Personally I would recommend mathematical analysis by Pugh. Goes into as much depth as Rudin, but more approachable and a great selection of exercises.
I like Pugh too. All three are sitting on my bookshelf :). Coming from very little formal math training, and trying to self-study analysis, I would bounce from Rudin if I got stuck, go to Abbott for a confidence boost, and try out some Pugh for a different viewpoint. Pugh might have been just right in terms of rigor and accessibility.
Reading the article, and then seeing responses posted here, I am starting to think hacker news isn't the place for these kind of discussions. Any time any kind of contentions topic is posted a small number of people, similar to those described in the article, come out of the wood work and feel the need to share their uninformed opinions.
On an unmoderated forum like this one, perhaps it is better to keep the discussions restricted to subject like programming languages and operations systems, and avoid inadvertently providing a microphone for those with an axe to grind.
For background see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact. Basically growth of southern cities has meant demand for water from the Colorado river has gone up while rainfall in the region has decreased. There is still a surplus right now, but that won't continue indefinitely.
The most charitable interpretation of the claim I could think of was that the author meant the few exceptions illustrate why the other companies are moving away from ruby.
Not sure what niche the all wheel drive fills. Most people I know with that kind of vehicle justify it as something they take up to the mountains every winter. While I'm sure it would handle great on icy roads, I could see the range being a problem, especially as this probably is less energy efficient with the higher profile. The other thing vans and the like are good for is packing heavy on road trips; same problem.
I'm just surprised that the options are RWD and AWD... in the North American market, RWD is the province of sports cars and Euro imports. I'd expect to see front drive on a family car like this.
Most of the country gets snow in the winter without going into the mountains. I fish-tailed my RWD car into a bridge railing last winter just tooling around suburban New York in light snow...
Remember that everyone above median income is going to end up paying what they receive right back to the government in taxes. Only half the adult population will actually see this money as a check and not just a tax break.
Here are the 10 rules from his slides, though he goes into a lot more detail in the video (he starts going into the rules at around 14:00):
1. Get good at something
Really good. Get good ts as many things as you can. Being good at one thing makes it easier to get good at other things.
2. Getting good at stuff takes practice.
Lots and lots of practice.
3. Get OBSESSED
Everyone at the top of their field is obsessed with what they're doing.
4. Doing something well and thoroughly is it's OWN reward.
5. Show and Tell
If you do something well and you're happy with it, for FSM's
sake, tell EVERYONE
6. IF YOU WANT SOMETHING, ASK.
If something piques your interest, tell someone, if you want to learn something, ask someone, like your BOSS. As an employer I can tell you, people who want to learn new skills are people I want to keep employed.
7. Have GOALS
Make up goals. Set goals. Regularly assess where you are and where you want to be in terms of them. This is a kind of prayer that works, and works well. Allow for the fact that things will NEVER turn out like you think they will, and you must be prepared to end up miles from where you intended.
8. BE NICE
TO EVERYONE. Life is way to short to be an asshole. If you are an asshole, apologize.
9. Fail
You will fail. It's one of our jobs in life. Keep failing. When you fail, admit it. When you don't, don't get cocky, 'Cause you're just about to fail again.
10. WORK YOUR ASS OFF
Work like your life depends on it.
"Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible duplicate of some Unix utility and giving it to me. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would be very hard to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is absent. Most interface specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contribution works with the rest of Unix, it will probably work with the rest of GNU."
This stood out to me. Back in 1983 online collaboration was unheard of, and it was only the incredibly modular nature of Unix which made the project seem at all plausible.
> Back in 1983 online collaboration was unheard of
Not really. Stallman mentioned Chaosnet which the AI Lab had used for, among other things, internal mail (not yet called "e-mails") between developers about changes to programs. He also mentions UUCP, which was the godawful Unix way of sharing files (and which could be used for mail purposes).
This is really, IMO, why no new community OS has ever taken off. Only clones of existing architectures. I was briefly involved with TUNES many years ago. Getting people on the same page is an immense task, when creating something new and different. You get stuck in the bike shed tar pit. Focusing on a well-specified Unix clone was definitely the right thing to do.
