run away is a legitimate threat. You trust Adobe Reader, but if a website tricks Adobe Reader into executing an attacker's code then Adobe Reader can do anything it has access to on that PC (which is everything in user-mode, which is a lot). So you use AV as a stop gap to try and catch some of these (although its effectiveness is questionable, things like Click-To-Play on browser plugins, automatic updates, NoScript/Request Policy, and EMET are more reliable).
Plus then you have OS enforced app restrictions (manifest permissions). If an app gets hijacked by a bad guy, if the bad guy wants more access than the original author then they need to request it and that is user visible (might set off alarm bells). Even if they just keep the old permissions that may restrict what they can do.
Lastly the way Android is designed in general means certain common issues are mitigated, for example:
- Cryto-Blackmail (encrypt your stuff then blackmail you into paying or it will be deleted), most apps cannot access other app's content, most content is backed up automatically, and if they can access other app's content they may not get enough access to overwrite it.
- Sending spam or DDoS botnet: Android kills background processes. Android throttles processes using up too many resources.
- Stealing passwords: It is very hard for one app to "spy" on another app (rooted phones not withstanding). So if you enter your password on Chrome, you can reasonably be assured that the Space Invaders app didn't "see" it (unlike PC, where one user mode process can trivially spy on another).
I was thinking about this problem recently and one idea that I came up with was to build a "MVP league" that would combine aspects of eSports leagues and online hackatons (e.g. Node Knockout). Participants could form teams and submit a new MVP every X weeks. Another option would be to have theme/technology based tournaments (e.g. "open source", "node.js", "education"). Winners could be selected after each cycle, new teams could be formed, there could be a leaderboard of teams/participants, etc. Sponsors could offer prizes to winners or investors could offer funding.
There are already a couple of websites that aggregate online hackatons (http://challengepost.com, http://www.wehack.it/) but I haven't seen one that operates as a league and most online hackatons are one off things or once a year things.
Curious to hear HN's thoughts...
PS: I added #lfl on Freenode to my auto-join if anyone wants to hang out :)
Pretty much south of seattle, it's going to be hard for dev and entreprenuers alike to start-up.
So I started a small business that I work in with my free time, to help build a foundation for people to learn code, brainstorm ideas, and start businesses. I do free code classes via meetup, and I'm working on getting something weekly in motion, and hackathons.
And since I've started my group has been getting a lot of interest and support from the community and even the county.
I plan to keep at it, until there is a solid foundation for people interested.
I don't know the demographics of your town, but the concept I started might be something you could give a trial at.
And if it doesn't work out, or pick up interest. Then abandon ship and make your success story.
I believe you will find New York more hospitable. Here we have investors, technologists, and an extremely diverse culture with accommodations and activities for a wide range of budgets and tastes. . Foreigners and non-native English speakers here are just the norm, they are pervasive and not treated like second-class citizens. My experience in the rest of the country is not so welcoming, even in the SF Bay area.
I am a Russian American (I speak Russian fluently) and I would be happy to connect and show you around once you are here.
I live in Finland and there is an emerging start-up scene here already. Also there are plenty of older, steady-going companies, that have proven business models, who have start-up mindsets towards new things.
If your plan is to create a thriving project that aims to address a specific business problem, you are going to need a group (even small) of likely minded people. There should not be any "work for food"-ethics attached. No body will work for you for food, but many people are willing to work to create something they believe in.
Why exactly do you want to be in the US? I've lived in Moscow and St. Petersburg for quite some time. It is hard to imagine, that you won't find anyone in those cities with summed population of almost 20 million, who is willing to work with you on your or their ideas.
You can also try contributing to open source projects on github until you find a way to be around good programmers
Technological globalization has created a situation where, excluding time zone differences, we could communicate in a way that is extremely similar to face to face contact.
Speaking from personal experience, a coding bootcamp might be a good opportunity for you, assuming it is cost effective. Through a coding bootcamp you will have the opportunity to network in regards to tech entrepreneurship and software in general, as well as developing a higher skill level, however you may be proficient enough already.
If I were you I would make a table of pros and cons, based on as many factors as I found to be very important, attribute weights with those factors and make a decision based on the results. Or you could flip a coin and see which side you want it to land on in mid air. That will give you a good idea of which one is more favored by your spinal cord at least.
It's a tough question, good luck!
Feel free to give it a go: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/water-cooler-chat/id94476300...
You might find some interesting people on there to talk to, it's still early days and currently only my friends are using it so far, but we're a friendly, interesting bunch of people :)
If I were you I would change location if possible. Generally it's harder to change your environment than to just move to a better one. I recommend the SF Bay Area because it's the most tech friendly, and can recommend some places nearby where you'll have access to the Bay Area but live cheaper if you're not moving here to work for a big company.
Try to become number one or two in Turkey and serve that market really well, e.g. with help pages, guides, related services like moving company or deposit comparisons. Or expand to another niche like Greece.
Growing viral or with SEO (or worse spending marketing money) in english will be 10x harder because there so many more competitors.
I had <meta name='robots' content='noindex,nofollow' /> in my homepage.
I'm using Cloudflare as a CDN for my website for 3 months now. All my traffic (~98%) is from Google and it is consistently increasing every week.
It saves 20% of my bandwidth serving static resources and some of most visited pages.
I don't use SSL, it is not important for my pages.
That being said, for the back-end I've never seen improvements. If CloudFlare detects a server error, it could show a static optimized page which is great for anti-DDoS protection but the recovery on their end was significantly slower (minutes behind). It's an unnecessary layer in the protocol.
What is your domain name?
(1) The startup world is full of creeps and psychos. There are a lot of sociopaths, vapid fast-talking wheeler-dealers, and people who are just flat out bat nuts crazy. There's also been a huge influx of douchebags since tech became (supposedly) a way to get rich quick. I've been burned by this a couple times and have gotten better at judging character as a result, but be warned-- here be dragons.
(2) Credentialism is a lot stronger in startups than most people believe. Stanford degrees seem to count more than traction. In the end I just broke down and added "did not attend Stanford or work for Google" to my AngelList profile. If you care, you're not going to like me anyway.
(3) Everything follows an extreme power law distribution, and it always implies a catch-22. If you don't live in the Bay Area, it's exponentially harder to get funding. If you do live in the Bay Area, you need a substantial exit event to afford a down payment on a modest post-WWII starter house. This also applies to incubators, startups you might join, employees you might recruit, etc.
(4) Trendy not-invented-last-week syndrome abounds on the technology side: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2003/02/the-cadt-model/
(5) Given the quantities of money involved, I'd expect investors to be more rational than they really are. "Raise on no numbers or good numbers" -- that doesn't exactly strike me as rational. No numbers is better than some growth? That's not by any means the worst example either. I once had an investor type tell me with a straight face that he looks for founders with a "prominent jaw line, an alpha male look."
(6) Founding or building something is lonely, thankless, isolating, and a lot longer of a death march than you probably realize... unless of course you are "juiced" in which case you can walk into a VC firm and walk out with millions for a product that doesn't exist. Then you can hire people to build it while you wheel and deal and pimp your ego. The existence of this kind of "juice" can be enormously discouraging to mere mortals. It's enough to make you wonder if this game isn't as rigged as Wall Street. (I don't think it's quite as rigged as Wall Street, but there's definitely a privilege network.)
(7) With all the talk of innovation you hear from people like Peter Thiel, the reality is that the most profitable stuff is usually some kind of equity play on the rapid growth of some trendy thing that isn't technically that interesting. Examples include Facebook, Snapchat, etc. If you want to extend the human life span, develop AI, or otherwise advance the human condition, sign up for a vow of poverty. The only hack around this seems to be to do something a bit more "boring" to make enough money to then do something more visionary. The poster boy for this is Elon Musk. There are also exceptions -- things that can be both profitable and interesting -- but those also tend to be the hardest death marches of all. While you're struggling to create real value, someone else is making millions flipping some kind of social media app of the week.
(8) Mobile is the future this week. Last week it was the web. Next week it'll be the Internet of Things and nobody will ever fund another mobile startup. Desktop is dead even though everyone builds absolutely everything on a desktop. See #4.
(9) Don't let anyone fool you -- tech is sexist as hell and geek culture is misogynistic with a faint whiff of creepy pedophilia and other chthonic horrors. If you don't have a penis, be prepared for subtile hazing and grunt work and possibly drool on your seat cushion. Racism exists too, but it's less stark and omnipresent than the misogyny.
(10) Age-ism is big too, and it contributes a lot to #8 and #4. A big reason for this is that all the incubator and accelerator programs are geared toward unmarried childless recent college grads who can move on a whim, room with six other people, and special enzymes that can derive a full spectrum of nutrients from ramen and energy drinks.
I could keep going.
Yet I keep coming back for more. Thank you master may I have another?
When working on sales, I think engineers underestimate how truly difficult it is for someone to sign-up, or take their wallet out to pay for a service. The assumption of creating a great product isn't enough for success.
Firstly, please spell his name correctly. It's Aaron Swartz. That respects him and makes sure that your audience isn't distracted by that tiny detail and can focus on your message.
Secondly, the petition was too narrow and targeted the individual prosecutor for that case. Even if she was removed, it wouldn't prevent the same sort of thing happening again.
The larger issue (and one closer to the point) is that the law is broken.
- There are overlapping laws such that Swartz was charged with several distinct offences for what was fundamentally a single (though repeated) action.
- Maximum sentences for such offences (crimes against property, in particular those that use technology, even crimes that are on the face of it relatively victimless) are grossly overstated when compared to violent crimes.
- Prosecutors are permitted to present the charges in a way that maximizes the sentencing, by adding them consecutively.
- All of the above points join together to maximize the number of cases where the defendant pleads guilty to avoid a court case, so there is a ridiculously small number of such cases that go to trial (and a correspondingly vast majority of cases of which the defendant is, as a result, convicted), even where the defendant is actually innocent of some or all charges, or when it is likely that a trial could result in a not guilty verdict.
No reasonable person could say Swartz deserved 35 years in prison for what he is alleged to have done. The legal system that enabled Ortiz to present the charges as she did is much bigger than any prosecutorial overreach she is accused of in that petition. Let's not make it about one prosecutor. Let's make it about all of them.
What are some of the causes of the problem?
What are some of the effects of the problem?
If the problem disappeared today, what side-effects would it have on the rest of the world?
What, given all of the answers to these questions, would be a solution that solves the commonly agreed upon problem (usually by solving the causes for said problem rather than the problem itself) with minimal negative side-effects?
"Should we code something? Organize a rally in the major cities? Write code to make it easy to start rallies? What're some good ideas to show our discontent?"
No, those are actions. What good is an action without a solution in mind? Plan then act. Don't act without a plan.
If there aren't any representatives that you support, run for office. Dedicate your life to making these changes. Convince others that these are important issues, convince them to donate to your campaign and to vote for you.
The problem is, this is a hard road to take. And, truth be told, people don't really care enough to do the actual, hard work. They'd prefer to retweet some quote, maybe change their facebook profile picture for a week, if they're really serious about something. But ultimately, that doesn't get people elected, it doesn't put someone in office working to make the change. Best-case scenario, it gets some lip service from a 4-term representative. How much do you care? Do you care enough to actually get out there and actually push for change? Or do you just want to sit on the Internet and complain, and do a little comfortable work that ultimately sits in a GitHub account and rots?
There isn't an easy solution. It's going to take a lot of work to convince people to collectively vote for change in this area. This is why the government is set up the way it is. Every 6 years, it's possible to replace essentially 2/3's of the government (Executive & Representative).
Unfortunately, I imagine that most people truly don't care about this "prosecutorial abuse". He knowingly broke rules & laws, and the government went after him. He had an opportunity to take a plea deal and chose to kill himself instead. Sad? Absolutely. But you'll have a hard time getting enough people motivated enough to vote accordingly. There are other issues that people care more passionately about: budgets, social issues, foreign policy, economic issues, etc. That's why I said at the beginning to start locally, because that's probably your best bet on this particular issue.
If that's the case, why not launch a petition to, e.g. require an investigation when somebody under investigation commits suicide? (not an idea I've thought through, btw, but my point is there's ways to address this within the terms)
He is also an idiot for killing himself. If he believed what he was doing was right he should have been willing to face the consequences. To me, killing himself is an admission that what he did was wrong and stupid.
Should he have been thrown in jail for 7 years? Well; he would have had more years alive after he got out then he does now.
Edit: Fuck Swartz. More clear?
Then, our lead designer walked out. There was a shortage of designers. I stood up and said "Hey, I know photoshop and I've got a good eye! If one of the designer give me a style guide, I'd be able to design this website!".
I did a very basic wireframe for a website, and ended up designing it all. This was FUN. I have not done any other design work since then. But it was enough to open my eyes.
What I hated wasn't the workload. It wasn't the projects. It wasn't the open office. It wasn't my coworkers.
I hated how monotone my work had become. Simply doing something new was like hitting the reset button. Since then, I try to go on the edge of my skillset. We need a video for the office party? ... well, I've done some video editing when I was younger... and my phone has a nice HD camera! Sure, I'm a programmer. I'm not a master at video editing... But who cares?
My biggest skill isn't how I can make awesome loops and how quickly I can connect to a database. My biggest skill is how I can take a challenge, research how to do it, and then do my best to do it perfectly.
Branson said it, but I hadn't understood it until this point. "If somebody offers you an amazing opportunity but you are not sure you can do it, say yes then learn how to do it later!"
We humans aren't robots. You can't simply put us in front of a game and expect us to play it for the rest of our lives. We need bonus stages. Boss fights. Hell, we need to play a whole different game from time to time!
Embrace the suck! So much of work-life is a mental game. Can you learn to lean into it, take control, and shake off the lethargy of a controlled environment?
Recommend reading Mark Divine, unusually good practical advice> http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17465530-the-way-of-seal
I don't take for granted what I have, I know it can easily go away at anytime, and that's why I fight to stay relevant and get better at my craft. I might not be able to do it at work but I have my own free time to learn all the new technologies, docker, ansible, aws , etc.
You need to find something else outside of work to make you happy, I think you have everything to make any man happy.
a good wifea kid on the waya good paying jobhealthyou live in a great country and you have freedom.
if you are not happy wait until you lose any of the above.
While I'm not in your position, I fear that I will one day end up in a situation where I'm working on something that I don't care at all about and regardless of what the job gives back in terms of money/prestige/experience, I won't be able to 'unsee' the fact that I'll be wasting my life for the benefit of a third party.
As of now the only thing that really keeps me motivated is a combination of a challenging problem (not being 100% sure to be able to solve it elegantly) and working on something that I care about personally. Unfortunately it seems to me that this kind of combination is most likely found in the startup world, which means you also have to deal with its generally awful culture.
Maybe you too can find a way to keep motivated, although having a family surely reduces your possibilities. A side project maybe?
If you can't change your working situation then you must find a way to 'recharge your batteries' outside of work and since you have a kid on the way you might also want to consider something that you can share with him/her in the future.
Try and make it clear to colleagues you won't be contactable, and hold yourself accountable to this (no checking tools, email etc.)
Here are just a few notes that come to mind, based on what I've extracted from your comment. They are designed to try to get you to ask yourself, "What is the root cause of my lack of motivation?" They may or may not be on point or specifically applicable, but again, take them as potential "candidate questions", if you will, to get you thinking toward solving the problem.
1. You have a child on the way. As a parent myself, that's an absolute game-changer, and you could be subtly stressed about this. Becoming a parent affects different people in different ways. It's possible that you are mentally focusing more on that upcoming area of your life, and so the motivation to stay connected at work is subtly fading.
2. In conjunction with #1, you mentioned that you live in a high-cost city. That, coupled with the fact that you are going to become a parent, could be causing stress. You may feel that there isn't enough money, and this could be subtly impacting your motivation.
3. I take it that you are a software engineer that worked up through the ranks and are now leading a project. Is it possible that you miss being a developer? That is, are the stresses of managing the project, "talking to mangers and product people" pulling you away from your love of the code, such that it's absolutely draining your motivation?
4. Alternatively, if you're in a "mixed role", where you both code and manage, maybe you are suffering from the fact that all of the product meetings and discussions are killing your productivity, so your backlog just keeps getting larger and larger. If so, that of course can be a deep cause of stress, despite having full control of your schedule, and having all other aspects of your position be copacetic.
5. Are you just flat-out burned-out? Do you need a vacation? It could be that you need to step away and recharge.
6. Is it possible that you have become unmotivated because of your comparisons to your colleagues who have went on to become millionaires? Admittedly, this is of course a very difficult comparison, but if this is affecting you, you will need to work at letting it go. This will poison your Will. There is no other way except to keep fighting, and to keep working on what you define to be important for you.
7. Are you taking time out to exercise and eat right? I'm talking about lifting heavy weights, cardio, yoga, etc. In my experience, this is vital to reconditioning the mind, revitalizing the soul and improving your outlook.
8. Finally, do you still love what you do? This is an important, but potentially tough question to ask yourself in an honest way. That is, if none of the above are factors, it could be that you need a change of season in your life. I've written about this before, but in my personal experience, motivation is secondary (but closely related) to passion.
Generally, when one has an issue with motivation, then he or she may not have discovered his or her true passion in life.
You have to find your passion.
If you do not find it, then it is likely that you will never be truly motivated.
However, once you have found your passion, then you will find that it is literally game on in your life. You will wake up earlier, because you have engaged passion in your life, which will bring motivation to your actions. You will be bringing the thunder. You will be firing on all 12 cylinders. You will not want to sleep more than is necessary, because you will know from deep within you, that you want to bring what is inside of you to others, and to the world.
1. "What am I truly passionate about?"
2. "How can I deliver what I am passionate about to others?"
Answer these questions, back the answers up with action, and you will see motivation unfold in your life.
I wish you every success.
What does the OS or network config matter if it's "airgapped"?
What do you consider an "airgapped machine"?
Although I think your idea of who goes to these bootcamps is pretty off. These aren't people who "had never opened a text editor in their lives." Some of them are people who were working in science, doing research and matlab programming, and wanted to make a career switch. Others are people who maybe majored in math, or perhaps a completely non-technical major but went to a bunch of hackathons or took some intro programming classes for fun, and then when they realized they loved tech it was to late for them to make the switch in college.
Top programs like the Flatiron school are NOT a walk in the park. They are intensive, 60-80 hour a week programs with a very low acceptance rate.
Of the dozen plus people I know who have gone through one, I can't think of a single person who had never programmed before entering into one of these bootcamps (not that it is not possible!).
"looking around, there don't seem to be many jobs for entry-level Rails or iOS developers. If you look around on job boards, there simply is not much competition for entry-level talent."
What? I get emails every other day from recruiters hiring for their social mobile ruby on rails web app. The tech shortage is present more than ever in every level of the industry.
I was hiring for a telehealth startup based in NYC and got some referrals to some recent General Assembly grads. I bit and went ahead and scheduled some interviews. It was a total joke, honestly. The graduates glossed over the entry-level interview questions with a lot of handwaving (I would ask them things like "How would you do x given y?") and quoted rates upwards of $100/hr even though their total experience was the 10 week course @ GA campus.
I was so turned off by that experience that I just never even considered hiring from a 'hacker bootcamp' again. I'll echo what others have been saying as well: You can hire them, and maybe they'll perform for a while - but the amount of time you'll need to spend to get them up to speed on CS basics will more than likely not be worth the investment. You're better off hiring a recent college grad whose only experience is working with Java - at least they have the fundamentals and can build on top of them instead of backtracking.
I work at Conde Nast. I helped work with a bootcamp program to create a "internship" program for new graduates. We took eight students after attending a recruiting event and invited them to work on a cycling program. From the eight, we hired four.
Going into the hiring process, I was betting on the students rate of learning. We knew they didnt have the domain experience. We were hiring out of a RoR bootcamp, so their knowledge was also going to be irrelevant. Knowing they spent 10 weeks learning at a rapid pace, I believed we could extend that to our own code base.
Our experience was good. Because our company was in a unique hiring period, it made sense. We wouldnt do it again.
I'm willing to give anyone a try, and so I interviewed a lot of them over the phone, and gave nearly all of them the coding exercise. Which they almost universally failed to complete.
Still, I wound up hiring one as very junior. And that's exactly what she is. I don't have to hold her hand through the really really basic stuff, and she needs me to get her through sticking points pretty regularly, but overall she contributes to the team.
$100k, though, I really don't see it happening. And she's the exception - she finished the coding exercise.
Which means a lot to me. The coding exercise we use isn't particularly hard, but it requires you to do a bunch of separate things - and it thus requires some ability to go on google/stack overflow/etc and figure out something you didn't already know. Which is what I want most in a junior dev - a way to move forward when you get stuck.
> Most of the job growth appears to be in academic stuff like AI and data science
This is incorrect -- web jobs are growing quickly.
> there are companies hiring people at $100k who, twelve weeks ago, had never opened a text editor in their lives.
This is rare, but it does happen. The more common case is the student that coded on the side for a year or two and then jumped in full-time to a school like mine.
> And if it's really possible to build a rails developer from scratch in 10 weeks, why not just just do it in-house through an internship program?
Running an educational program is hard. You might as well ask me "If your grads are really worth $100k a year, why not hire them all and make software?" That's, like, a whole different company.
> And why do most companies still ask for "at least a Bachelors in CS" for web and mobile development positions?
We tell our students, "This means 'you have to know how to code', so that random non-coders don't apply." As a former engineering manager, this was true in practice. I didn't care if an applicant had a BS or not, as long as they could code.
>But if the stats that these bootcamps throw out are true, there are companies hiring people at $100k who, twelve weeks ago, had never opened a text editor in their lives.
This is a very extreme case. As part of the admissions process for most great schools, people who have never opened a text editor are shown tutorials, books, and videos to prepare for the admissions challenge. They wouldnt be accepted until they can solve basic programming challenges. Example: (mks.io/ac1, mks.io/ac2)
There are some schools who admit people who have never opened a text editor in their lives. Flatiron School, MakerSquare, Hack Reactor and a few others are not those. IMHO, programs who admit very beginner students like those should be 6 mo - 1 year long.
> The run-of-the-mill web and mobile developer positions all demand at least some level of experience (generally 2-6 years)
Almost all of our graduates are hired for positions that advertised needing 2-4 years of experience.
> And if it's really possible to build a rails developer from scratch in 10 weeks, why not just just do it in-house through an internship program and avoid paying commission to these schools?
Properly vetting who would be a good student is hard (admissions), properly teaching people is hard, and creating a proper learning environment is also very hard (Most education institutions fail at one or more of the above). All of the above are certainly not core competencies of software companies, nor do they need to be.
First off, I think it varies quite widely on the school. We talked to people from General Assembly and the quality varied A LOT. There were some people who I would have said were capable of being a junior developer and some who I would say are hardly employable. None of them were exceptional programmers though. Everyone we talked to had never built anything prior to GA and were very clearly not what I would think of if I had to imagine an (ideal) programmer.
We did end up hiring a programmer from a program called App Academy and this program seemed way more legitimate. Their staff had people contributing to the linux kernel and git, which gave us a lot more confidence. Similarly, with some of the smaller programs that we interviewed with we saw an increase in quality. The largest correlation we saw though, was that programs that were compensated based on your compensation produced much better people. GA is just making money whether you suck or not. AppAcademy gets paid if you get paid. If you make 10% more, so do they. I think that's extremely evident in the students they send out into the world.
The combination of his salary and equity isn't too far below $100,000, but he's also quite exceptional. He had gone to Princeton, did great in school, had a perfect score on the SAT's, knew about Public Health, etc.
The average starting salary of $100,000 sounds like BS.Hire from smaller programs that get a commission - not tuition.Just like normal universities, students can vary in quality regardless of their "pedigree."
Judge for yourself.
What was great about Flatiron:- Really good faculty that cared not just about tech, but about teaching- Really good curriculum that fosters basic CS skills and an 'engineering mindset' instead of just 'learning Rails'- Fosters an attitude that encourages learning for learning's sake- Great support through the job placement system.
What was not so great:- You really can't come in with 0 experience and come out a competent developer. Most of the people in the program had at least some prior familiarity with coding, even if the experience was shallow.- Instruction focuses on the students at the middle of the individual semester's bell curve. Students with no experience (or lacking basic computer skills) can get left behind, students with way more experience (or more aptitude) can get bored.- To me, the average salary touted by the school is inflated. Most people seem to have landed in jobs that pay around 50-60k initially, although many people are able to move to higher paying positions quickly.
I haven't personally been through the GA bootcamp, but I know two people who have and have worked/interviewed with others that have. GA seems to not really give a shit about actually educating people or getting them jobs, just about making sure they pay tuition. There is little to no job counseling, instructors are of (at best) mixed quality, and the curriculum is extremely confused.
Like anything else that you're going to spend 12k on, do your research before you commit. Some schools are great, some are not, and what you get out of it always depends on what you put into it. Look for one (like flatiron) with great job placement, and connections to companies.
Additionally, the idea that 'most companies' require a CS degree for web devs is just not true. Most job postings that are out in the wild might ask for that, but most companies hire new devs through job placement services, or connections that can vouch for the skills of non-degreed developers, rather than through cattle call services like Linkedin, Craigslist, etc.
I just don't mention the boot camp, unless explicitly asked. The "Rails dev in 12 weeks" pitch understandably sounds like a scam at first glance. Fortunately it isn't, and I'm happily employed.
As others have mentioned, almost no one in our cohort came in without prior programming experience. They seemed to be screening for types who:
* Had prior programming experience
* Did not major in CS in college, if they went to college
* Performed well in technical interviews
Teaching is very hands off; per day, you're given a partner, a project, and limited guidance from an available TA/instructor. I rarely talked with our main instructor. Workweeks were expected to be around 90-100 hours.
I graduated a while ago, so this information may not be current. I also can't speak to graduates of other schools. At the time, it seemed like a good way to grab otherwise smart people who missed out on CS in college, and give them the opportunity to retrain.
But all in all, not a bad place to spend a couple of years when you're inexperienced! Just gotta learn when to move on and not get distracted by the free pizza and all that stupid shit.
We also treat the internship as a real internship, not a contract-to-hire. We expect to be teaching them.
As others have said here in one way or another. The good ones are ones who were coding anyway and just needed some help leveling / focusing their skills. The ones who didn't have a clue about programming when they started, don't come out much better IMNSHO.
To give you an idea about what kind of juniority is attractive to a shop like ours: We run our own in-house internship program which takes 9 months. It requires CS degree plus some previous experience (private pet projects are OK) to enter.
The intern is paid living expenses and has vacation like other employees. The goal of the program is to hire the intern as a permanent junior developer after 9 months. Junior starting salary is also a far cry below 100K USD, but then again we don't have to live in San Francisco.
We came back to their next graduation, and that batch of candidates was even worse. Next time, we didn't come back, but we did interview some folks over Google hangout. No one made to the next level of interviews. We no longer participate as a hiring partner with the bootcamp.
Now, that's a sample size of 1 (well, sampled it 3 times, but still only one camp), but the experience was about what I would have expected. Most of the bootcampers were 1) wanting to make more money and heard that coding pays well, or 2) out of work and trying to learn new skills to land a job, or 3) switching careers. About 95% of the folks we talked to fell into the never-seen-code-in-my-life-till-this-camp group. And it showed. The camp touted the campers as junior developers, and they were not remotely developers, let alone junior. They were people who now knew what coding looked like. That was about it.
Worse, we got some initial false positives because one of the questions I asked was the very simple but classic fizzbuzz test. It turned out that the day before the hiring day, the camp covered that test, as well as others, that get used in interviews. Not cool.
Overall, I'm not yet convinced of the value of such camps, at least those that say they can take someone with 0% coding experience and turn them into a junior dev in 9 - 12 weeks. I don't think so. Maybe if they've already graduated with a technical degree, or minored in CS, but not for someone who's worked for 15 years as a legal secretary, etc.
I recently interviewed a ton of boot campers and the skill level varies greatly. I would have hired a few of them for junior level roles, but we were really looking for more experienced people. IF you are considering boot camps is try to get in early so you have access to the best people there. My guess is that the best get snapped up fast.
To answer the original question - companies in my area are unlikely to hire from a Bootcamp and I think this may be a trend in smaller hiring markets.
I've had some experience with bootcamp grads over the past couple years, as they have applied to jobs I had posted (I recruit engineers). Based on my experience, the bootcamps seem to do a good job of building confidence in their grads, although that might be a trait of people who go to bootcamps (those confident that they can change careers in 10 weeks).
I believe there was also a trend of some bootcamps to hire their own grads in some capacity, which could skew the numbers a bit.
Like many of the other commenters here, I'm also a co-founder of a trade school (Code Fellows, we're 2 years old) that offers immersive programs for web and mobile developers. We have 13 different offerings to accommodate developers with varying skill levels and interests. Our flagship program teaches students who have on average ~2yrs of experience writing code professionally, and our hiring partners offer them >$75k/yr in Seattle (on average, though the spread is interesting...detailed stats here --> https://www.codefellows.org/alumni-stats)
I've talked with hundreds of hiring managers about this topic, and - to answer your last question - the reason why they want CS degrees is because web/mobile developers often need to design systems and solve complex computational problems (not to mention the need to build well-tested, scalable products). There really is no shortcut to learning the foundations of CS necessary to perform well at these tasks.
Thus, to piggyback off of what others have said here, many students who go through these intensive programs often have CS backgrounds and are looking for intense "polish" to get up to speed on recent industry tools and practices.
Less than a month out of the school I was offered a job paying $55,000 a year salary at a large insurance company.
They primarily use Java and Groovy. The bootcamp taught Ruby on Rails. Maybe I got lucky, but I've found that the ability to code is slightly less important than one's ability to speak about programming/code in general.
If you can read and understand documentation, understand fundamental concepts like OO or functional paradigm, and understand what a stack is, a closure, recursion, the difference between an integer and a float, or a character and a string, methods/functions, etcetera, you are more or less hireable.
Basically you have to understand how a computer works, and the fundamental concepts in programming, as well as how to apply them.
However, you do need to have some sort of experience to put on a resume. For instance, if you go to a coding bootcamp you should be able to develop a simple REST API which sends a blob of json from a DB to a URL. That's a relatively complex task, but with a tool set like Ruby on Rails can be done in < week.
Essentially what I am doing at my job is more complex list processing and analysis. Just taking a bunch of data from a db, performing some operations to it, and spitting it back out. Basic stuff.
These are my opinions, and not necessarily those of the company.
Hiring junior engineers is always risky. It's a bet against several factors that are nearly impossible to be certain about in any hiring situation, but there are several up-sides to the candidates that we've seen.
1) These are motivated people. The decision to drop everything and code 12 hours, 6 days per week, doesn't happen lightly. Contrast this to some college graduates who drifted toward a CS major.
2) These are not first-job people. Most are switching careers, but have already ironed out some important pieces of their adult life. You are less likely to encounter over-partying, failures to set an alarm, or other maturity problems that impact work or work/life balance. The end result is a more reliable worker.
3) They have a secondary competency related to their former life. Sometimes you can leverage this in their work. It's handy to have an ex-legal clerk doing TOS compliance or a sales guy helping on the ad system.
4) This tends to be a more diverse pool. The factors that still screw with women and other under-represented groups entering CS and related majors aren't as present here. If you've got a Silicon Valley "White Boys Club" monoculture holding you back, train them to fairly evaluate people not exactly like themselves and give it a try.
There can be downsides, of course. Of note:
1) These are not computer scientists. They know one or two toolkits and little or no theory. This can be mitigated by the maturity and motivation mentioned above.
2) It's up to you to effectively mentor junior employees. If you don't have a few people on staff that have the humility and patience to answer questions of junior folks, you're doubly hosed because of the lack of knowledge depth. But that's your fault, not theirs.
3) If you don't have some overlap between the toolkit they just learned and the work you're going to give them, there will be some major frustration. Don't hire a person out of a Rails bootcamp to write Java.
In the end I think this is a pretty decent, if imperfect, way to add quality junior employees.
Here is my reasoning:
* 2 years of college is just to finish core curriculum/elective stuff (history, foreign language, writing, philosophy, etc)
* 2 years of college is used to finish computer science major
* Each year, students study for 40 weeks. So in total he studies for 80 weeks.
* Each week, he takes an avg around 3.5 courses a week.
* Each course takes him an avg 4 hours a course (remember college kids waste a lot of time...a lot of time).
Total= 2 years * 40 weeks/year * 3.5 courses/week *4 hrs/course = 1120 hours
Conclusion: If you put in bootcamp hours, which is 80-100 hours a week, it's only 11-14 weeks. That's the avg length of a bootcamp. Bootcamp = college degree in CS (from a mediocre program) minus the core curriculum and minus the 2-3 internships you would do in college.
Many people here are saying that bootcamp alums aren't as good as college grads. I don't have enough data, but I would agree with that statement. While bootcamp grads aren't as good as CS grads, I wouldn't say the bootcamp education is worse than a poor/mediocre CS program, because of some unaccounted for variables:
1) Internships are still vitally important! 2-3 internships is basically a full year of programming on a very diverse set of problems!
2) Selection bias: Better programmers tend to start earlier in their career, hence they don't have to go to bootcamps.
3) Confidence issues: It takes years for people to be comfortable with engineering. I would not be surprised if people don't have confidence issues going into interviews + work after a 12 week bootcamp.
I pointed out that, not only is my degree not-in CS, but I would probably be dissuaded from applying to a job that required one. He said "don't worry - it doesn't mean anything, they just all say that."
2 had 2-3 years experience post boot camp. They are excellent mid-senior devs. They are from Flatiron School.
We have hired 3 juniors straight out of camp. All are on boarding at or exceeding our expectations. 2 are from App Academy, one is from GA.
EDIT: I'm pretty certain our JRs don't make 100k.
I graduated from the Flatiron School at the end of April 2014. 6 weeks past graduation, I had 3 job offers (1 apprenticeship and 2 full offers) and accepted an offer for $75k - which, by the way, is a very normal salary for a Flatiron School grad (http://www.quora.com/How-successful-are-code-bootcamps-like-...). Now, 6 months after starting work, I think anyone on my team would say I'm more than pulling my own weight. I've already been involved with interviewing candidates and training new hires.
I had some experience with coding pre-Flatiron, but it was relatively minimal (AP computer science - so effectively 1 3-credit college course).
A great developer is made of 4 parts: 1. Inherent talent, 2. Grit and determination, 3. Effort, 4. Experience. You can always boost someone's experience by giving them time to keep learning and helping them along the way.
In terms of recruitment, I can't speak for other schools, but Flatiron grads tend to be placed by networking, not job boards. It's easier for a fresh developer to make a contact and open up a job than it is to fight with others for an already-open spot.
I can't speak for other programs, but due to the rather steep admissions requirements, there's not a single student who arrives on their first day of Hack Reactor without having invested many, many hours into learning and coding. This included becoming proficient (at least to a functional novice level) with Git. I, myself, had a couple of years professional experience - but that experience was at a small eComm company in a small town, utilizing technology lightyears away from the bleeding edge. I went to Hack Reactor because I wanted to make a real go of my career. I don't have a CS degree, but HR got us up to speed on CS fundamentals to the point where I didn't encounter problems when I went to tech interviews.
One of the benefits that you are getting from a bootcamp is the immersive opportunity to build practical skills building apps under the mentorship of experienced devs. This one key point is something that you won't get from Coursera, Udemy, or any other similar course platform. You can't get code review from a book, nor can you get advice about best practices related to the project on which you're working, from a MOOC-style course.
Here at Lighthouse, we bring in dozens of intermediate and senior devs to participate as TA's, sharing their knowledge, skills, and experience with our students. That, time and again, is one of the key points that our alumni highlight as one of the greatest values they got out of the course, above and beyond the practical knowledge in the curriculum.
Overall, you will get a better developer out of a bootcamp than you will get from someone who has endeavoured to build the same skills on their own, especially in that same amount of time. The ability to work with experienced devs and get that level of mentorship will always produce a better developer than someone trying to achieve the same level of wisdom and skill independently.
I do not anticipate starting at $100k - maybe half that if I'm lucky.
The caveat is you have to be very selective in interviewing. Hand out small take-home test projects, and look for guys that not only do a good job, but go above and beyond. Most of the tech bootcamps guys are mediocre, but there's always a few standouts.
That said, after attending a dozen or more of these hiring events I must admit that the quality is abysmally low. Two of my previous employers decided to hire our entry-level engineers from these "bootcamps" and 6 months later all of them had been fired for poor performance, even after weeks of mentorship and coaching. In my experience the amount of handholding was far greater than the work they could do on their own. I can recall helping people with basic command line navigation, simple git commands, and even things like running rspec. Trivial tasks that should form the foundation of your work as a software engineer required almost constant support.
My personal take is that these schools are great in that they encourage people to pursue engineering but I fear that just like other trade schools (e.g. ITT), it's offer a promise of a big paying job without adequately preparing people for the career ahead.
>If you look around on job boards, there simply is not much competition for entry-level talent.Do not rely on job boards for indication of what's out there. Out of the dozens of NSS grads who have been hired, the vast majority found their opportunities through networking or from companies that have relationships with the school and reach out directly for their junior position needs. The rapid establishment of my network was one of the unexpected, but most beneficial, results of attending NSS.
>Average starting salaries of 100k or moreThat seems like a stretch, at least anywhere outside of the west coast. Starting salaries around here have been about half of that, but the opportunity to get to six figures within a few years is certainly there.
Not really knowing App Academy's name because I was outside the area, I only read reviews that said it was a good program, so I applied. Bootcamps are only emerging in Los Angeles at the moment with General Assembly being the only one there last time I did reaearch.
I am now working as a backend Engineer in SF starting at over 100k.
I definitely believe it is realistic to get a programming job without a degree in computer science or a related field.
Here's why:Computer science degrees (as a whole) have been greatly devalued recently. I've talked to dozens of employers who are frustrated with "CS grads" who know nothing but archaic languages and have no practical, modern coding experience. Most assuredly YMMV, but universities are doing a really poor job of keeping their curriculum modern and employable. Having a CS degree doesn't make you an engineer any more than studying Latin makes you a fluent francophone. Employers are much more interested in competency and performance than they are with credentials and grades. With software engineering, it's all about what you can build. Not only that, but a college degree isn't a great measurement of talent or skill.
If you can demonstrate competency or skill proficiently in an area that is in high demand for employers, you will be offered a job.
None of my students have gotten jobs out of my short-term, part time (6 hours a week) course yet. Most of my students were already employed and looking to find out more about development, or starting their own business. That's why they did a less intensive course. A couple, both with jobs already, are going to start looking soon though, they tell me. I'm excited to see what they come up with :)
However, I know that from the immersive course (UX Design Immersive and Web Design Immersive) which are all full time, many students get jobs. One recently at a company I used to work at, and in fact, my Teaching Instructors were both ex-GA students one of whom had gone on to get a job and then start freelancing.
I think the key is to keep a balance of experience within the team so there is mentorship available and to have clear expectations on both sides on ability, how fast one might learn, and the relationship to that and salary. Roughly speaking, if a junior engineer is willing to start at 60% the salary of an experienced engineer but grow by 10-20% a year, it works.
However in the end I was overruled by others unfamiliar with the specific technology and relying only on raw years of experience numbers.
I think he accepted a different offer and relocated--unfortunately, another case of management not listening to the front-line troops (but not so for him, as he's better off elsewhere).
(And as another poster noted, I believe he was one of the few in the program who was fairly new to development.)
Best ways of learning have been: 1.the study groups done almost twice per month during 3 months after that RailsGirls event, 2. Learn how to get answers in StackOverflow, 3. Ask around to devs in the internet and even my colleagues (I do marketing in a software company).
I don't know how good are these bootcamps, and I'm not sure if all the comments here included are real or just bootcamps trying to defend their business. I'm pretty sure there are good teachers out there, but dont know necessarily if they are in bootcamps. Seeing that many of these bootcamps either they implied to commit full-time, either they were USA-based, either their curriculums were super-easy, I tried to look for specific help in places like Codementor (https://www.codementor.io/r/5HXQM64N3R referral link!), much flexible and I don't feel 'scammed' paying for really basic stuff that you can learn with time + internet.
In http://petithacks.com/posts/how-i-learned-to-build-a-rails-a... I gave more explanations about my learning.
The bootcamp was designed by the company to bring software developers from entry-level to the equivalent of 3-5 years of industry experience within 12 weeks with the goal of turning graduates into software development consultants.
I went through the first run of the program in 2013 and have been a consultant since I graduated. When I arrived at my first client, although I was lacking in domain knowledge, I was able to run circles around developers that had less than 3 years of experience. I was basically at the same technical level as the developers that had been at the client for 3-6 years. Within 6 months, I had guided the client's executive team on how to effectively target mobile devices as well as leading them to build their first responsive web application, which was built for one of the nation's largest retailers. I also now have a bill rate of someone with about 5 years of experience.
Bootcamps can be produce incredible results if they are done well, but ultimately it comes down to having the right people go through the camps and having the right people teach them. The participants need to be inquisitive, hard-working, and quick-learners, and the teachers need to be passionate about their craft and domain experts.
$100 (65k) is very unrealistic for a junior dev in London. I was hired at 35k, which is pretty good for a junior.
Caveat: as part of a maths degree (and as a hobby) I'd done a good few chunks of (self-taught) programming, so was a long way from "never opened a text editor".
Nobody got a 100K job offer, I think. All of them are productive junior people, who will probably go on to have good careers in the field.
But simply completing the program isn't a guarantee of suitability or even competence -- it's just an indicator that they are willing to spend significant effort learning.
We'd probably do it again at some point but our engineering team is not big enough to absorb too many junior devs and train these. GA helped in building a foundation, we wouldn't have had the resources to do this training on our own.
And no, we were not paying 100k to people right out of the program.
There are quite a few assumptions being made in messages on here. I think thats partially because coding bootcamps are very different from one another. For instance, the students we have at Bitmaker Labs typically have little-to-no experience coding, whereas shawndrost of Hack Reactor points out that many of their students have coded on the side for a year or two. I cant speak to how everyone in this industry recruits, but I can share what Ive seen in my experience with Bitmaker Labs over the past two years:
- The number of open web development positions is exceptionally high and the barriers to entry (i.e. prerequisite diplomas, degrees, etc.) are very low in many cases.
Several people have already touched on this point. Ultimately, a students abilities are more important than their credentials. So when you have an industry with a huge number of open positions, and students with practical knowledge and a thirst for learning, its no wonder placement rates are so high at many bootcamps. For us, over 90% of our students find industry work within three months of completing the course. Bootcamps also do a lot of work to build relationships with companies that are open to hiring junior developers and tailoring their programs to fit employers needs. This can help open doors that are otherwise very hard to find when you are learning on your own.
- The job openings are for multiple types of programming languages, but the people hired into these positions do not always have experience with those languages. Startups and larger companies are looking for a great cultural fit in combination with decent coding skills.
As I was saying above, many jobs that we are able to find for students are not posted online. Beyond simply opening doors, we work hard with our students to build networking skills and an understanding of the job market so that they also how to create job openings for themselves. Many companies are focused on finding someone they will want to be around long-term employees who can integrate well into a fast-paced culture and who will be able to adapt to a changing tech stack. I think this is one big reason companies are willing to hire developers with a lower skill level or limited experience. Bootcamp students are really hungry to keep learning, a bootcamp is just the beginning of their coding career.
Back during the .com boom days of the late 90's if you could spell the word computer you could get a job making over 60K+ a year as a "programmer". Some of what is happening today is beginning to remind me of that. History shows us that the market will correct itself. It's just a matter of when.
We treat our QA department as kind of a software engineering farm team. In fact, I don't know the last time we hired an entry-level SE directly. So maybe our QA engineers are what other places might consider a "junior SE".
Also, my girlfriend teaches at Zipfian Academy (http://www.zipfianacademy.com/), a data science bootcamp, and so far they legitimately have a 100% placement rate. I'm sure they won't keep that up forever, but they do a great job preparing their students. Theirs is a little different, however, as they expect some prior programming and a fair amount of math, so it's fairly difficult to get into.
YES - we have hired out of Flatiron school. A total newbie who goes through the program can't come out as a full-fledged developer, but we have brought them in as QA/Automation engineers and then promoted to developer after 9-12 months.
It seems like you're confusing listed job requirements with actual hiring practices. They don't have that much to do with each other. I don't think every graduate of a developer bootcamp is necessarily qualified to go right into a full engineering role, but more than enough are to make it worth it to employers.
do you see people with CS degrees, from 10+ years ago, going to bootcamps to learn new skills?
I'm in that situation and mostly worked in network, sysadmin & security and also got an LIS so I'm quite removed from the front-end/back-end relationship on a practical level and would like to start some projects and be able to use things like node.js to solve common/daily issues quickly.
Your thoughts?(I'm probably just going to find some times to read up and exercise but was curious about other's thoughts?)
Also, has anyone from Canada tried any good school here?(From Montreal here, but interested about other big cities...)
He was already a great programmer, but he took a DevelopMentor Guerrilla .NET class and made contacts there that put him on a contract for Alyeska.
I doubt if he was a mediocre guy they would have noticed him, but he absorbed and mastered the material and got noticed. shrug It happens.
shameless plug: we're hiring in SF for ruby/scala/angular, email me if interested.
I had always been interested in computers and the web, but never made the leap to building something with substance. It's really hard to figure out how all the moving parts of web development work together if you're on the outside looking in. I would read books, follow tutorials, ask friends to teach me, but I would always get stuck on something stupid like installing Postgres. The most important thing I learned at DevBootcamp was how to figure that shit out by myself without wasting time spinning my wheels in frustration.
The numbers that the schools boast about post bootcamp success are really inflated. Very few people who I graduated with found 100k jobs right out the gate. Most settled for 60-80k range, and it took a few months of looking (not bad though!). I'm currently in my second engineering job working on a Java stack. A job in a language and framework that DevBootcamp did not teach.
I think a lot of people don't understand that most of these programs are highly selective and fucking BRUTAL... I was at school grinding away most nights till 1 in the morning. Not only are they challenging in technical sense, but emotionally intense. Being stuck in a room with 30 really smart people who are sleep deprived and being forced to do yoga after a marathon coding session is not easy. I saw people cry on numerous occasions.
Getting a job is hard because of the assumptions people have about these programs. Everyone I went though the program with (and finished) might not have had a CS degree, but they ENJOYED PROGRAMING . Something I can't say about everyone I work with. I went though many interviews where I could tell the person I was white-boarding with wasn't going to give me a shot. I remember being in a final round technical interview and was asked a standard algo question. After answering the problem the person interviewing me asked me how I got to the solution... I had been asked it a million times before and googled the answer after the first time it stumped me in an interview. He did not like my answer.
Good programers are confident and enthusiastic.
Having a CS degree and a math background does not make you good at your job or a great engineer. It's probably a requirement to work on some of the really hard stuff. Google X/Palantir stuff...
I think most of the people coming out of these camps are dangerous enough to make an impact anywhere they go. Given a shot and a little finishing polish they will become great engineers.
Its very depressing to me though..... I freelanced as a web dev for years & turned it into a career because it came easy & now am sticking with it for a bit because I got an easy job offer to do some consulting. But man am I envious of pretty much every other profession...
Basically: if I were not already in this position (handed it on a platter), I wouldn't aspire to it. It upsets me to see friends with master's degrees in arts, sciences etc. clamoring to be low-end web devs. If you get up on the wave easily then by all means ride it for a bit but if you have to start from square 1 there are lots of better things to do with your time.
We've graduated both Web and iOS students and, well, I'm just going to come out and say it: We have a 100% placement/hiring rate of our graduates. Most students secure dev roles within a month of graduating, a few even before they graduate.
That's right. 100% in a country where with 1/10 the population, fewer companies and jobs generally, and no real "valley" comparable to speak of, we are able to have ALL our grads find DEV roles, mostly WITHIN Canada. While I can't speak to whether or not we can maintain that 100% for years to come, I can speak to why and how it's like this now.
While it's easy to argue that 4 or 5 year CS degrees are too long and often not "current" enough, the idea of a 8, 9 or 12 week program that claims to give BETTER or even equal results still seems off.
Being a CS grad who doesn't have strong displeasure with College programs like some others do, I feel that our philosophy is a bit different.
If you ask most professionals where they picked up their skills and expertise, they don't refer to any of their schooling. Instead they'll likely say "on the job". So, you don't grow as much from lectures, exercises, homework readings and online video as much as you do from "DOING". And no form education will ever replace that.
Here's another thing, Instead of comparing a bootcamp grad to a college grad, we should be comparing an bootcamp grad that continues to work as a dev for about 3.9 years to a CS grad coming out of a 4 year program. Who do you think will generally come out ahead?
If you do compare a fresh college grad with a fresh bootcamp grad, I feel that the CS grad does have better and definitely deeper understanding of COMPUTER SCIENCE. Of course they do, you're comparing 0.1 years of CS to 4 or 5 years of study.
Anyway, coming back to our crazy 100% placement of Jr Devs... I think this comes back to our more "humble" take on what our grads are truly capable of and need after graduation. The 8 weeks at our bootcamp prepares most of our students for a 3 month paid internship, which usually translates into full-time Jr. Dev employment at that same company.
So while most bootcamps tout "entry-level ready" developers, we suggest that most bootcamp grads are almost junior ready. They need a few months of mentorship within a company before I would feel comfortable calling them a Junior dev. Owning/Running a dev shop that hires most of it's juniors (as interns) from bootcamps helps me be more realistic about this.
As for salary comparables, Canada (East and West coast alike) is noticably lower than US. Post-internship, our grads make between 40K and 60K. There are definitely a few outliers that will make more than 70K, but that has more to do with their prior experience and what else they bring to the table.
Just register, install the plugin. You can create folders for various stuff. Drag n droping opens the plugin on the side and you can drop it to any folder you want.
Still sad about them dropping Firefox.
Being rigorous about permission-in-advance can result in an involved, costly process that often reaches dead-ends and unthinking default ass-covering "no"s.
On the other hand, being bold and then waiting for objections can achieve much more. And by the pragmatism of common-law, and the rough precedents of DMCA takedown procedures, it's plausibly legally defensible! Or at least in practice not too risky.
Most complainants don't want a legal battle, just a prompt fix-upon-request. And some may even be unofficially indifferent to non-profit reproduction, as long as they don't have to go on-record giving permission. In that way, they reserve the right to object at any arbitrary later date, without incurring any negotiation/legal overhead in the meantime.
Nobody here on Hacker News or the Internet seems to care about copyright of old DOS Video Games and permission to download and play them. It is like they are being given free candy, and they enjoy it, even if technically it was stolen.
But there is a DMCA takedown page that copyright holders can request their games be taken down.
I figure some of the video game makers that have games on Steam and Gog.com will issue takedown requests.
Enjoy it while you can. The Underdogs did an DOS video game abandonware archive 10 years ago and had to take games down as well.
We are all into this playing old games on modern systems craze, so much that we don't really care about copyright and permissions anymore.
The Internet Archive is a non-profit and claims to use the library defense. The Pirate Bay once did this as well, but it didn't work.
Some games like Prince of Persia got released to the public so no permission problems there.
BTW some of the games are really porn, beware if you got your sons and daughters looking into the old DOS games.
I personally can't be arsed to protect myself, but that's just me- I'm kinda fatalistic and assume that everybody knows everything about me already.
But you'll definitely find a lot of others who are mindful of privacy here.
2. Possibly but unlikely.
3. Yes. "Removed as requested by $law_firm on behalf of CartoonStock.com"
The best course of action would be to remove the cartoon, check for any other infringing content on your site, and ignore the request. Any other action should be preceded by talking to a lawyer.
Also keep in mind that there is a lot of ambiguity around linking - unless you were hosting the image, you didn't necessarily commit copyright infringement.
Finally, if you do reply to the request in any way, do so from your home address.
You can't copy and distribute someone else's work without their permission. There is no requirement of malice, financial gain, or anything else to be in violation of their rights under copyright law. It's just not allowed, and that's the case in probably 100+ countries around the world, since 90-something were signatories to the WIPO treaties. Your use of the image doesn't fall under any of the fair use exemptions, and neither is ignorance of the law a defense. If they wanted to take you to court, you'd lose, and you'd almost definitely owe more than $168.
With that being said, if they own the right to publicity or copyrights now or represent the artist, it's going to be tough to fight. If it was a personal blog they may be able to go after you personally. But if they are a legitimate rights holder you will spend multiples more trying to fight it on the basis of not knowing about copyrights or not having made money from it.
You should request documentation to the matter and speak with an attorney.
Can you summarize the liability explanation? Is the sender a lawyer/law firm or someone just claiming to be the copyright holder?
IANAL, ask them to provide how they arrived at $168.00 as economic value of the image. Similarly, you should estimate the economic value of the image to your blog/venture. Did you generate any income from the blog? Can you quantify the value contributed by image to your income? For example, if you were running advertisement on the page, could you quantify contribution of the page, that the image is on, to your total ad revenue?
Do not pay right away! Keep asking for more information like their validity of their claims of copyright, who owns the copyright? Where the image was posted? More work the sender has to do, less likely they will continue to badger you. In all requests, give them a definite time-period like 30 days / two weeks to respond.
I am very suspicious of such claims demanding monetary compensation unless such claims were preceded by take-down warnings and legal warnings from a lawyer/ law firm. My guess is the sender is a fraud and I am sure you are not the only one they are harassing. Such claims are like 'spam,' sender sends out thousands of them expecting some will pay. Do a Google search on the sender, sender email address, reverse-image search to find where else the image is posted. Contact some of them to see if they received similar demands.
Edit: If you decide to communicate with sender, I will suggest asking only one question in each email and then wait for response. Once you get response, then take a few days and ask another question. It will be a while before you run out of all your questions. You also get to see how determined the sender is to collect from you.
Step 2: Once you know your customer segment, change the copy on your website to drive the value proposition home for that specific segment.
Step 3: Find out where your target customers hang out. People from specific niche industries hang out at specific niche forums. Hang out at these forums and ask questions and contribute. If you are strapped for time, you could advertise directly on the forums - a lot of them allow you to open paid sales threads.
Step 4: Build a community from the early adopters you find from these forums and then get them to spread the word.
To support this campaign, try to write press release and send it to bloggers and magazines popping up on your key search request, set up links with them and ask to post on some date, then buy some targeted Ads in Facebook and Google.
More aggresive you will, more prospectives you engage. The better way is to make natural links on forums and boards related to your product. Better to make it the part of viral loop or even better part of user daily workflow.
Word of mouth, for a quality tool, is significantly better than nothing (though probably not where you should stop... others will have more ideas).
I also think that employees would not answer honestly either. Around my office when the bossman asks how everyone is doing, everyone says "great" even though 10 minutes ago when he wasn't there they were all complaining about one thing or another.
Wish you success with the service. Keep working on it.
Previous HN discussion (with some other suggestions):
and a relevant StackOverflow thread:
I used CppUTest on a c++ project to test algorithms for image and video manipulation. It worked fantastically, very easy to learn, and it helped test drive and optimize the algorithms. Highly recommended.
Edit: fixed typos, typing on phones is hard.
I'm not a technical book person and I definitely threw this book across the room multiple times during this class. Hardest I've ever fought for an A-. It's not poorly written, I just struggle with math-y books.
Critique of Pure Reason for similar reasons in another of my lifetimes. It's another book I'm not smart enough to criticize meaningfully.
Fiction, clearly Cormac McCarthy's The Road. As a parent it's just brutal to find a place to put it. Not necessarily my first recommendation among his novels, either.
It taught me just how much I was reading for my own entertainment, not for real information.
Most programming books are challenging to me as I'm more of a learning by doing guy and the content is usually either too abstract for me or in form of sample projects that dont teach much beyond mere replication.
That shit was tough.
But there's one exception, my black horse.
I tried to skim the Bible (Old and New Testament), in multiple translations. Including easy ones, dumbed-down ones, ones for deaf readers, etc.
I thought that as literally millions of people have read this stuff for literally hundreds of years, and it permeates every part of western culture, it would be a walk through the park. Much easier than "more difficult" or specialized stuff.
This is not true. I found it absolutely horrific to try to read it from beginning to end. It's very difficult and basically I gave up, even in situations where I had no other reading material and absoluetly nothing else to do except drink some coffee and try to read it. I found the old and new testaments are unreadable.
This is not just because of the subject matter. For example (I've said this elsewwhere) I found the Qu'ran an incredibly easy skim. You can do it in an hour. (easily, and for meaning.)
Just try it:
This is just 566 pages triple-spaced with mostly blank lines, it's like 180 actual pages. It's incredibly repetitive. You can really stop on the parts that say something.
The whole thing doesn't say much, there's not all this useless geneology and history and names and such. It's easy.
Start skimming now and you'll be done by the time you get an answer to a quick email you just sent. 20-40 minutes if you're fast.
So it's not me. It's not hte subject matter. It's just that the old and new testaments are not the same at all. they're incredibly dense books that somehow made it into our culture while being totally unreadable sequentially. (for understanding.)
obviously it's fine to look up specific verses in. but as a book? Forget it. Even if you're stuck on an island with nothing else, it makes for the most impossible reading you'll ever find in a language you speak.
Probably the most challenging/rewarding book I've ever read was Fuller's Synergetics. It offers an understanding of science and nature that is holistic in a way that is timeless and self-evident.
Martin Meredith's masterfully researched and written The Fate of Africa completely altered my worldview, and brought into sharp focus contemporary African politics. More broadly speaking, it brought clarity to global politics in general, and our human condition.
Sometimes is a bit hard to conceptualize the infinite, you know!
I didn't get most of the Zen kan from this book. But I feel its a great book about the history of Zen.
Regardless, the one that I spent a good year reading through multiple times was Farnsworth's Classical English Rhetoric. A brilliant book that challenged my knowledge of rhetoric and enabled me to hone my rhetorical skills. You can read it to learn or read it just for the awesomeness of the passages.
Don't fly blind. Make a plan, execute on that plan. Make short term goals you can achieve to get you towards a bigger achievement. Work towards something, make a plan that can get you there. It's not a habit its a journey to an achievement of some kind (running a mile under 6 minutes, benching 225, completing a race, losing a few inches on your gut).
When I was younger and had more time, I had a body you could put a muscle chart on (I did grappling sports). Yet, I'm terrible about actually going to a gym, and I eat whatever I want. I simply did what I had fun doing, was motivated by competing with others, and that was also intellectually interesting to me.
Every good thing in your life comes at a price. You may not see it yet, but there are no freebies. If you want a fitness habit, you need to pay for it with time and effort. There are no magic solutions. You simply need to force yourself to suffer. Embrace the pain. If you're not feeling like you're dying, you're doing it wrong.
Go do 10 push-ups right now. Get up from your chair and do them. There is nothing really stopping you. Only the excuses you make for yourself.
It's because working out is againts the human race, we will "crafted" in a time that se haven't nothing, in a misery age back then and we were built to livre, which means that tour body will work to keep you alive. You will never see a Lion for example running to loose his belly fat, animals just spend energy for 3 things: food, sex and running from a predator, basicaly.
So, to achieve this habit, you have to have a "military" willing, because your nature will always fight against you.
What would help is if the act of going to gym does not void you of your usual joys. For example, if you were to watch a tv show, watch it at the gym while you're working out. Like hanging out with friends? Bring one to the gym with you.
Play a sport instead, that way you get exercise and the time passes much more quickly because it's fun.
Now, if you were sitting at a table or something, and perhaps put the bag of chips under the table, you'd have to make a little more effort to get the chips (reach under the table, extend arms and so on) and you'd most likely eat a little slower.
My theory is that habit-space is hyperbolic (close is close, far is v. far, etc.). So perhaps if you had a fitness habit that was easy to keep up wherever you spend most of your time, it would become easier.
Am I out of mistaken in presuming that you don't have a way to achieve your habit from within your household? Maybe that could be a way to start.
Mon and Th I will do Chest and ShouldersTue and Fri I will do Back and Legs
If I only go M-W-F, I'll hit everything each day (called Starting Strength) with Bench (flat and incline), Squats, and Deadlifts.. among a few other things depending on what parts I want to work on.
r/gainit on reddit was also a helpful place for me, as I am one of those people with a super fast metabolism and have a hard time gaining weight.
This means there are specific, identifiable factors in your life that make it harder for you to exercise. Maybe you live far from a gym, or you don't have time during the week, or you have back pain that prevents you from exercising.
My point is that you're not going to do any progress until you make concrete changes based on your own specific situation.
So I guess my answer would be that it's hard because most people think it's a matter of motivation and self-control, whereas small, practical changes to your environment (for example, buying a bike) are actually much more effective.
Basically its just another habit you need to do consistently if you want to be able to stick with it long term.