If there was a way I could say "go you", yeah, I want to do that. He's a great guy, has done great work, go him.
And all that said, I bet this is not a "go him" job, I bet he makes a difference, maybe a huge one, maybe not so huge, but I bet he makes a difference. Let's come back in 5 years, I bet he will have made stuff better.
Each chapter had a pithy quote at the start, and my favorite was the excerpt from the EDSAC instruction set:
Z -- Halt and Ring Bell: Stop the machine and ring the warning bell
Edit: thanks for the explanation. Note to the several downvoters: you aren’t accomplishing much here by “punishing” innocent unfamiliarity with an in-joke...
If you do get around to reading CA: AQA, you can follow along with this Coursera course (it's taught by the professor I had when I took it at Princeton, and he does a great job teaching it): https://www.coursera.org/learn/comparch
Your recommendation was very useful and interesting to me, and I bought the paperback. I was surprised that it was cheaper to buy a used paperback than to rent it via Kindle for a month.
Also, Hennessy was also one of the minds behind the MIPS architecture.
Don't ignore the books on the assumption its too hard as that wasn't my experience of them.
Are the new editions worth it? My library lets me get an e-book of the 4th edition from 2007 for free, so are the last decade of added material worth buying it?
They both use one of Hennessy's book. Although I think 370 used Tanebaum's years before that
I love computer science now a lot more than I did at the time, heh, but that's part of why I bothered finishing early. The professional environment suits me well.
The intro to this video talks a bit about his accomplishments as president.
This video is probably more in line with the interests of the community here (Stanford Seminar - Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders: John Hennessy of Stanford University):
I was in the audience when he announced the launching of the Knight-Hennessey scholarship. It was an incredible speech. He was always an incredible fundraiser, but putting together a $750M fully endowed scholarship program is a heck of a way to say goodbye to the university.
How much influence does a chairman really have on the the vision though? Isn't that more of the CEO's business?
I suppose the board picks the CEO, but that spot doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon.
In an ideal situation the chairman can function as the intellectual sparring partner of the CEO. Not many can do that, as some things cannot be discussed outside of the company personnel, and going downwards in the chain of command always has this gradient of authority which can function as an intellectual inhibitor.
<meta name=Title content=cv.html>
<meta name=Keywords content="">
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document>
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14">
<meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 14">
<link rel=File-List href="cv_files/filelist.xml">
<link rel=Edit-Time-Data href="cv_files/editdata.mso">
EDIT: and now contrast1970 has solved the mystery!
From what little I've read of it for my classes in the subject, it's well written and accessible.
I'm a CS PhD student, but my undergrad and master's are in physics, so I didn't go through all of the same steps many did in their CS curricula.
Agree with gp, very well written text. Probably the only class textbook that I have actually read entirely. (10 years ago or whatever)
At least that's the impression I got of Hennessey from Malcolm Gladwell's podcast http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/06-my-little-hundred-...
I couldn't help but get a chuckle out of the subtitle.
One day I hope my side hustles involve helping to run an $800B company.
Schmidt has been on his way out for a couple years - it appeared to have been part of a planned transition.
When that didn’t pan out, they didn’t see much use in keeping him around, especially in light of Trump’s penchant for grudges.
Google isn't some benevolent entity. They've recently been on a hiring spree for Republican lobbyists (which most here consider much more evil than democrats). Personally I think both parties are not that different.
It frustrates me greatly to see comments like this. It's worth taking a moment to even briefly skim the official platforms of the two major parties. They are profoundly different on a enormous range of substantive issues and policies.
Perhaps there are some issues on which the two parties agree, and certainly there are many political positions which neither party represents. That hardly means that the two parties are "not that different."
However, it probably fair to say both parties have most candidates skewed to the middle on many of those issues. Lining up strongly with the party on all of those things doesn't win elections usually. And it's also fair to say both parties have members that will betray those base positions for wealth or power.
I can see why someone would call them similar based on frustration with a two party system that rewards moderates.
I'm astounded that there are blacks living in ghettos but Nancy Pelosi shuts Govt down for people who are pondered to by speaking Spanish but paraded as having known no other culture and assimilated.
Duckduckgo is your friend.
"In 2012, Google paid Stanford $80,000 for the license, a sharp decline from the $400,000 paid in 201a and only 1/10 of what Google paid in 2010. Since Google began disclosing these payments, the company has paid Stanford around $3 million in licensing fees. Of course, that’s in addition to the $1.8 million shares that Google issued to Stanford, and which the school sold for $336 million in 2005.Google made up some of the difference by donating $3.4 million to Stanford for scholarships and what the proxy describes as “other philanthropic endeavors”, compared with $3 million in 2011."
The share grant must have been fairly early on the history of the company (or else Google won't be able to use PageRank, which was fundamental to Google Search), probably pre-Series A. Google itself wasn't worth that much back then, so the 1M shares was probably bigger slice of a much smaller pie that eventually got diluted through later funding rounds.