Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

xsrus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 117 posts

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#51

Post by oaktrout »

csee wrote: post #10
lordnacho wrote: post #3

I've long thought that schools should just let people go at whatever pace they want. This should be easier now with video classes. Just let people take the algebra or calculus or whatever module, when they feel like it. There would still be some sort of minimum requirement so that you can write a decent email, but there would be no reason to lock people in year groups. Year groups are still important socially, but th…

> Year groups are still important socially Disagree. Year groups perpetuate immaturity. They are also very socially unnatural, a mere byproduct of going for scale in the education system. That is fine, but if we can achieve scale without year groups (which we could under your proposal), that would be better.

Is everything we do not socially unnatural though? Remote work? Video calls, social media, online forums? What, other than living in hunter-gatherer societies is not socially unnatural for humans?

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#52

Post by myth_drannon »

nisegami wrote: post #15
lordnacho wrote: post #3

I've long thought that schools should just let people go at whatever pace they want. This should be easier now with video classes. Just let people take the algebra or calculus or whatever module, when they feel like it. There would still be some sort of minimum requirement so that you can write a decent email, but there would be no reason to lock people in year groups. Year groups are still important socially, but th…

School is glorified babysitting until university. Actually learning is just a convenient but ultimately secondary use of that time.

In US maybe. Other countries might have or had better systems.

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#53

Post by pc86 »

verve_rat wrote: post #50
BobbyJo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> profits aren't the true goal... Ok, we can all stop there and go home. This person knows more than every economist and game-theorist on the planet. >They're all kinda the same, though, and the system is designed that way. I take it you haven't had many jobs I've worked at 5 different corporations and this is just verifiably wrong. 'The system' you're referencing is voluntary exchange, and it's not designed, it emer…

Profit for the firm might be the goal for the firm as an entity, such that it is, but the goal for each individual is their own self interest. The worker wants a pay rise, the manager wants a promotion, the CEO wants a better gig at the next company. None of that is a goal of making more money for the company.

The number one way for the CEO to get a better gig at the next company is to make the company they're at now wildly successful. The number one way for a VP to get a promotion to the C suite is to make the CEO look good. Etc. etc. down the line to the ICs.

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#54

Post by BobbyJo »

verve_rat wrote: post #50
BobbyJo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> profits aren't the true goal... Ok, we can all stop there and go home. This person knows more than every economist and game-theorist on the planet. >They're all kinda the same, though, and the system is designed that way. I take it you haven't had many jobs I've worked at 5 different corporations and this is just verifiably wrong. 'The system' you're referencing is voluntary exchange, and it's not designed, it emer…

Profit for the firm might be the goal for the firm as an entity, such that it is, but the goal for each individual is their own self interest. The worker wants a pay rise, the manager wants a promotion, the CEO wants a better gig at the next company. None of that is a goal of making more money for the company.

But it is all 'profit'. Prestige is an asset some people pursue, money another.

The challenge of corporate governance is designing it so that the incentives for the individuals within it align with the goals of the corporation itself. Every "How to do startups" book written has some portion of it dedicated to "How to get your employees' wants to align with the company's." This is the primary difference between companies that thrive over long periods and those that die out quickly.

There are academic textbooks written on the subject. Its study is as old as the corporate structure itself.

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#57

Post by edmcnulty101 »

ltfey wrote: post #43
bko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it exactly opposite in almost every way. Corporate attempts to be meritocratic. They have every incentive to be. Executives want to hire the more effective people to perform tasks so they can maximize profits. They can be greedy or stupid, but not both. They can hire their friends and family, sure, and sometimes they do. But they have an incentive to make decisions on merit otherwise they would go out of bus…

Quoted post unavailable.

Just to let you know I completely agree with you.

The corporations I've worked for rewarded schmoozing with the manager much more than competence.

Maybe those other people disagreeing with you worked for different corporations?

I have no idea but I've worked for several corporations and they were all a mess in this way.

My current position as a software engineer with almost a decade of experience is a subordinate to a project manager who has one year of experience in tech and the project is millions of dollars and years behind schedule.

This being a tax payer funded project to create a system for a few hundred people...

The person in charge is friends with the manager and the manager is friends with the COO and on up the chain.

Previous position was for DXC technologies who fired my entire team except me and another and then hired offshore workers. They were also sued by their customers for providing poor quality software.

The business practices I've seen boggle my mind.

Re: Life, school, and the 80:20 rule (2019)

#58

Post by francisofascii »

bko wrote: post #26
ltfey wrote: post #13

School is a flawed meritocracy, but it actually makes efforts to be one. Corporate is a deliberate non-meritocracy whose purpose is to ratify the inadequate descendants of an existing oligarchy as meritocrats. Mussolini didn't make the trains run on time; he punished people who said the trains were late. Corporate is the same: meritocracy by assertion--and only by assertion. In school, you learn that hard work is rew…

You have it exactly opposite in almost every way. Corporate attempts to be meritocratic. They have every incentive to be. Executives want to hire the more effective people to perform tasks so they can maximize profits. They can be greedy or stupid, but not both. They can hire their friends and family, sure, and sometimes they do. But they have an incentive to make decisions on merit otherwise they would go out of bus…

> But they have an incentive to make decisions on merit otherwise they would go out of business and be out-competed.

Yeah, you would think so. To some extent you are right. But I think corporations are still very inefficient and get away with promoting or hiring less than ideal candidates. Why do they not get out-competed? Because the competition is also flawed in similar ways.

Post reply on HN