Why are O'Reilly books kinda shit?
>>55327360
here's your reply
>>55327360
(you)
>>55327390
>>55327405
Are you getting paid to shitpost?
>>55327360
Awww... too hard for you?
Look around for the Little Golden Books versions.
They're not shit. Books are usually a better resource than the internet for learning, anyway.
Good luck googling some shit that Pajeet posted on SO and learning from that.
Because Bill O'Reilly is a sperg
>>55328834
Their machine learning and ai books are shit and very superficial. Fizzbuzzers like you wouldn't know, however.
>>55328904
I feel like every Pajeet in IT gets to write a book and submit it to this publisher.
t. PhD in ML
>>55330891
>>55330891
Both of these things happen but Pajeetposting on SO is much more prevalent.
>>55327360
I think they're a lot better than most the books out there.
Why ask a rhetorical question you know is disputed, while not providing why you think so?
>>55327360
>That massive brick for learning about Sendmail, a simple command to send a mail.
>>55332655
They're really dry and superficial, providing no fundamental explanation and instead offering recipe book. For example, making a reader think he can do computer vision just because he typed out a few commands in python opencv. Some of them don't even show any technical knowledge and is instead just an author's rambling.
I'm generalizing though, maybe there's actually a good book from this publisher that I might have missed. Why don't you some good ones, eh?
I can point to Mastering Regular Expressions like something worth, like a complementary knowledge, but yeah generally they are bad
>>55327360
I've never found a single o'reilly book that was actually worth reading all the way through.
I could certainly never recommend any of them.
Often-times, they're too dependent on a flavor of the week framework that the author just fell in love with, and other times, it's just the author rambling and dropping hot opinions.
This makes the books age like spoiled milk.
The ones that serve as "reference" texts might have once had a place on a developer's desk, but thanks to the internet, paper documentation is completely obsolete.
>>55332888
>Building Oracle XML Applications
>>55332888
You should read the UHH chapter on sendmail.
http://richard.esplins.org/static/downloads/unix-haters-handbook.pdf
>contrarian faggot being contrarian
>>55333809
DON'T
>>55332888
Fuck. I once had to read parts of a massive 400 page book on SNMP
It was the most fucking boring book I have ever read
>>55333079
what is a non-recipe book? any recs?
>>55327360
Ben?
>>55333839
>So I decided to upgrade to the latest version of Berzerkly Sendmail (8.6.5) which reputedly does a very good job of not adhering to the standard in question. It comes with an FAQ document. Isn’t it nice that we have FAQs, so that increasingly incompetent Weenix Unies can install and misconfigure increasingly complex software, and sometimes even diagnose problems that once upon a time would have required one to <gasp> read the source code!
Fuck, this is good. Thanks anon.
Coding books are almost universally poorly written.
>that Python book
1600 pages that could've been condensed into 700 or so.
>>55334107
With one programming language's worth of background, most books on new languages could be condensed to fewer than 100.
Give me a general overview, a grammar, what shit does, some examples of shit being done, and common pitfalls. Add in basic I/O and math libraries, and you are ready to go.
>>55334133
> JavaScript: The Good Parts.
>>55334181
that book has an entire section dedicated to the "bad parts" of javascript.
And it's literally just a list of every C-like construct in the language.
He shits on for loops, incrementers, the array subscript operator, continue statement, bitwise operators, etc.
>>55334181
>What is "Nothing", Alex?
>>55334073
I personally enjoy the story of one apple employee sending a mangled email which resulted in apple.com's MX server (VAX machine) receiving 40,000 Error messages from relays and hosts around the world.
