There are more people in schools, but they have to lower standards as a result. We have CS graduates who can't write fizzbuzz.
Unrestrained nepotism is stupid, but its opposite is equally absurd.
Unrestrained nepotism is stupid, but its opposite is equally absurd.
>Unrestrained nepotism is stupid, but its opposite is equally absurd
I think the opposite of unrestrained nepotism is meritocracy, which is surely a good thing.
In the olden days we had few schools that made sure every CS graduate were fizzbuzz experts but back then computers were an expensive rarity that could only be touched by a fizzbuzz expert. Now that everyone and their grandma have a pocket computer that's more powerful than an IBM mainframe, of course the requirements will be different. Not every piece of software is mission critical, not everything has to be perfect. Crappy software is better than no software.
The opposite of nepotism is where no one grants an advantage, privilege, or position to relatives or close friends in an occupation or field. That's not "equality of outcomes" by any stretch. A hypothetical system that grants privileges purely on merit would be its true opposite.