But how did a few air mattresses on the floor of a San Francisco loft become the most widely-used anecdote for startup growth hacking? I would never do this. It also serves as an example of an early stage startup doing everything necessary to get off the ground.
May This essay is derived from a guest lecture at Harvard, which incorporated an earlier talk at Northeastern. When I finished grad school in computer science I went to art school to study painting. A lot of people seemed surprised that someone interested in computers would also be interested in painting.
They seemed to think that hacking and painting Hackers hacking essay very different kinds of work-- that hacking was cold, precise, and methodical, and that painting was the frenzied expression of some primal urge.
Both of these images are wrong. Hacking and painting have a lot in common. Along with composers, architects, and writers, what hackers and painters are trying to do is make good things. Computer science is a grab bag of tenuously related areas thrown together by an accident of history, like Yugoslavia.
In the middle you have people working on something like the natural history of computers-- studying the behavior of algorithms for routing data through networks, for example.
And then Hackers hacking essay the other extreme you have the hackers, who are trying to write interesting software, and for whom computers are just a medium of expression, as concrete is for architects or paint for painters.
Sometimes what the hackers do is called "software engineering," but this term is just as misleading. Good software designers are no more engineers than architects are. It falls between what and how: What and how should not be kept too separate. But hacking can certainly be more than just deciding how to implement some spec.
Perhaps one day "computer science" will, like Yugoslavia, get broken up into its component parts. That might be a good thing. Especially if it meant independence for my native land, hacking.
But the people at either end, the hackers and the mathematicians, are not actually doing science. But for the hackers this label is a problem.
So instead of doing what they really want to do, which is to design beautiful software, hackers in universities and research labs feel they ought to be writing research papers. In the best case, the papers are just a formality.
Hackers write cool software, and then write a paper about it, and the paper becomes a proxy for the achievement represented by the software. But often this mismatch causes problems.
Number two, research must be substantial-- and awkward systems yield meatier papers, because you can write about the obstacles you have to overcome in order to get things done.
Nothing yields meaty problems like starting with the wrong assumptions. As Ricky Ricardo used to say, "Lucy, you got a lot of explaining to do.
This kind of work is hard to convey in a research paper. So why do universities and research labs continue to judge hackers by publications? For the same reason that "scholastic aptitude" gets measured by simple-minded standardized tests, or the productivity of programmers gets measured in lines of code.
These tests are easy to apply, and there is nothing so tempting as an easy test that kind of works. Measuring what hackers are actually trying to do, designing beautiful software, would be much more difficult.
You need a good sense of design to judge good design. The only external test is time. Over time, beautiful things tend to thrive, and ugly things tend to get discarded.
Unfortunately, the amounts of time involved can be longer than human lifetimes. I think hackers just have to resign themselves to having a large random component in their reputations.
In this they are no different from other makers. The influence of fashion is not nearly so great in hacking as it is in painting. There are worse things than having people misunderstand your work. A worse danger is that you will yourself misunderstand your work.
Related fields are where you go looking for ideas. If you find yourself in the computer science department, there is a natural temptation to believe, for example, that hacking is the applied version of what theoretical computer science is the theory of. All the time I was in graduate school I had an uncomfortable feeling in the back of my mind that I ought to know more theory, and that it was very remiss of me to have forgotten all that stuff within three weeks of the final exam.Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment - a report which the government of Ukraine said was fake news.
In connection with the emergence in some media reports which stated. Computer Hacking: The Essential Hacking Guide for Beginners (Hacking, How to Hack, Hacking , Hacking for dummies, Hacking Guide, internet skills, hacking guide, how to hack, hacking free guide) Kindle Edition.
May (This essay is derived from a guest lecture at Harvard, which incorporated an earlier talk at Northeastern.) When I finished grad school in computer science I went to art school to study painting.
Thanks for the feedback Denis. I actually believe that the best growth hackers do innovate. Yes they need to be analytical and disciplined, but without testing innovative ideas it is unlikely that they will figure out the big growth programs.
Introduction There are no precise, reliable statistics on the amount of computer crime and the economic loss to victims, partly because many of these crimes are apparently not detected by victims, many of these crimes are never reported to authorities, and partly because the losses are often difficult to .
"Storytelling" is a bit of a buzz word except when it's actually put to good use. Then it's just marketing genius. See how to use it in this post.