141–150 of 152 posts
I like the converse: "If you're so rich, why aren't you smart?" It's attributed to MIT's Paul Cootner, supposedly as a comeback to a money manager who asked him why, if Cootner was so smart, he wasn't rich?
That response didnt make much sense to me :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the problem is that there is almost no career path for the specialization called "Masters in Humanities." Even with a PhD, the career path is very limited. I've watched my sister-in-law, with a PhD in English and teaching experience, pretty much give up on her career because it is nearly impossible to find a tenure-track position in the humanities.
"Smart people" evaluate this prior to spending 4-5 years and a shitload of money trying to obtain a "Masters in Humanities".
I'm 35. I'll try not to be too critical. Moral of the story: Being educated doesn't say anything about you being smart. Here's the rub. A college degree is a specialization. That's why you "major" in something. It was never designed to be an extension of high school. So, you should get a degree in something that you are both passionate about and also accept the limited career paths that come with that particular pass…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Writing documentation is a skill that requires more than a good command of the English language. The technical writers that I've hired in the past didn't even have English degrees, but were excellent at what they do. I don't think the copywriters in the media agencies I worked at had English degrees either. I've only hired one English major in my career, and that was as a software developer. He was -much- better at w…
>And most of us started our careers doing stuff like "admin assistants" etc. Really? what is the upwards path there? I mean, is it easier to jump from 'admin assistant' to IT than to just jump into IT with no experience at all?
My first job could be considered an "admin assistant job" by all regards - I had no official responsibilities related to tech. My boss saw that I knew computers well, and I got to work on their home-grown CRM system, and I set up a national BBS system (yes, I'm that old) for their not-for-profit. I also got to write a lot of technical documentation while I was there, and after that I made the jump into the tech industry as a documentation writer for a startup, which opened doors into development.
So yes, you can make your upward path into tech as an Admin Assistant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then we disagree on the value of staying alive irrespective of one's productivity level.
You're being intentionally ignorant of the way everyone else uses the term "creating value," which describes work that improves the world around you, not just work that happens to keep you alive.
A great many people contribute a little, so a few can excel. There wouldn't be universities if everyone had to hunt for their own food. Most people create value and asserting that this person doesn't is shortsighted, especially since this job enabled him to start a PhD... who knows what wonders may come out of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And most of us started our careers doing stuff like "admin assistants" etc. Really? what is the upwards path there? I mean, is it easier to jump from 'admin assistant' to IT than to just jump into IT with no experience at all?
No, it's work experience. Being around office politics, talking to people in different roles, learning how to be a professional. If you're an admin assistant in a tech co, chances are that you'll get exposed to whatever systems they're using as well. Every job has something to teach you, including, yes, fast food jobs. I grew up in my Dad's fast food restaurant, and I learned more about human nature and the importanc…
While I think this story is largely fictitious, when someone argues that they're downtrodden and victimized because they sound smart -- in verbal or written form -- they're often missing the forest for the trees. Unless you're debating esoterica of a specialized domain, the smartest people manage to communicate in a simple, effective manner(1). The person accused of using too many syllables, in contrast, tends to be…
I know it's hard to believe, but there are people who legitimately enjoy finding the exact right word. This is like trashing someone for working on an open source project - they're just doing something they love the best they know how. In this case it's not strategically optimal and finding that out was a (perhaps overdue) shock.
I see people make this mistake all the time; it's important to recognize that the ultimate goal of language is to communicate.