>>14280942>>14281283>>14281705No it's definitely a meme. It's redundant and the books aren't very good.
>advanced programming in UNIXyou don't need this book. you will pick up everything here either by casual use or by designing POSIX compliant OS's
>data structures bookall data structures books suck, use notes from MIT, stanford, berkeley, etc., literallly any renowned CS school
>transition to advanced mathematicsa boring as shit intro to proofs book. concrete math or book of proof is better
>combo/graph theorybad book, save this topic for later with a harder and more instructive book like van-Lint/Wilson
>that OS bookuse OS: 3 easy pieces and the pintOS standard/projects from stanford as a way to do OS
>that crypto bookjust use intro to mathematical cryptography and then the handbook of applied cryptography, both of which pair as beginner theory + practical knowledge very nicely
https://cacr.uwaterloo.ca/hac/>intro to probability I like Sheldon Ross's book better
>design patternsmeme beginner soft eng book, get an internship
>database systemsyou will either need no book if you just want to learn how to use databases or will need several books in applied logical methods if you want to take the deep dive
>mythical man month and lmfao ethicsskip
>matrix analysisuse linear algebra done wrong instead, and this should be like the first or third thing you learn along with calc up to at least vector calc, wtf
>mathematical statliterally useless book if you already have a good probability theory book
>randomized algos...actually very good choice
>approximation algosyou won't be able to read vazirani's book unless you have more mathematical maturity than this list asks for. you should do:
diestel's graph theory
van-Lint/Wilson's course in combinatorics
at the very least, with perhaps some analysis for good measure (pun intended). this is extra recommended for convex optimization...where it's literally just applied analysis
