I don't mind long novels. I finished Lonesome Dove earlier this year and it's extremely good. The Count of Monte Cristo was last year and I didn't particularly care for it. In fact, I thought it was one of the most overrated books I've read. My question is about Neal Stephenson. He gets a lot of recommendations here. Some years ago, I read Snow Crash and it was obviously pretty dated by then. My real question is what is the best entry point into Stephenson's longer fiction and any secrets to reading it. That is, he tends to digress a bit. Any recommendations?

f you just want correct future predictions at a past point, then you are reading Stephenson wrong.

What if it's dated? Anything wrong with that?

You don't like the mythology of a culture being blended into a great story with futuristic tech?

I just loved that.

I see Stephenson as an unapologetic celebration of nerdy, intelligent stuff. It it definitely not the only way.

I have read Quicksilver. The way the novel portrays that time, and my Science heroes, is just fantastic. I don't care at all that it's dated.

My first book from him was Cryptonomicon. I care about History, Math, Computers, and that book blended all that in a coherent setup with proper environmental creation.

I also like the writing style. It's so clean and friendly.

I finished Stoner about 6 weeks ago. It was excellent and if you let it, it would make you think. Haven't tried Williams' Augustus yet but it's on the list soon.

LinkedIn has degraded considerably since the Microsoft acquisition. It’s hardly better than Facebook now. I dropped my premium subscription several years ago. I can get Trump sucks memes anywhere. It’s harder to find and cultivate business contacts.

Depends on your goals and much of the advice that you'll receive will revolve around maximizing the college experience. This is certainly important. However, as a hiring manager for several decades, one of the things that routinely frustrated me was a stream of candidates from very good schools that were totally ignorant of basic business practices. Most graduates will not work for FAANG companies upon graduation. They will go into industry. And yes, right now AI/vibe coding is all the rage. The issue becomes what value does one bring to the company. I've seen this play out many times over the decades. So my suggestion is to burn a couple of electives on things like accounting and business management. Learn to write well and speak well in front of any audience. When you interview with an insurance company after graduation, for example, the hiring manager isn't going to be overwhelmed with your ability to write a compiler or even necessarily your vibe coding skills. They will likely be impressed more by your presentation skills, your ability to grasp business concepts, etc. Enjoy college, but don't become so rigidly engaged with technical topics that you limit your future opportunities.

I fail to see how your past frustrations with the skills of your entry levels hires is OP's problem. OP should fulfill their own learning goals, not try to fit themselves into last century's corporate mold. If they have trouble getting hired because they need some accounting skills (unlikely, btw), they can solve that with a Coursera course or a few weeks at the local community college.

Undergrad is where you learn to learn, learn to think critically, and learn to adapt to changes in the world. Any coursework that fails to focus on those broader learning goals and just teaches vocational skills is an utter waste of their tuition money.

I'm not saying that such info is useless. I fully agree that it can be helpful. But don't burn tuition and college credits on that. Learn things in college that are more complex and require more engagement. Take yourself to a higher level of thinking, so instead of worrying about how some future interview at an insurance company would go, you never even have to step on the path that would make you want an interview at an insurance company in the first place.

Apparently, you missed my opening statement. It depends on the OP's goals. But, by no means is my advice "last century". Many here approach their careers as if FAANG and technology was all there is. It's not. Tuition is unquestionably an issue. Nonetheless, it should be viewed as an investment. And no, Coursa is generally not an adequate substitute for an actual education. It's a way to familiarize oneself with a topic but by no means is it comparable to the typical university treatment. It's fine to believe that "it's different this time or today". It's not. History has shown repeatedly that it repeats. And contrary to what many think and hype, the current "AI" trends are not going to replace the need for human thinking. And if you believe it is, then why go to college at all?

Why is it too many? Books are an experience that no digital medium can’t replicate or even imitate. Plus one owns their books in perpetuity, unlike digital that is merely licensed and ephemeral.

If they are actually interested in the profession, and not just the money, find a smaller company in the area that’s hiring for a less specialized role, one a generalist has a chance of performing, eg a customer support role somewhere that maintains some development efforts. Even this will be difficult if the last ten years or so hasn’t afforded them some basic people and business skills. In other words, regardless of the role, they have to bring something to the job. Assuming they do and can get hired, then it’s about learning that business, technical space, etc. It will be a lot of work regardless. Is FAANG a possibility? Yes, perhaps, but not a probable one. However, there thousands of commercial companies uilding and deploying interesting projects and paying very good salaries.

Turn off CNN , FoxNews, MSNBC or wherever you’re getting your hyperbolic reaction. You have much more to be concerned with, such as the DSA takeover of the Democratic Party and the alignment with antisemitism than anything Trump dreams up.

As expected, communism is alive and well here. I find the lack of historical perspective here to be a serious indictment of the educational system.

your responses are hyperbolic in themselves. you are accusing the folks in one of the highly educated forums to be not representative of real education. all the while you've not posted a single sentence of substance. be self-aware!

America is well into the midpoint of slow and steady decline; and balkanized states are not helping. Lots of other countries are going downhill as well, but nothing like the spectacular fall of USA.

I'll stand by my comments. There is a perception here that the Trump administration is historically dangerous and we've never seen anything like it. That's not factually defensible. Now in my 70s, I've seen presidents come and go and frankly the vast majority of them have left a lot to be desired. All presidents have engaged in activities that at best could be considered extralegal, particularly when viewed from the "other side". Realistically, Trump has done less damage to the country than Biden for example. Or more correctly Biden's team. The decline of western democracies stems from being unwilling to stand up for the very values that made those countries successful, massive immigration from Mexico and the Middle East, unwillingness to reject radical Islam, calling for the elimination of police, etc (the list is lengthy) are all reflections of a lack of civic courage on the part of elected officials the world over. France, Spain, Great Britain, Germany, as well as the US have all surrendered much of their culture to immigration. And the results aren't favorable to traditional Western countries. So yes, most are in decline. And attempts to halt the decline, as some of Trump's policies are directed, are met with scorn and derision, claims of fascism, etc. Such claims are historically inaccurate.

Another bad decision that won't stand the test of time. The decision says more about the justices themselves than it does the decision. Voting the "right way" gets positive press attention, invites to the DC social circle, etc. Kavanaugh and Barrett are both attention seeking, weak willed individuals that Roberts plays like puppets. Personally, Trump should not have nominated either of them. And W's nomination and selection of Roberts over Scalia was appalling. Neither a textualist or an originalist could have ruled that way. And using the 14th Amendment as justification is historically disingenuous, as Clarence Thomas pointed out. Birth tourism will thrive.

I'm sorry, you are saying that using the highest law of the land to settle a legal question it directly addresses is historically disingenuous?

No, I'm saying the use of the 14th amendment to justify the majority opinion is disingenuous, as Thomas points out.

So pirating is the answer? I don't think so. It's unethical and illegal. Buy the physical media of the books, movies, and music that you consume. Quit screwing the creators. I've seen numerous complaints on HN about one's code being stolen. What's the difference?

> It's unethical and illegal.

I don't think it's unethical. It's illegal on the distribution side, but not if you're just downloading. I don't really care either way, because I don't think it's unethical.

> I've seen numerous complaints on HN about one's code being stolen. What's the difference?

The 'stealing' in those cases is usually plagiarism; copying someone's work and not attributing it to them. I will happily attribute all media I've ever downloaded to their creators. If that's all it would take to make 'piracy' legal, I would happily do it.

It may or may not be unethical, but I can 100% certainly say it is not universally illegal.