Agree, Kat, the interface reminds me a bit of slack and having it as a desktop app makes it quite easy to browse when you have a couple of minutes of free time.

Wow! Damn!

thanks :)

I'm not saying to use what frameworks win in popularity. The problem is; how are you supposed to know which framework/library tool is going to be the best for your project without actually trying it in said project? I've heard a lot of stories of startups going down a path of using a new library because they initally thought it would be the right tool to fit their needs, but after actually implementing it they find it was the worst decision they ever made. They inevitably end up needing to rewrite everything (eventually) using the more appropriate tool.

With that said, I'm looking for advice on how to avoid that scenario, but yet stay current with tech.

Prototype!

Agreed, this concept of making a modular, reusable, less technical code editing, and a collaborative coding environment is what a lot of engineers see as the future of development. I've heard some engineers argue that this is going to be a better way for them to collaborate with product owners and managers. I do wonder though what it would take to have companies start adopting a type of workflow using such apps...

Couldn't they have blocked it for another reason listed in their terms? Wouldn't it make the most sense to ask them in an appeal?

GitHub doesn't want to be in violation of ITAR, its a bad thing to get stuck under.

The saddest part is that a lot of individuals won't even consider this when seeing such content.

Aren't those ideas the ones that are always the most successful businessess too?

If one can continue to crank out those simple genius ideas, yes. And if one has the rest of the skills necessary to run a business.

Cool stuff, can't wait to give it a try.

Thank you

Feel free to open issues if you have questions!

What a thoughtful response. I'd love to know which readings you'd suggest reading and in what order.

In order to understand Kant, first read David Hume's Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Kant's major ideas are entirely a response to this essay (we English-speakers are lucky to have this crucial piece of the Enlightenment in our native tongue). Hume argues that cause and effect are entirely empirical concepts, which has the implication that we can't actually talk about "eternal laws of nature" with any sense. Kant wrote The Critique of Pure Reason and his subsequent critiques in the trilogy to argue that the laws of nature are laws because they are the laws of our ability to experience subjectivity at all. The Critique is very dense and technically written and the English translations do little to abate this. I would recommend reading it with a companion commentary text though unfortunately that wasn't the path I'd taken so I can't pick out a specific one.

Did you mean to say in his native tongue? There are way more English-speakers than native English-speakers.

I think the person you're replying to meant to say "we native English speakers".

Not the user you replied to, but there's no harm (and in my judgement great benefit) from diving right into Kant, or more generally, German idealism - so Kant, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Marx is also worth visiting for his "Hegelian" materialism (in this case opposed to idealism). That'll provide the basics to know what Foucault was talking about.

The Cambridge Companion to German Idealism (I forget which year) is also highly recommended though I haven't looked into that myself.

Also, to plug my own favorite dead German guy, Schopenhauer spends a lot of time in his writings explaining (his interpretation of) Kant's ideas, and his prose is much easier to understand than Kant's, even in translation. You won't get any love for Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel from him though.

>You won't get any love for Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel from him though.

You most certainly won't :)

It should be noted that even Kant said that Hume "awoke me [kant] from my dogmatic slumber." Hume is pivotal to Kant's work, so at least reading the Enquiry is a good thing to read before Kant.

While true, and I realize the irony of saying this since I mentioned building up to Foucault, I don't think one is harmed so much by simply starting. There's a lot of people who try to pile on more and more prerequisites and I think it's less productive; for every person who tells you to read Hume before Kant there are ten who will tell you to read Berkely before Hume. Personally I simply entered what interested me; first Marx (which is an ongoing love) then Hegel and now Kant. Heraclitus can come later.

It's equally important to do the research yourself as well so that you can make more educated decisions with your attorney. I would, at least, read your local state laws in regards to this subject.

Bankruptcy is a federal statue not state. And the law is extremely complex. I don't disagree people should be informed but this requires an attorney to properly prepare.

If the investment was debt equity versus a priced round that also drasticly affects the options available.

OP please reach out to an attorney, and ask lots of questions. And make sure they understand the details of how the investment was done etc.

IANAL but there are a couple of ways this could work out in your Companies favor.

Thank you! This is helpful. Will discuss further with Cooley. They weren’t too stressed about it, but since the investor is getting more motivated to sell, I’m trying to best educate myself

I have to agree. I mean it's not like you're the one storing the data, but you are the one giving it up by participating in using the technology at hand.