This is so neat, as Phil mentioned in the How to run a software bookclub post, out of a group of 500, only 1-2%, 5-10 people may contribute with comments. But he lets the group grow in size because it is minimal overhead and many "lurkers" say they really appreciate reading the comments and get a lot out of it.
I am left wondering is there any way to see past comments on book discussions? I would love to read the discussions as I go through a book already done by the club on my own.
I keep thinking about doing future ones semi-public (need to sign up to be allowed to post) but I already spend more time on the book club than I particularly want to so I mostly just keep doing the same thing which works fine enough. It's also not unlikely we'd repeat a book in a few years (for example we'll read DDIAv2 probably next year). So for now, join the mailing list and new readings as they happen.
Weird. I got bored with the Tanenbaum books (because they are very abstract and theoretical). The 3 piece book OS was very refreshing and I actually learned stuff
This is great. I sort of feel a lack of fora for discussing technical books over a longer lifetime than merely say, the HN front page.
While there is a very good selection of readings, it's unfortunate that both LinkedIn and Google are being used here, especially if the discussion is text-only.
I am left wondering is there any way to see past comments on book discussions? I would love to read the discussions as I go through a book already done by the club on my own.
https://notes.eatonphil.com/2024-05-30-how-i-run-book-clubs....
1. https://www.regular-expressions.info/email.html
isn't the real pragmatic answer to parse out known invalid email address strings, and only attempt to deliver an email if unsure?
I wish there was an update to this book, reading it a while back I think it covered some proposed HTTP/2 features but definitely not HTTP/3.
Many of the issues discussed had to do with TCP itself.
(I help host nycsystems w/ Phil- we don't mind, just an easier way to know who is who other than email)
While there is a very good selection of readings, it's unfortunate that both LinkedIn and Google are being used here, especially if the discussion is text-only.