We already know that many HNers are in favor of a black bar. It doesn't matter if there are hundreds or thousands.
Just ask firstname.lastname@example.org. They are the only ones to decide on this, and they already know about that request.
What could a Ask HN thread possibly do?
If you have a Freshbooks account and you use it for sending your clients invoices, Freshbooks has recently partnered with a company called Fundbox which provides advances on your outstanding invoices. I'm not sure what kinds of qualifications you may need to be offered this service (not sure if account age or previous activity plays a role, I've used Freshbooks for a long time before this advance service was put in place), but any invoice under $1K is typically available for an advance immediately. Repayment is on a weekly basis and the fee is rather reasonable compared to the payday loan and title loan services you see advertised to "help" the desperate. You can add anyone as a client with nothing more than a name and an email address and you can send them an invoice instantly. The account set up for Fundbox is literally just connecting your bank account for them to ACH to you (inbound is about 2 days) and for them to automatically pull their weekly payment out. And, you can repay the entire loan at any time with no penalty.
Your skills seem pretty much what 2 out of 3 companies in WWR are looking for. If your skills are what you say they are, you'll get hired in no time IMHO.
I wish you best of luck and happy new year.
 https://weworkremotely.com/ and SO careers are the best job-boards IMHO.
If I happen to hear of anything, I will ping you.
Best wishes, and good luck.
What helped for me was intensive real-life networking; it changed my life. You cannot imagine what is there to pick from in this world if you speak to enough people.
Sorry if this is unhelpful, but what do you have in terms of LinkedIn and other front-facing portfolios (including Github)? I've been out of the Rails job market for a few years now but I still get recruiters who are obviously autoscraping LinkedIn and Github (literally, for any repo that is classified as Ruby) and doing cold emails. I don't know if a full time gig is something that's possible for you but it certainly won't hurt to keep those low-maintenance nets open for the occasional legitimate recruiter doing keyword searches.
Unfortunately, I don't have a project for you, but I wish you luck! Keep at it, you'll pull through!
1. Gene editing in embryos
2. Orbital rocket makes a successful return and landing.
3. Self driving car technology becomes more commonplace, and becomes more feasible for people.
I think the hard thing about your question is, "have we built new tools to build a cooler future in 2016?" and that can only be seen when tools today are actually building the future tomorrow. The other thing is that something like 2 or 3, have had people working on them for years prior, so it's not that anything become suddenly practical in 2015 -it's just that all the work now bared its fruit.
It would only dilute your salary (now you're working 1-2 extra hours every day for the same pay), and while it might provide you a slight productivity boost (unless you burn out), if you ever were to need those hours back it would be difficult to explain the lower performance at work.
If you want to improve your skills, I would suggest reading, taking a course, working on your own projects, anything by spending time on work-related stuff.
Unless you're the founder, in which case what are you doing not working 24/7.
One benefit to doing your own thing, is that it can help beef up your github "portfolio". But, don't feel beholden to that or anything.
- The Product Manager's Desk Reference
- The Lean Startup
- Agile Product Management with Scrum
Targeted at interview preparation, but good for breadth:
- Decode & Conquer
- Cracking the PM interview
Other good books for PMs:
- Talking to Humans
- The Design of Everyday Things
- Zero to One
If you want to get deeper into project management I suggest that you become a member of the PMI and possibly get certification from them. The training and testing are rigorous and it is a certification that means something both from the knowledge you get and the benefit of having it on your resume.
Which maybe was not on the lines OP intended. :)
here's the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10703194
@cperciva's answer was sublime IMHO for multiple reasons.
The points in this thread helped me better understand team interaction. Especially: A leader is never too busy to listen to a teammate.
Ask HN: What problem in your industry is a potential startup?
It gave me so much food for thought and ended up with a fairly popular essay http://000fff.org/the-problem-with-problems/
Really enjoyed both the article and the discussion on that one.
Some pretty healthy discussions and consolidated information which I can't find elsewhere.
I've also observed that there are generally two types of confidence: the brash, in-your-face type and the quiet, in-the-corner type. The point is not the type, the point is confidence. You need confidence in order to tackle problems, which might be wearing a mask of arrogance.
From an appearance/soft-skills perspective, it is one possible mode of the assertion of social dominance based on skill/expertise. It is a more aggressive one, hence it is more likely to backfire. There are far better ways to assert social dominance based on skill/expertise which are more socially productive and far less prone to backfire.
From a mental functionality perspective, you're being arrogant when you are prone to false negatives when judging other people and their input and prone to false positives when judging your own.
how do you avoid being arrogant?
Humility. Spend time at the bottom of a learning curve. Truly take a deep dive into a different mental model of the world. Prove the null hypothesis. "If you're the smartest guy in the room, you're in the wrong room." If it's the case that no matter what you try, you can't ever find your way to a place where you're mistaken, you missed some big facet of reality, or you're a beginner again, then congrats: You Are Arrogant!
To me arrogance is conceited. It's assuming you're better than everyone else. It's assuming everyone else is worse than you, and making it shown.
Detecting arrogance is pattern-matching for multiple traits more than a single characteristic. Some examples that show arrogance:
- Thinking you always know best
- Similarly, thinking you're cleverer/funnier/N-er than everyone else
- Not listening or valuing others opinions
This can be verbal as well as non-verbal. Pretty much all of this boils down to two values: narcissism (self-conceit) and lack of respect.
Why people become arrogant is a tough, philosophical and behavioural question. Is it parenting? Is it consistent self-praise? Maybe not being challenged as a kid? It's hard to find a real answer. Sometimes people really excel at an early age and it might make them think they're better than everyone else. Then again, maybe the person didn't grow up to value other people in the right way.
And generally whether it's bad is a situational call IMO. It's bad if you don't have anything to back it up. Even if you're brilliant it's bad if you're a douche about it (and have no respect for others).
Could you blame Steph Curry for being arrogant about being (one of) the best shooter in history? Maybe not, but if he's a dick about it you probably won't like him.
And that's probably what encapsulates whether arrogance is bad: does it hinder your personal relationships or your personal progression? If so, it's a bad trait. And I think that question can be asked of anything.
Some people below have posted great points in preventing arrogance. Part of the problem is ego: learn that other people do hard work and value them. Easier said than done. Assuming you're doing the easy part of a project is a good tip. Asking people about what they do and actually trying or taking interest in it is another. Working with smart people is even better, though it's not necessary even not-so-smart people do tough jobs that people might not value.
The problem is that a person with a healthy ego will always come off as negative to some people, because that person won't shy away from confrontation the same way that the humbler majority will. I prefer words like "hubris" which better target identifiable personality defects.
That said, being needlessly confrontational over things that are personally emotional is a good way to get called arrogant. Another thing that people don't like is expression or allusion to a belief that people deserve to be in whatever social class they're in.
A good preventative antidote is to adopt a service mindset. It's hard for people to form negative opinions about people that are always being helpful. I love reading about butlers for this reason, a butler has to embody the service mindset without being humble. This juxtaposition itself is the fodder for an entire genre of books.
I myself can come off as arrogant sometimes, and believe me it's always involuntary.
Online I've taken to reading everything I type and trying to imagine reading it from another persons perspective. That way I often throw away comments before posting them.
In real life it's much harder because it often takes me a long pause before I can answer someone, that pause is filtering out unnecessary arrogance and "snide".
And yes, they're always much people better than you.
Three principles i live by
- Everyone lives in a reality were they are the hero - the smart, clever individual who got perfect reasons to do something and was misunderstood if something went wrong. Let them be this hero or you will be the villain.
- The root of every problem around you is ultimately you, yourself. You should have either fixed it, helped fixing it or avoided it. Blame the next person just delays this.
- We judge our own intellect with our own intellect. We cannot even understand how stupid we are (esp. in specific areas that are not interesting to us). Assume the worst in your own case and you are on the safe side.
I've observed this in myself as well as countless others - on way up the learning curve you think yourself an expert and become arrogant about it right before you realise that in fact the computing industry (and probably applies to many other industries too) is so complex that it's likely impossible for a single person to understand everything.
Thus, for some people, a good way to combat arrogance is to gently teach them things they don't know - which will hopefully lead them to understand that we all have much to learn. It certainly worked for me.
Listen, no matter what, and make it a point to not interrupt.
This may or may not stop you from being arrogant, but it can avoid that perception, which is almost as good for group dynamics.
2 - Detecting arrogance in the self can be hard, but isolation is a good warning sign. If one finds oneself separate from the group, there can be a variety of factors, but check in your heart to see if arrogance is the cause first. To detect it in others, ask questions that deal with empathy and helping others.
3 - People can become arrogant if they are the "biggest fish in a small pond" for too long, and actually are the smartest person in the room for a while. This is one reason it's good to always put yourself in work and cultural situations that test the limits of your abilities and allow you to grow and teach simultaneously.
4 - Arrogance as commonly defined is probably always a "bad" trait, simply because it is anti-social, and an argument can be made that the only real ethical behavior is social behavior. That said, many many arrogant people have made significant contributions to society, but it's important to understand that their arrogance or anti-social behavior may have been a symptom of their brilliance, not the cause.
Others have no real reason to expect to be successful, having never experienced success in what they are attempting.
So to me, the best way to avoid arrogance is to take an honest assessment of your experience and whether you have actually experienced success in the arena you are attempting to enter, and if you can't point to past successes, don't speak as if you expect to succeed this time.
This is something that comes with age, I believe. As you get older you gain more experience, so you understand that success is difficult to achieve. This does not necessarily mean approaching things with a defeatist attitude, but rather to take a more comprehensive look at the challenges and not merely rely on your own unproven abilities and proceed accordingly.
So assured of your correctness that you'll ignore contrary information. A military type example would be to assume that your forces are so superior to the enemy that you ignore information about new countermeasures and send your troops to their death.
In programming or business terms, you could have a process that people assume is the right way to do everything in every situation who are unwilling to adapt to nuances.
Usually the best way to detect it is to ask somebody holding hard to a point of view to explain it.
So IMO, the best way to explain arrogance would be delusion in combination with ability to act on it.
Arrogance can be perceived as an offensive display of superiority. We can have straight forward manifestations of arrogance but also comes in a disguised or cloaked form.
2. How do you detect arrogance?
If it's straight forward it is easy. But sometimes is well concealed behind actions, irony or even gentle words. I believe that we detect (or display for the matter) arrogance from a set of behavioral traits more than anything else.
3. Why some (we?) people become arrogant?
Because we are not wise.-
The Socratic paradox goes like "I know one thing: that I know nothing". Socrates believed that he is the wisest man in Athens because he knows that he does not know while others falsely believe that they know. Pythia (the famous oracle of Ancient Greece) confirms that Socrates is the wisest man in Athens.
What Socrates was trying to say gets a lot clearer by Aristotle a couple of decades later, when he writes "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.". Shakespeare in 1603 A.D. in As you like it writes one of my favorite rhymes: "The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
Combining all the above, we can say that smart doesn't make wise. Wisdom comes through experience and careful unselfish study. Smart is good, shiny but can get us easily out of our way. Wisdom is what we should be aim at.
Then the question becomes: What is wisdom? And Socrates replies "The act of making wise decisions". Which decisions are wise? "The ones that do not hurt your spirit". Socrates believes - like Christ- that even if actively attacked, we should avoid attacking-back because it will ultimately cause us anger and hurt our pure spirit. Socrates says that every human has the obligation to keep his spirit as pure as possible: no anger, no fights, no fears, etc.
4. Is it always bad?
Yes. It is always bad.
5. If so, how do you avoid being arrogant?
See answer No 3.
Sometimes you think you're helping and sometimes you're actually helping but you're still making people feel bad about themselves.
YC recommended a nice book that can help you avoid being arrogant:Non-violent communication: a language of life
Arrogance is the presumption of competence where there is none.
> 2 - How do you detect arrogance?
If you have competence, it's fairly easy to detect incompetence in others. If you want to detect incompetence in yourself ... that's easy. Let yourself fail.
Arrogant people never expose themselves to the possibility of failure. In the rare circumstance when it does happen, they deny it. Anything else would pierce the veil of presumed competence.
Let yourself fail. Over and over again. Acknowledge the failure. Keep exposing yourself to new things and keep pushing outside your comfort zone. That will keep you nice and humble.
> 3 - Why some people become arrogant?
Fear. Fear of failure. Fear of being perceived as a failure.
> 4 - Is it always bad?
I believe you can become arrogant by getting used to being the smartest person in the room (or believing you are), noticing the times you readily had insights that others lack, etc.. Confirmation bias plays in, too, since as soon as you start to conceive of yourself as knowing, unless you try very hard not to, you'll take more note of events that confirm your self-assessment than that disconfirm it.
As others have noted, arrogance as described here is closely akin to the vice of pride (which is opposed to the virtue of humility). The main distinction I would draw is that arrogance to me has a stronger social aspect--a particular way of presenting oneself, born from pride. Pride itself is a spiritual state and could (at least hypothetically) pass unnoticed if you were also good at hiding it.
I referred to confidence-out-of-proportion, and I think I stick with that. To my mind, a person who exhibits rational confidence in their judgement is not arrogant by definition, even if that confidence is (correctly) very high. But arrogance isn't the only way to go wrong. E.g., a software BDFL may be a jerk even if he's not arrogant, and someone who confidently makes a decision they had authority to make without consulting someone who would rather have been consulted isn't arrogant either, but may none the less have committed a faux pas. Both may be incorrectly perceived as or called arrogant.
Of course this advice assume you have already understood that 1) there is nothing to be gained but bad things by being arrogant and that 2) there is no reason to be arrogant.
Nerds often come out as arrogant by merely offering unsolicited advice or opinions. It doesn't matter if you actually do know what you think you know: you can still be arrogant even if you're right. This sort of arrogance is basically about stepping onto someone else's lawn.
For the general arrogance, I don't have answers. I haven't much felt the need for setting myself above others outside of a special context where I believe that my skills will benefit everybody so I'm not quite sure what's driving that.
For the nerdy arrogance, there's one thing I do: I usually negotiate responsibilities first before acting, i.e. I claim the territory before I pull out my tools.
If I've agreed with someone that I should take a look at fixing something, then I can rightfully and confidently exercise my knowhow myself because finding the solution has become my own territory. If it turns out to be a problem, I'll just return to negotiating: "I understood you wanted me to fix this so do you want me to continue or do you want to fix it yourself?" Conversely, if there is no agreement about territory I won't step in but just let them know they can contact me if they need me. I might know exactly how to fix something but I realise it's not my place until we've first cleared who's going to do what.
Also, getting into a debate with someone you don't know who actually does like debating, can easily be considered arrogant. Likewise there: while debating can be fun with the right person, however, most of the time with most people it isn't so I'll just skip that unless I specifically know the person.
Egos constantly need validation. In some people, this need results in certain annoying validation seeking behaviors. A few office examples are: constantly bringing attention to one's abilities or accomplishments, speaking to others in a condescending tone, putting others down, and failing to listen to others. I believe these sorts of validation seeking behaviors are what we collectively call arrogance.
> Is it always bad? If so, how do you avoid being arrogant?
Arrogance is when your ego gets in the way of your daily life. Arrogant people are too focused on themselves to notice that they are annoying others. This hinders their ability to communicate or receive correct information. This makes them less productive in a team environment and a pain to work with.
IMO The best way to avoid arrogance is to be mindful about your interactions with people. If you practice mindfulness and compassion in your daily interactions with others, you will find that people will enjoy interacting with you more. As your mindfulness skills develop, your skills in communication with others increase as well.
2 - Detecting arrogance in it's subtleties can tricky, but often times it's less subtle. A nice Star Wars linkage is 'only the Sith deal in absolutes'. Otherwise, you can detect when people avoid asking or answering questions that might allow other input.
3 - Some people probably become arrogant as a defense mechanism to being questioned. Often, by over compensating with confidence it can help you lead dictatorially. By being the loudest, most stubborn, and sometimes / most of the time right (to at least some degree) they will get their way by the passives in a group. More broadly speaking, arrogance is caused by a lack of perspective - an inability to perceive that someone else might bring ideas to the table or that you might be at all inadequate.
4 - Yes, it's always bad or at least not an admirable trait. Particularly when working with others. By being arrogant you will often miss different solutions that may be easier, quicker, more elegant, or better explained.
And the fact is that there are all sorts of people with all sorts of internal regard, but there are also between-individual differences in theory of mind.
It doesn't matter whether you are Bill Gates, Joe the Plumber, or Andrew Ng. You can always benefit from playing the game. You are never too elite or too rich to play the game. Even if you think you're better than everyone else, as long as you can easily manage an elegant model of public perception, it behooves you to play.
So why would someone not play? I think, (1) your theory of mind isn't up to par, or (2) you have contempt for people and an impulsivity that gets in your way notwithstanding your individual and crowd modelling abilities, or (3) some combination thereof.
If you do not actually think of yourself as superior to others, you can accidentally appear arrogant by failing due diligence when communicating with other people, which in turn may be caused by lack of practice. Pay attention to what you say, and think of what you could have said to deliver your message better.
Especially in writing it's important to imagine how the reader may react to your words, and consider the benefit of terseness over the possibility that you may be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Going over your phrasing once or twice is a good idea as well. Also keep in mind that whoever you're talking to can not know everything that you know, and that this is often not their own fault.
If people who are more powerful than you perceive you to be arrogant, they will tend to lash out and strike back. If people who are less powerful than you perceive you as arrogant, they will walk on eggshells around you. Because no one likes to feel stupid.
The tricky thing is that you need to remember to care about how what you say will make people feel, even when what you are saying is purely technical in nature. In other words, you can't ever focus so purely on the technical issues that you forget to craft your words to account for your audience's feelings. Which is really hard.
I would say arrogance is using your power, wealth, prestige just to show others that you are powerful.
The secret to gaining respect is having power, but only leveraging it when absolutely necessary.
2. From a lack of empathy or consideration.
3. I think it's largely due to deep rooted insecurity (maybe in other areas than their strengths).
4. I think it is always bad. I don't know how you can avoid it aside from self-reflection.
"Assume that your part of the project is the easy part." 
"Heres a polite persons trick, one that has never failed me. ... Ask the other person what they do, and right after they tell you, say: 'Wow. That sounds hard.'" - Paul Ford 
I'm sure others will tell you I'm not great at it, but I think the key is to cultivate an attitude where you _genuinely_ value all other people regardless of ability (or whatever you suspect is causing you to value people lower.) If you're in a position to do so, _genuinely_ want to help other people to the degree they want to be helped.
A few things that come to mind to combat it:
- Be genuinely humble. Don't think you are "a better person" than anybody.
- Value people as people, not by material measures like intellect, health, wealth, etc.
- It is ok to think you are good at something, but don't brag. Realize you have not always been good, and there is always somebody better.
- When appropriate, help others, but be sure they want help.
- When helping, be really nice and sympathetic to those you help.
- Volunteer and serve poor/needy/disabled. Don't be proud or brag about doing it, but genuinely want to help those who for whatever reason are not lucky enough to be discussing arrogance on HN ;) Talk to the people and learn their names and stories. Just interacting with those people and treating them as people will help you find balance.
When arrogance becomes problematic is when it impacts your ability to work with others. The best type of person is someone who can bring others in to work with them, praise the people they are delegating work to. And share the success of a project, with those vital team players.
2) Almost everyone is arrogant to others in one way or another. Usually derision is expressed in private, but an arrogant person makes no attempt to hide it.
3) More often than not, arrogance is a front to hide and protect a secret vast well of incompetence. My own experience has shown that the bigger the attitude, the smaller the talent. Almost invariably.
4) Contempt for stupidity or laziness can sometimes be motivating to the recipient, but not usually. Lots of life experience can eventually cure arrogance for some.
Just remember, stupidity makes perfect sense in the face of it all.
Napoleon was "arrogant" for thinking he could march 500,000 troops into Russia in the middle of Winter. But had he succeeded, he'd be described much differently.
Frequently, people that call others "arrogant" are actually voicing their own insecurities and using it as a crutch to avoid moving outside of their comfort zone.
2 - People who are arrogant do not ask much questions. Arrogant people are unpleasant to interact with.
3 - Coping mechanism for little internal confidence. Alternatively, nobody told them they are projecting or they can't see this for themselves. In pathetic cases they can not help themselves.
4 - No, not always bad. In some roles it is necessary to exude confidence and a better-than-thou attitude. But when you are not a general, king, pope, or professor, then people will not take kindly to such behavior.
You can avoid being arrogant, the same way you can (try to) avoid being stupid, Andrey Kolmogorov: "Every mathematician believes that he is ahead of the others. The reason none state this belief in public is because they are intelligent people.". Also realize that there is only one way to be perfectly correct, but a possibly infinite ways of being wrong.
2. Detecting arrogance in others is pretty easy: they do not listen to an alternative point of view with any patience.
I think the question really being asked is: "How do you detect arrogance in yourself?" That's more interesting, and more difficult. Unfortunately arrogant people are the least receptive to the feedback they are arrogant because the root cause is that they are bad at listening. There are some good indicators you can use to help recognize arrogance in yourself if you are an arrogant person by nature, however. I think the most effective is to monitor your use of questions and not statements when having discussions with your peers. If >90% of your contribution to the conversation are statements and not questions, you're almost certainly being arrogant. "We can't do it that way" is very different than "Why did we decide to do it that way?" One is a statement that begs equally fierce opposition, the second starts a conversation that reveals reasoning and the creative process.
So ask lots of questions, and really listen.
3. I'll avoid answering this--it is different for every person. For many it is simply not having had historical peers on their level to effectively add to a conversation, for others it is just a learned behavior. It isn't as important how people go that way, it is important they recognize it and stop.
4. Human behaviors are rarely binary good/bad: each usually has a place. Arrogance can be a tool in rare cases where a massive display of confidence can substitute as a shortcut for authority--you might sometimes see a CEO, for example, say "I am right on this and you are wrong, we are doing it my way" (the subtext that this is in the interest of saving time or resources is often lost in translation). Steve Jobs built an empire on this. However, it is generally bad in the long term to display this level of arrogance--all large-scale work is teamwork, and in a organization of 100 peers you will only be the most right statistically a small percentage of the time.
This is why avoiding arrogance is important; it means that you are open to hearing other solutions and implementing them when they make the most sense.
To avoid arrogance is simple, yet hard. You have to actually listen and converse with your peers. If you have disagreements you should state them politely and from a non-combative alternative point of view--not a combative self-driven point of view, and you should not jump to conlusions. For example: "Won't it be harder for a user to access feature X in this redesign?" is better than "How am I supposed to access feature X now? We can't ship this, it is not good enough". The first leads to conversation, allowing the opposition to present their approach, the second does not. Perhaps feature X was buried because it was found to be used with reduced frequency by actual customers? If you start with the second you are less likely to have the conversation with your peers where that critical information is revealed.
Everybody is stupid and broken in their own way which we can never see ourselves, yet we make a conscious and sometimes very difficult effort to like each other and get along anyway. Either you "get" that, or you're arrogant.
i.e. you aren't growing as a human being, you're static, and have become comfortable there in your little niche, so you look down on others who are learning new things.
when was the last time you felt dumb? been a while? fix that. most arrogant people are afraid of feeling dumb so they just dismiss things they aren't good at as beneath them.
The most important thing to remember is the Golden Rule - treat others as you would wish to be treated in their situation. If being arrogant breaks this rule, then don't do it.
Sometime after the summer vacation I panicked since I realized that I would not be able to reach the 6k MRR goal I had semi publicly stated.
Instead of openly accepting this I started making bad decisions to boost the MRR, this in turn led to some (of the right customers) feeling abandond and therfore they churned.
That made me realize I was fucking up and in the end I agreed to part way with one of the wrong clients and now we are back on (an even better) track with our app and vision for the product.
But damn it was a hard realization and some hard months living the lie.
This year I started 4 new jobs. 1 at a startup after an 8 year long position that I basically grew up in. There were some layoffs and so I picked up 3 contract positions to try to learn new things and pay bills and junk. I also went from a 10 minute commute to almost 1.5-2hrs... which is a big jump for me. The 3 contract thing worked for awhile until the holidays rolled around, and then everything became too much. I was able to exit one contract gig somewhat gracefully and told the others that I wouldn't be working much during the holidays. Just in time for anxiety to kick in. :P On top of that, currently studying for interviews, which I haven't done, ever.
I think I know how to pace myself better, but we'll see...
Mine was inaction.
They select top Brazilian students and give them scholarships. They usually choose by assessing the candidate's academic and professional track record, besides considering their personality.
They usually select very, very, very impressive young folks.
Fundao Estudar's alumni are really strong. If you are approved, the network you will be part of is a much better gift than the scholarship itself.
For instance, the current CEO of AB InBev (the company which is the owner of Budweiser - among other beer brands) is a former fellow of Fundao Estudar.
Actually, he is won one of the firsts fellows and won a scholarship for an MBA at Stanford.
Every year, some candidates apply for MBA's/LLM's scholarships at top American universities and for undergraduate's scholarships.
I applied for an undergraduate scholarship in a Brazilian university.
I must emphasize that I did not need the money, what I really wanted was to be part of their network.
Actually, this year was my third try. I also made an application in 2013 and 2014.
Previously, I was eliminated on the semifinal phase. Going until this phase means that I was among the best 40/50 out of 80,000 candidates.
This year (2015) I went to the final interview with other 19 students.
On the last interview, there were 20 candidates applying for an undergraduate scholarship for a Brazilian or American university. They chose 18 and cut out me and a girl who was going to Yale.
I was really sad when I received the result because I wanted a lot to be part of their community. And this year I was really close of finally achieving it. I almost got it!
Being refused three times by Fundao Estudar is my greatest failure so far in my life (I have 22 years old).
This third elimination happened in the middle of July.
It has been awhile and I have been reflecting on it a lot lately. The feedback they gave me about why I was not chosen is also clearer now.
The lessons that I took from this experience are:
1 - I am really glad I tried. If I had not tried I would be wondering for the rest of my life what would have happened. I am quite happy that I will not regret not trying.
2 - Every application process I tried, year after year, I noticed that I was getting better. I was better in interviews and my professional and academic track record were improving on the last years.
3 - Due to the application process I met a lot of people and made some new friends. And they are very impressive guys. Hence, my network has been enhanced.
4- It is clearer for me now my strengths and my weaknesses. Knowing what I need to improve is great. Getting this "no" is an excellent way of reducing the asymmetrical information between my perception about myself and what other people think about me.
5 - Self-knowledge is something weird.
Really difficult to measure, usually with little or no science when peopletalk about it and absolutely important.
This "no's" that I received were the best (and the hardest) way I have ever experienced to improve my self-knowledge.
6 - The process did not change much from 2013 to 2015. I was also older on the third try. But a funny (and IMHO cool) thing is that my preparation was better and harder year after year.
I put a lot of effort every time I tried. And this increased. I read books, searched for info on the Internet, rehearsed, created a notebook for self-assessment and spent many hours thinking about how I could pass.My preparation was definitely over the demand.
7 - I have a few idols. Two of them are Americans: Michael Jordan and Bob Knight. Jordan used to say: I do not accept not trying. And bob knight used to say: the will to succeed is important, but more important is the will to prepare.
I am in peace with the philosophy that two of my idols used to preach.
8 - I took lessons from it.
Hope you guys have enjoyed reading this long answer. My English writing has been a little rusty, sorry for the minor mistakes.
Edit: I know there are some languages that just suck on MS. RoR I've heard is horrible. I made 1 attempt at getting a good environment setup and failed miserably. Partly bc of the poor documentation, or should I say conflicting documentation.
Try the same tutorial on a Mac and it would just work. The time I save using a Mac is well worth any slight premium.
Actually my current windows laptop cost more than my macbook air. The air has more than enough power for developing web applications.
Both Windows and Mac have their fan boys/camps. I use both, but prefer Mac for development.
Give it a shot and see how you feel. Install VS Code on Linux and play around with ASP.NET MVC or WebAPI to see what it offers.
Usually I use a Linux web server, but I have worked at places that use IIS and it is really not all bad. Microsoft had some very good ideas in ASP.NET that were compromised by a few mistakes, and if they had fixed the mistakes instead of creating a new MVC framework every year since then, it would be sweet.
Today I mostly code in Java or other JVM language, and can run a good test environment, if not everything on Windows but I deploy to Ubuntu Linux in the cloud.
UPDATE: I uploaded a screenshot of the support conversation. I obfuscated any info that would identify me. http://imgur.com/JB4XX4s if you're wondering - the discrepancy in my name I'm talking about in the last message is merely a matter of an acute over one letter.)
@Nadya Yea, I've considered that. But I'm not sure if trading personal privacy for getting that account is a good deal. And it seems like there's been countless huge stories about people in the drag community.I just sent an email to one of the main people that were involved in these. The word on the interwebs is they have some special contact at FB. And I really hope I can handle it that way. Trying to find more potentially-helpful people.
Contact (tech) news publications if you have solid evidence  of this. Bad publicity will pressure Facebook more than you'd be able to. They'll run a sexism-in-Tech article centering around Facebook's treatment of non-standard genders and Facebook will reverse whatever issues you're going through in a jiffy.
May as well play the current political climate to your advantage. And I mean the above in a genuine effort to help - as it very much would and I don't see alternatives. Facebook controls Facebook. If they're going to delete your account or treat you unfairly, they will. But not if it means bad press. Give them bad press and your problems with them will go away.
 Who am I kidding, if there is even a possibility of it being construed this way.
Have the lawyer write a letter to the lawyers at Facebook with proof that you are over 20 and what your real name is, because Facebook is not taking you seriously.
Huffington Post did a lot of gender equality on Facebook before, you might want to contact them about your issues if they are based on non-standard gender issues.
Mendeley lets you tag and organize things in virtual folders, as well as store notes and annotations. The bibliographic info for subsets of papers (eg. with a particular tag) can be exported to bibtex files when writing.
Mendeley is available on all platforms, and syncs across multiple computers. The only catch is that the links to PDFs are only maintained on the 'master' that watches the folder. (If you try to watch folders on multiple instances of the same synced database, all hell breaks loose.)
Pubchase (www.pubchase.com) can also sync with your Mendeley library, and does a surprisingly good job of recommending papers of interest.
papers papers\filtering papers\math papers\languages papers\filtering\IMM papers\filtering\MHT
When I read I highlight using the yellow highlighter, and type notes in Evernote. Evernote is searchable.
I make this 'cloud'y by using bittorrent sync to share across computers.
That's all free. The folder method of holding papers/book/topics is nonideal - a paper can cover 2+ topics, for example. But it works, sort of, and I can still search. I use Everything (from void tools) to search on title or author, and then you can search inside pdfs with various tools.
Mendeley and such were nonstarters for me. Any service that makes me pay for cloud storage has lost the war, IMO. I already have 1TB each from Dropbox and google, more from Microsoft, why am I paying you for cloud storage?
I was having trouble with syncing with Mendeley, but reading the other comments aheilbut worked out the issues, so maybe i'll give it another go. I want to control the cloud, syncing, and file structure choices, not have a program decide those for me.
I don't worry about reading lists - I need to read what I need to read. When I get around to that topic there may be more relevant stuff than I selected back at the time, anyway. YMMV. If I see a paper of remote interest that I can legally grab I grab it, dump it into my file structure, and then rely on search to bring it to my attention again at the appropriate time.
The latter holds my notes, highlights and every piece of information I find somewhere; it can do basically any format, not just PDFs. Additionally it links them up with other things in your database (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/544bf5dae4b0dd27d7018...). This plus the superior search makes retrieval a lot easier than in any other application I have found so far.
Previously I used ReadCube, which was also quite good - unfortunately it doesn't run on Linux, so I had to ditch it. I would love to try out Citavi, it sounds even better than Mendeley, but again it doesn't do Linux. (Note: Citavi carries a fairly hefty price tag, but if you're affiliated with some university, chances are you can get it for free. The other two are freeware with the option to upgrade to premium plans.)
All of these are closed-source, so if you're an FSF-fan, steer well clear. Otherwise: well worth the use of!
They all fit together.
>- recording notes and ideas from papers
Docear's core is a mind-mapping application that is used for taking and linking to different notes - you can take notes using whatever app you want and then add it to the mind map-
> - recording where I got a paper from, ie was it referenced from another paper or found on a particular site?
With Zotero this can be as simple as a click, it adds the current page and document along with metadata and can export it to bibtex or the like, thus tying it to docear.
> - even how to read a paper.
This is not a technology problem, investigate approaches such as SQ3R (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQ3R) which is the one I use (actually the variation SQW3R) or PQRST (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Study_skills#Reading_and_liste...). I keep a low-tech approach on purpose for this, but there is nothing preventing using Docear for this as well of course.
>Right now I use google docs with sub folders for unread, read and implemented papers. I tend to use Acrobat to highlight sections of a paper that I find important and Evernote for saving more important notes.
Docear is supposed to be used with PDF annotators, it then scans the PDFs and automatically creates the references mind map.
> If anyone has a good system for how to read papers more efficiently, how to store notes/annotations for a given paper, or how to track a todo reading list I'd be very appreciative!
For reading them take a look at those I mentioned before, SQ3R has been useful for me in terms of articles and books. To store things Zotero is very good for anything which is done via browser. Docear is useful for managing different "projects" (could be disciplines, specific papers, etc). For TODOs you can either also keep them in Docear (since it has a mind mapper you can create a new node and add the references you exported from Zotero there, actually Docear scans the library and automatically adds any PDF to a specific node) or use something like Evernote.
the biggest advantage of this is how flexible and easily searchable it is if i'm working with different content types.
So far it has suited my needs quite well, but I don't really annotate them, but I do add a one or two sentence overview, which is enough for me.
Works for pretty much every kind of idea.
Then, just remember.
(have any of you guys tried it? Curious to hear your thoughts)
To me, I have learned the most while pairing with someone who had MUCH more experience than me.
So it's time for me to pass that karma along and help others. If you want to pair on this project, I'll be happy to.
Email is on my profile. Invitation open.
Edit: Just to clarify here. This is NOT an invitation for services. These are completely free of charge pairing sessions.
In accordance with the $3Million in donations she's received from Tata and Infosys she will immediately move to increase the H-1B visa intake by 5x to "allow American business to be more competitive"
An IT grass roots org will start a petition that draws 5 Million signatures to oppose the move and it will be ignored.
20,000 newly unemployed US IT workers will vow never to back Hillary in 2020 and vote for Carly Fiorina instead.
Record high temperatures
Increased investment in VR
Majority of new businesses to be subscription based
Techno-conglomerates will invest in emerging countries to get them online
ISIS will succeed in two or three more semi-large-scale attacks in the west (ten to hundreds dead, but not 1000+).
Optimism about deep learning will continue, but it will not revolutionize the world within 2016.
The economy will continue to muddle through, neither exploding in growth nor crashing through the floor.
Syria will continue to be a war zone. The peace process will not make significant progress. However, NATO and Russia will not wind up in a nuclear war.
Categorizing issues by required familiarity with the code ("novice" vs. "expert" levels) and establishing a good contribution and style guide are just a few of the very useful things one could apply to his or her smaller open-source project.
One OS project that I've seen and love is https://love2d.org/. Most of the work is done by a few contributors, but some members of the community give back at times.
It doesn't matter if it is an alternative to Microsoft Word, a driver for an obscure wifi card or a fps game, people usually get involved in open source not out of the goodness of their hearts but because they are passionate by the end result of their work, software development being only a mean to an end.
So get the word out about the specific problem you are trying to solve with open source. If there are other people out there with the same problem and the technical skill to help they most certainly are going to find out about your effort and try to help.