From what I see, Node is something you install on a web server and it executes javascript server-side. How is it possible to build a web application (with user authentication, web pages with different content, etc.) from that? It doesn't seem anything like web frameworks I've heard about in the past like Rails and Django.
The shell of a web app/website can be built with white background on black text without any viewing library at first, right? So, would it make sense for a beginner to just pick one of the few frameworks you listed above Note+Express/Laravel/Django/etc. and just get to work on what it means to have a CRUD?
I feel like most tutorials always complicated things by trying to add too much at once -- to a fault, I've never been able to learn Node/Express and build a working app where I could add a record, delete it, update it, etc. Once it gets to "ROUTING" I kind of lose it, unfortunately. Haha.
I would probably be better off with Wordpress for most website needs, anyway...
The core WordPress software is amazing. The plugin developers and community are another story. I've had cases where WordPress plugins have unlisted dependencies, bundled plugins that completely alter the WordPress Dashboard, build systems that go against established WordPress software patterns, etc etc etc. The majority of the community seems to be fine with this as they treat it like self-hosted Squarespace (set it, forget it, don't need to learn programming, contract any programming that does need to happen as cheaply as possible).
I was just there recently and there are rooms off to the side of the David which had so many sculptures. I remember it vividly because they all had these black markings sticking out of them in symmetrical places all over the faces and bodies. Is this what you're speaking of? I can't remember seeing the works in progress, as you mention.
I thought it was at that museum, perhaps it was another. The statues were clearly incomplete. The arms and legs were often still just a block of stone, uncarved. I'll dig through my photos later to see if it was a different location.
Well YouTube was similar when it first started, no? People were uploading whatever they wanted, and eventually they rolled out DMCA takedown and reporting features for copyright infringement violations.
Over time, the service was setup with a full feature set to handle all of this, but it didn't exist when YouTube first started.
Best of luck to you. I'm not hiring or run a business, but I enjoyed reading your write-up and checked out your personal site. I'm now looking at the Dataquest webpage and considering signing up. Been meaning to get into Data Science for a while..
Off topic but can someone answer this for me? Are the stars in our night sky part of our galaxy or no? It seems such a stupid question to ask, but when I look online it says we have one star, our Sun, whereas other galaxies have one or multiple - for instance a galaxy with two stars would be called a Binary System.
So where are the stars in our night sky? Are they even further away than Uranus, Neptune.., but so bright we see them anyway?
>Are the stars in our night sky part of our galaxy or no
Every star you see in the night sky with the naked eye is part of our galaxy.
>for instance a galaxy with two stars would be called a Binary System.
A galaxy usually has billions or trillion of stars. Our solar system has one star, which is our sun ( a sun is a star with planets around it). Our solar system is inside of a galaxy, which is made up of billions and billions of stars.
>So where are the stars in our night sky? Are they even further away than Uranus, Neptune.., but so bright we see them anyway?
All stars are outside of our solar system by definition. They are light-years away ( the time it takes to get there at the speed of light is years), but most planets are light-minutes away.
Either I didn't get your question, or you're a bit confused about the structure of the universe. Not a problem.
There's Earth, it's a planet orbiting our star, Sol AKA the Sun, in our solar system. A star has plenty of bodies orbiting around it, dust, asteroids, planets, so the whole group is called a solar system.
There's other stars "next" to us, which in turn have dust, asteroids and planets orbiting around them. So they also are solar systems, since all stars have stuff orbiting around them.
Stars (/solar systems) tend to cluster together in a galaxy. A galaxy is composed of billions of stars.
Earth/our Solar system is in the Milky Way galaxy, so most of the stuff we see in the sky are stars that are not very far from us and/or part of the Milky Way galaxy.
The closest galaxy from ours is Andromeda, which is in turn composed of billions of stars, and countless planets.
So, the order is planet (Earth) -> star (Sun) -> (grouped into a) solar system -> galaxy (Milky Way)
Binary systems are solar systems which do not have a single star, but they have TWO! and these stars orbit each other. A galaxy has millions of binary systems (not sure how rare they are)
Uranus, Neptune, etc. are part of our solar system, so yeah, the stars you see are farther beyond.
EDIT: apparently I'm a bit confused as well, as star/planet groups are called planetary systems, and only ours is called the Solar System (from Sol/the Sun). The more you know.
Note that the Magellanic Clouds are basically orbiting our galaxy, and that the next closest independent galaxy is Andromeda, 2 and a half million light years away.
As others have covered, the stars you can see are all in our galaxy. The closest star to us is around 4 light years (the sun is around 8 light minutes).
The two obvious extra-galactic objects you can see are (1) Andromeda, which appears as a small smudge but is actually huge: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4Z_aNPDvDVU/UtvEsVBCzSI/AAAAAAAAD... and (2) the large magellanic clouds which are a bit more obvious.
Andromeda is the nearest big galaxy to us, but the LMC still has its own stars.
To answer your last question - yes, this is the concept of apparent magnitude. Stars are so incredibly bright that you can see them despite the fact they're very distant. We can see the planets even though the only light we're getting is from reflection. Look at how bright Jupiter or Saturn are, for example, and then think what a miserable fraction of the Sun's light they actually reflect, and how much of that we receive on Earth. It's a very small percentage - the Sun is just really bright.
This is an important point though - you cannot measure the size of most stars directly. We've been able to do it with very large stars, but mostly all you know is (a) That star is this bright and (b) it's this colour. From that astronomers can derive models to figure out how large it is. Even if you know the distance, it's not trivial: is it a really tiny, but stupidly bright object or is it a massive, but really dim object? Beyond a certain distance you have to use models and make educated guesses.
When we look up at the "heavens" with the naked eye, we have our own personalized "starry night", courtesy of, and unique to our own, galaxy.
We don't see the individual stars from other galaxies. We barely can even see other galaxies with the naked eye. But once technology shows us that the sky is filled with galaxies, invisible to the unassisted eye, it blows the mind away. Every galaxy has it's own unique "starry night".
Astonishingly, some have projected that there are more galaxies in the universe than stars in our Milky Way galaxy. ~d
What you are calling a 'galaxy' is actually just our solar system, one of millions in the Milky Way Galaxy. The stars you see are located in our galaxy.
Sad about the Kinect, but don't interpret this as Microsoft/Xbox failing. They are actually doing a fantastic job with the Xbox brand. The X (scorpio) is launching soon, and they are releasing a bunch of older titles into their ever-expanding backwards compatibility library. In addition, developers are pushing out graphics/performance update patches for the popular titles on the X, and recently overhauled the Xbox UI - it is extremely snappy now and customizable.
Thanks for the feedback and for sharing your personal experiences. I think your comment about value being created in other ways (and in sometimes incredibly simple, non-techy ways) is something important to not lose sight of. Also, just in that example alone, future enhancement of a service like that could be automating the newsletter into multiple formats, for viewing on the go (such as a kindle format, PDF, etc.), instead of leaving it email only.
But yea, like I said in my OP, I don't even have a business idea yet. Whatever it is, it will need to have a real value prop to be worth doing.
This looks like an awesome concept. I'm going to fill a profile in the next few days, as I was just updating my resume. Hopefully I can have success as one of the site's early members.
