61–70 of 157 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article isn't about this. It's about literal bribes.
And "Donations" like what I describe aren't bribes? This is only slightly different classes of bribes. They both are bribes.
This is ridiculous. One benefits lots of students, one benefits just your kid.
From the article: "It may be legal to pledge $2.5 million to Harvard just as your son is applying — which is what Jared Kushner’s father did for him — and illegal to bribe a coach to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, but how much of a difference is there, really? Both elevate money over accomplishment."
The first is for the benefit of all the other students in the form of reduced tuition grants, a new library, lab equipment etc. The other is for the benefit of the bribe taker. There are lots of situations that elevate X over accomplishment, but this seems like one with actual benefit on a large scale. That said, I hope they all get punished for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean https://github.com/stanfordnlp/CoreNLP ? Why would you expect them to relicense GPL libre software to you? What does "in kind" mean?
> What does "in kind" mean? in-kind (adj): consisting of something (such as goods or commodities) other than money https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/in-kind
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As of 2013, the median grade at Harvard was an A-. The mode was an A. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/12/... Anecdotally, I have heard of places that refuse to hire Harvard grads for this reason.
Agree. Anecdotally, I had a sales manager who graduated from Harvard. He was literally no different from any corporate manager I've ever had and just parroted whatever unattainable goals trickled down from the top, providing no clear way to meet said goals
"Contributing" to a congressman is literally giving them money so they make decisions favorable to you. That is identical to me giving a policeman $50 to look the other way.
Unlimited campaign contributions is just newspeak for "legal bribery".
Meritocracy for thee, but not for me. As the upper echelons continue to cordon off segments of the economy and education for just themselves, will the "Bootstraps and Personal Responsibility" mythology finally start to die out?
We are in the process of building up a new aristocracy. This process has repeated itself over all of history.
Just reinforces my belief that an ivy league degree is much more an indicator of socioeconomic class than it is intelligence or aptitude.
However: I have worked with a handful of Harvard MBA graduates and . . . they were the smartest people I have ever worked with, and I have worked with a lot of people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are in the process of building up a new aristocracy. This process has repeated itself over all of history.
Hell yea, look at our presidents, we got legacy admissions for the biggest job in America.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These universities don't have the prestige without the legacy admissions (and alumni donors). There are tons of universities, but it's hard to say anyone "deserves" a spot over someone's family who helped build it.
How is a school prestigious by allowing undeserving[1] rich kids in? [1] In the sense that they're not academically or athletically at the top of the heap.