Fireship – Learn to Code Faster
fireship.io
fireship.io
If you haven't heard of fireship, do this instead of complaining about his prices:
1. Watch a few videos on his YouTube for free (https://m.youtube.com/c/fireship)
2. If you enjoy it, subscribe/watch more.
3. If you really like it and want to take his courses then pay for a membership.
This guy can get information on a new topic into my brain faster than anyone on YouTube, while keeping me entertained and enjoying every minute of it. His code report videos are so entertaining (but less technical) that my non programmer wife likes to watch them.
I'm glad he can make a living at this. He's put thousands of hours of labor into producing fantastic content for free. I was happy to pay a fraction of a days pay to buy a lifetime membership to support his years of work, but if you don't like it don't buy it.
High quality technical content is important to me, and I'm thankful whenever those creators find a way to eat without being totally subservient to google's algorithms.
I normally never subscribe to channels on Youtube but these 2 are so good for both getting a clear explanation on what you want to learn and keeping up-to-date with what's to come.
The primary reason I subscribed to his Pro lifetime membership was to support him as a content creator. However, after consuming several of his full-access courses, I enjoyed and found real value in his matter of fact, rapid-paced delivery of content.
Jack, if you’re reading this - please don’t let the negative comments here discourage you. Many of us are fans, and know that we support what you’re doing for the dev community.
IMO, Every YouTuber should also host their content on their website instead if relying upon conformist algorithms for Ads & Scammy sponsors; I've seen neither on Fireship videos, Besides he offers more value through his website.
Fireship person, More power to you as a fellow indie; Don't pay much attention to those who would praise a $999 monitor stand from a Trillion $ company but ask why an indie charges $30 for a living.
Subscribed!
I honestly believe we’re currently being too focused on productivity hacks, so we’re not seeing the forest for the trees. You reading and remembering a line from a book is not the same as you understanding that line, and in this example where they state they are giving you a 60 minute lesson in 5 minutes - how much understanding are you actually left with at the end?
At the end of the day, your approach is the Yang to my approach.
I think this is highly project and phase dependent as well, and sometimes the most valuable resource is a resource that can explain the essence of a thing in minutes thereby allowing you to make a decision about whether or not spending more time on the subject is warranted.
I am essentially paid to know a wide variety of possibilities to solve a problem and then narrow down on some of them.
One of the most helpful things for me is quick and concise introductions to a topic that give me some outlines and enough terms to google to rapid-fire through hundreds of criterias on why something could or could not be a good fit for the problem at hand.
The worst slowdowns in this process are topics for which only lengthy books/docs are available. Don't get me wrong, I need those to learn more about the topic later but they often make it hard to get an easy overview.
* Retention requires repetition
* Understanding requires interaction
That's one of the reasons why learning by reading is so powerful: Reading is an active involvement, it's an interaction.Videos CAN deliver that, but it's a lot harder, because a video is not something I conciously need to interact with; I press play and it plays, whether my mind wanders to something else or no.
Videos can deliver repetition, but the format in which social media present them (with the next clickbait always only a small flick of the cursor way) doesn't exactly help.
IMHO, Videos can excel at explaining topics with laser focus on a small, complex topic, that is then explained in detail with multiple examples. When trying to teach broad topics reading wins out most of the time.
1) Retention is not always needed. If my primary goal is to gain cursory knowledge of the top 5 frontend frameworks so I can decide which one I'll sink the necessary time into so I can retain/understand it, the short format can be fine (and highly desirable). I'll follow it up with a proper deep dive.
2) Understanding of core subjects may have already been established by decades of experience, and the video is just communicating what is possible, or the delta between Tech A and Tech B.
I think it boils down to: each format has a time and a place. I do think that trying to learn the depths of a completely new subject by watching 5 minute hyper-distilled overviews is not going to go well.
But that's not why I find these videos useful, personally.
I see a general decline of attention spans around me and I wouldn't be surprised if more learning content takes this route.
There is also something to be said about the fact the I often remember things I saw in edu TikTok more than things I read in a book because it's presented in a more engaging and visual manner. So, I assume it actually helps some people learn easier and lowers the "activation energy" threshold to get started.
Middle-school (and higher) students can't learn exclusively from books any longer. They need interactive engagement with a person (read: celebrity) on the internet. Children are reading less overall, and any parent that tries otherwise has to first push against the "personal portable tech is integral" wall (which was absent only a decade and half ago).
When you see social media platforms competing for our attention using clickbait titles, likes and retweets to give us the social component satisfaction that someone out there found what we had to share worth reading, etc. we're reaching a point where if content cannot, at the very least, match the engagement rate then it's not worth consuming.
It's a judgement call on the quality of information but based on how it's presented and not based on the value of the information itself. That's how we end up using the allure of gamification to engage people doing things that should be engaging in their own. Examples are having a tacked on achievement system that gives you a trophy in a video game, or even in the Fireship learning platform.
For example, as a developer, I loathe coding tutorials in video and I prefer reading books / documentation on the topic.
But for everything that I’m just curious about (which is, science in general), the video format is really nice because I’m not going to invest my time in reading physics books. So instead of watching TV shows, I watch science videos on YouTube.
I know it’s pure entertainment but if I’m honest, I must say learned a lot of useful things that I can use on a daily basis.
Like, understanding the basics of thermodynamics is in fact really useful to heat your home or to correctly cook things. I know I’ll never be an expert in any domain with YouTube videos but they give me more than just watching dumb things.
If you get your git diffs from one commit to the next to start looking concise and clear, maybe one working function added per commit, one block, one small class etc,, then you can start coding pretty quickly, because you're adding in discrete chunks, testing as you go, and you don't get lost trying to do too much at once, you can quickly switch back to the latest working version, debuggging is much faster, etc.
This enables a workflow I love to use for smaller PRs where I just do all the work without making any commits and then at the end of it all I walk through my changes and group/organize the changes however makes the most sense
The mindset has even become part of how I play Factorio, I have dozens of save files like "pre big train refactor" and similar.
You can do that on the command line as well;
git add -pErr, no, thank you.
I can't take anyone seriously when they contradict themselves so quickly.
What was most important to me was to make sure I didn’t burn out and get bored. It was important to get to a fun, captivating project asap.
I've also found reading the source for libraries you use and stepping through with a debugger is really the best way to understand them. This is probably how most people learn their in house code at work. Just treat the whole stack like in house code (within reason). And reading code is also a fabulous skill to hone.
But university… we were all noobs back then :D
One of the best intro to inner workings of JS : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o8hhJPK0m0&list=PLAwxTw4SYa...
sadly udacity is hell bent on removing all quality content off their website so get it while it's on youtube.
> "Why does BigTech keep tracking me!"
> "If you're not the customer, you're the product!"
> "Why is the internet getting monopolized by a few media empires owned by a few billionaires!"
Small indie developer: "hey guys I put a massive amount of work into this project, how about you just act like a customer and pay me a small amount of money".
> "Ahhh this is highway robbery! $30 is outrageously overpriced!"
People are insanely cheap with software, even professional software developers. It's an attitude that's shifting but very slowly. The VC backed ad-economy has anchored everyone's expectation that anything above $0 is somehow a ripoff.
The end result is we all get tracked, our data monetized, and the best job opportunities are mostly obeying the rules of a tiny number of elite overlords who can finance "free" products.
Also, people won't bat an eye at paying $40k, $50k, or $60k for 1 year at a university even though you'd probably learn more programming from doing Fireship's classes then a lot of undergrad CS semesters.
It has more to do with psychological anchoring than any sort of economic rationality.
I could see people who are against major corporations being for paying inde groups a premium for less than perfect service, just as people who are against Microsoft and Apple will tolerate less than ideal user conditions in Linux.
Hypothetically, of course.
Big fan of pop os personally.
The 60k for college is an investment in the future, but more importantly it’s not my money I’m spending, and there’s no replacement for that piece of paper.
This fallacy needs to die. It's why many who work in jobs are highly unqualified (they're hired for credentials/connections, not competency).
If you follow the same path as everyone else, yes. A "hack" of sorts I've done for this is to find things to improve at a place you want to work, front-load the cost of improving them via a small demo/report, and then reach out to someone in the company who'd find it valuable and start building a relationship. In a lot of cases, you end up getting plugged in directly and can skip the resume roulette.
There's a ton of wisdom in this quote that I picked up from Derek Sivers via his music teacher, Kimo Williams: "the standard pace is for chumps." There's always a backdoor to get what you want, you just have to be more creative than the other people to find it.
If everybody is sending a resume through the same channel but you're showing up with a working demo and reaching out directly to people in the company, you stand out. I've gotten gigs by just sending a thank you to people who taught me something indirectly through a blog post or interview.
You have to be human. It's not a process to automate or "game." Just be real with people and you'll be surprised how much easier things get. Very few people do that (especially in a genuine way) and the people who pull the levers know the difference between someone who's authentic and someone who's full of shit.
This is about a subscription for learning. Not a subscription for software. This also has no relation to “tracking”.
I will happily be not using any of his/her resources, even if they are free. Thanks very much.
I paid about 60USD per semester of college, by the way. Where’s your God now?
I'm European, I paid 500 euros per year, and that included laboratories and everything.
> It has more to do with psychological anchoring than any sort of economic rationality.
I really don't understand your argument here. Just because you think it's a fair price doesn't mean it's a good price for me.
FYI I used to spend 40/50$ per hour of algo and ds lessons in the past, or I pay 20$ for french classes and a similar price for chess lessons, all of those over zoom/teams/meets.
I'm not against paying for education, but I don't see the value of a 30$/month membership to do these courses.
Your education was heavily subsidized by the state. The government version of $0 (500 euro/yr) cost supported by ad revenue (taxpayers).
If you go to university to “learn programming” you’re doing it wrong.
Absurd that this even a complaint.
If you’re point is that you can’t trust the program to deliver, that’s valid, but make sure to make the judgement call AFTER you check out their free content first.
Honestly? I’d argue that they should be charging more. The people who are truly interested in investing in long term learning generally have a higher willingness to pay, while everyone else will balk at anything that isn’t free.
> I built this one-of-a-kind learning platform to give you dopamine hits like XP and meme prizes for every little accomplishment
if I already made 300K a year? (Ridiculous, by the way.) No, I would not. At least I would hope that I would be more serious and dedicated.
It’s hilarious that you think programmers who make 300k+ a year need resources such as this one.
They do the most amount of work -- with the least amount of code!
(Compare to long-winded political speeches where a lot is said -- but very little is actually accomplished! <g>)
I think I was responding to [The best hackers I know] are also super terse!
I've spent time in an aggressively terse 1980s/90s codebase (based on VA Fileman, example is [0]). Between single letter variable names and syntax abbreviations, and global scope assumed vars, it was like working in minified JQuery. Aside from NextStep/iOS methodDeclarationsThatTakeAllEightyCharactersBecauseTheyAreIdeDriven, I've never seen a codebase that was too verbose. I think they are few and far between because most people are too lazy to be really verbose.
The best code maintains a close approximation to the mind of a reasonably educated programmer, a mental model of the intent and purpose of the code and what the compiler (or jit, or whatever) can understand. Too terse is too closely fitted to one specific person's mental model.
feature, feature, feature
https://www.theodinproject.com/
If you charged 10$ for it I would off already signed up. I actually want to learn front end React
> Solution: I made a bunch of (better?) videos that teach you how to code.
I’m not sure I understand this logic.
I haven't tried the Fireship courses, but I'm intrigued which teaching approaches preferred by developers: video, text, interactive exercises, book - a combination?
For me, I have found video instruction is massively varied. Although instructors may be familiar with a subject, some are not good at teaching. The best instructors understand their subject but also explain their subject clearly. Also, overly long videos can make watching video a chore. But there are always exceptions (e.g. Harvard online CS50?).
A similar example?: Can you get good at writing by looking at videos, but not reading anything. Or, get good at running, by looking at videos but not actually running? -- Coding is mostly reading and if one doesn't liked that...
But yes sure, some concepts maybe can be nicely explained in videos. It'd be a small % of all one needs to learn I think.
Think about Code Complete, the book. How long would a video have to be, to cover the stuff in the book.
"I create short highly-focused videos" -- a bit contradictory, no? Sure it's "project based" but so are many other free courses
The best system would be having mini Web projects with automatic testing based. So they can program an actual website, whist being marked for actually doing it.
However, that's way too much effort for a one time thing.
Best of luck monetizing it in any way possible. Well deserved.
i am learning rust by reading docs. and it's teaching me so much. i was very fascinated when it gave me a hint about monomorphization. i went a bit deep and it was such a fascinating subject. would a video like these give me a slight hint of something like this and even if they do, they won't cover it.
the issue with these is lets say theres new framework now you have to wait for this guy to upload. the ability to navigate the docs by yourself. that skill is quite important and these take that away. now you are dependent on this guy, these videos. somebody should have already done it.
idk that what i felt. navigating docs is such a vital skill. esp for me. i struggled, it felt daunting 2 years back. but now docs are my way to go. docs of any framework, technology. i do not feel uncomfortable. and still i try to write each letter by my hand. and only copy which i have already written, that too rarely, if so i already knew it needs to dry and i do it asap.
learning the techniques is essential, how to use a tool you can always visit it's manual, but sadly these teaches tools and not techniques...
If these videos were truly not helpful, their YouTube channel wouldn’t have 1.7mil subscribers.
For me it’s common sense to check your assumptions before making claims about someone’s work.
A 5 year old channel with 1.7mil subscribers, 200mil views, 500 highly upvoted videos with tens of thousands of comments of praise is a pretty strong signal.
It might not be useful for _you_, but doing a general statement that it’s not helpful and is waste of time is silly, illogical and shortsighted.
Everyone is different and have their own preference which medium to use to gain knowledge.
2. it’s not true you need to actual code to learn coding
3. I’m really disappointed in the direction they going
Also GitHub is doing marketing with:“you’re code is not perfect use copilot.“
So code faster and then use copilot because we trust some data more which we didn’t even know the quality behind it.
2. This site is about all sorts of JS frameworks like Node and Angular and React. No other languages nor even clean JS without any framework or web apps. So, limited value IMHO.
- 1. I think it means to say "Learn to code well faster".
- 2. Yes. if you're starting out with javascript, you're doomed. I'm pretty sure Dijkstra would have adapted his famous quote[0] to JS too.
[0] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/79997-it-is-practically-imp...Courses are excellent and provide value even for experienced people like me.
My infrastructure work is in C++ and Python, whereas I most often reach for jq, awk, tr, sort, uniq, comm, etc. for operational support tasks.
It does not bother me too much, but it is humbling. And I guess speed puzzle solving is a skill that can be trained like any other, so given the context I too thought, that these a website to learn exactly that.
Another thing is having utilities and libraries that are well suited for solving puzzles, I have a whole module in my repo that implements a 2d-array style structure (in elixir), which I've been able to use on 6 or 7 puzzles.
So there are ways to increase your speed other than "just be really fast at coding" (although you definitely need that too if you're trying to get up the rankings!)
"Quick, generate a prioritized list of polar coordinate firing directions based on this CSV of enemy ships in cartesian coordinates and their offensive strengths"
Edit: Chatting on AIM was how I finally learned to touch-type properly. It's funny how a small amount of urgency really improves the value of certain exercises.
1. Ask chatgpt to write the code
2. Debug the obvious errors
3. Ask stack overflow to find the non-obvious errors
4. Repeat
You accidentally become a better programmer like the old days when people would learn by typing in listings from compute.