9,431 karma · joined May 16, 2010
I'd say there are a fair bit of elements of that sort of gating for government jobs here as well actually, but here that's not so important for earning prospects since they're mostly not all that well paid (exception for C-suite and equivalents, but my impression is those are almosts always awarded more on the basis of contacts and CV achievements).
Sorry if my objection came across as overly antagonistic, but what I was trying get across is precisely that while your experiences are unassailable as your experience, it may not be very representative of what's out there.
I wonder whether the guy who botted the profitability question (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48428763) could do genuine interest too, or is that inaccessible for examination over the Internet...
Most of the universities I've been in have had well above the occasional one. I'm certainly not saying that has to be true everywhere, but for academic level studies it's pretty sad if the fraction is zero.
> Where I live, a college degree is a legal requirement for a lot of professions that pay more than entry level jobs (although not all of them). So, people go to college to get a better paying job in a few years than they could get by immediately entering the workforce.
Fair enough, and I guess we have that here too, with a hard requirement for certain jobs as a proper lawyer or psychotherapist, and soft but compelling requirement for stuff like real estate agent or investment banker. Most college degrees are a dead loss economically compared to starting work immediately in a craft profession with high demand, such as plumber or welder, which is the reason I question the motivation. But not everyone has the capacity for learning skills like that I guess, and it's nice if there are still places that are still willing to pay well for academics.
It's bad enough all the corporations trying to steal perfectly active words for their brand names or products.
Does college even work for future economic prospects, by the way?
Unfortunately that, on its own, very much does not translate to being able to explain it all oneself, or to having the skills.
Ease and norms of outsourcing to software invites and amplifies this trap, I think.
is over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48373054
It does sound like such a caricature I can see the temptation to be flippant about it though.
(And on a personal note, I'm glad we don't have a publicly released Jarvis before we get our act together about the use.)
Which goes to show maybe it's less about literal sovereignty than wanting to rely on parties less prone to exploit the reliance for stabbing you in the back.
Considering it took decades of absolutely no meaningful action against the US tech sector's cavalcade of object lessons in 'They "trust me". Dumb fucks', and orgs were still eagerly ripping out homegrown system solutions to get all their communication and storage locked into Azure and AWS at the most four years ago, I'm not sure whether to feel relieved or exasperated that there are some signs of real reactions this time.
It seems appropriate to also recognize that it's simply tiring to be to be in constant opposition to most of the social environment, and most people can't keep doing it at undiminished intensity for a full lifetime.
Optimization on "Human Feedback", early exposure to high-effort experimental systems... I wouldn't be surprised it that turns into a bigger field than is generally recognized today.
Looking at it from the outside, I think it's still pretty hard to see how he came to end up in that position, but with a bit of individual vulnerability, arbitrary time to boil the frog slowly, and a fairly large number people exposed, maybe it would be stranger not to have the event occur with someone.
I can't find it right now, but something came up a few years ago (probably on HN) about highly intelligent people being more adept at making up arguments to rationalize beliefs and actions that they had taken for other reasons entirely.
Sort of makes sense that wielding a more complex mind would offer more complex ways to go wrong, doesn't it?
Neotenous fluffy mammals for collateral damage seems like an unfortunate handicap to take on. Maybe they should make it worms or something?
Despite the authoritarian rule, PRC still values education highly in quite a few contexts where it doesn't interfere too much with the authoritarianism, and the country not only has plenty of physics graduates who will have learned about the Josephson effect, but might well listen to them and give them adequate grants for R&D.
I hope you're right though.
Morris' autobiography "Animal Days" (1979) is a very charming account of his early life and career, in case someone wishes to take this occasion to read more about that than appears in the obituary.