Live data from Hacker News

Stanford’s war on social life

palladiummag.com

361–370 of 402 posts

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other extreme end of the scale, consider a young person with lots of potential entering university, who then decides to rebel by trying increasingly harder drugs, and ends up with drugs tainted with fentanyl and dies of an overdose. Similar situations have happened before, such as this report of a physics senior dying of fentanyl [1]. Consider young people who try black hat hacking as a prank or for illicit me…

Wouldn't the solution to this be to decriminalize drugs?

Absolutely (such as an ongoing trial project in Vancouver, Canada), but it’s not currently not politically realistic in many regions.

In the meantime for the individual, I believe it’s best to sit down and talk to a young person about the risks of drugs in a realistic way. Not the DARE fearmongering stuff, but talking about how drugs can be an easy distraction and source of drama from the things in life that should be higher priorities (e.g. relationships and career). This should also include specific advice about avoiding pills because of fentanyl tainting.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#362
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Romanticizing pure stupidity is always one of nostalgia's greatest tricks.

You are exactly the problem OP is talking about

Driving a car without functional brakes on the highway is pure stupidity. It's not "fun boyish hijinks" if someone else dies because of you. It's not nanny-stating to think that your cool future story/character-building experience shouldn't involve putting innocent bystanders at risk.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#364
post #324
post #43

It is absolutely impossible to take this article seriously, because the author refuses to acknowledge the un-fucking-believably fraught legacy that the Greek fraternity system has, at Stanford and at every other school. > Driven by a fear of uncontrollable student spontaneity and a desire to enforce equity on campus Oh, yeah, Stanford’s really afraid of “student spontaneity.” They’re definitely not afraid of organiza…

Aside from the factual problems here, which others have pointed out, I can't help thinking that the unfocused, angry, self-righteous tone of this post is related to the problems described in the article. It's as if people and organizations have bent over backward to appease the loudest, most furious, least reasonable zealots. I mean, OP has been made fucking sick ! How can we not listen? To be explicit about this: I…

From what I've seen a lot of this comes from two trends; a fall in popularity of frats and sororities, and a sharp rise in reported on campus rapes. I don't know if you recall, but there were stories about this just about every week a few years ago. If your biggest argument is complaining about that makes me sound shrill and self righteous, then I guess that's what I am. But there are some real problems that have for a long time been excused by "its just kids being kids, don't ruin the fun".

That's not even getting into the fact that it's only certain groups of people who even have the ability to engage in such shenanigans and get away with it. I may not sound like much fun, but I don't know why everyone would be expected to overlook these things for the sake of someone else's fun

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#365
post #213

I think I'm close to an outside observer - I didn't go to Stanford and don't have a dog in that fight, as the saying goes. I don't trust the conclusions of this article. It starts with a story about a frat which filled their building's first floor with sand, so much that they had to rent a bulldozer to relocate it to the campus lake. Then they call the Stanford admins killjoys for not supporting it. But... of course…

> What kind of impact does dumping all that sand have? What about running the bulldozer over the Stanford campus? What if someone is injured by the bulldozer? I wouldn't trust teenagers renting an after-party bulldozer who never cleared that with anyone, never notified anyone, and have no proof of training. That's exactly the attitude that causes this problem - there's always a reason to say no. These are supposed to…

Okay so then can I have some fun driving a bulldozer on your property, or are you no fun too?

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it is tempting to blame universities entirely for this, and I can go on all day about it, students culture has changed a lot too. I'm not sure what has caused it.

Can you elaborate on this? How do you think culture has changed?

So someone else gave you a well thought out, and sourced answer.

I'll just give you my personal thoughts on the issue, which are incomplete. I try to separate out what is actually going on from generic, "kids these days" bullshit that you hear a lot in the media, and by lots of older people. These are themes in people's lives when I was in school a couple years ago and even today, but they're not the whole story. Lots of good stuff is happening on campuses too, LGBTQ stuff being the best! It's not a big deal to be whatever you'd like.

There's plenty of young people having plenty of fun, so I don't want to paint some kind of completely bleak picture, but here are some of the problems that have degraded peoples ability to be fun.

The things I thing contribute the most are: - Phone cameras and the ubiquity of recording stuff - The ability for people to find those recordings if anything goes wrong in your life forever. - Lack of economic prosperity, and the feeling it's getting worse. So you can't rock the boat.

-Majority of kids in college now were kids when the GFC happened, everyone I know has graduated into a recession of some kind, or knows someone who has.

- Increasing policitcal polarization + extreamism. Everything has sacred tenats. If you're caught violating them you risk getting kicked out of your, economically advantaged, cohort. A small but loud minority who enjoy the political power of "catching" people out. This is true basically anywhere, left or right. This doesn't factor into your day to day, but does have a cooling effect on actual political discussion.

- Rising costs of basically everything that matters. Housing costs are impossible to manage for students and recent grads, the expectation is you will not own a house, and that your quality of life will be worse than your parents. Lots of people move back in with their parents for a couple years post college, assuming they like their family. Inflation, has and will make this worse.

- Extreme annoyance, and sometimes straight up rage about the fact that older people do not understand that things are systemically wrong right now. Mainly this is also related to housing. There is a sterotype of the entitled older white woman, "Karen", that everyone tries to avoid being associated with. Everyone I know has been abused at some service job by them, or in dealing with them for something related to their situation.

- Huge student loan bills on degrees that aren't going to pay for them. In lots of ways this isn't even the students fault, since colleges treat them like cash cows for everything. It's very possible to end up 200-300k in debt, which even a high paying degree will not cover reasonably. People are busy and do not have to time to fight the bureaucratic machine, especially when they will probably lose.

- COVID made everything above much worse. Destroyed basically all of young people's social lives, and empowered the people who were already busy trying to monitor and control people. Most of the people I know developed mental illness of some kind during that time.

There was an incident at my school, where students off campus had a small BBQ and someone jumped the fence to record them and post publicly calling them "plauge rats" and asking the school to suspend them. This wasn't really met with much pushback from the student body, but the admin didn't do anything about it so kind of a wash.

- People I know who didn't go to college generally fall into two camps. Both are mostly male. One camp is in jail, the other camp just stays at home with their parents and plays video games. I suspect it's just my locality thing, but a lot of people's younger male sibilings either dropped out of college, or never went and spend lots of time on twitch + discord etc. Very few if anyone I've met knows people in a trade school, even though I have older family who have worked in the trades.

- For lots of people performativity is reality.[0] Either because they do not have the means to go out and party, or the social media clout is more important. This seems to effect women more than men in my experiance. Lots of places to drink have capitalized on this by adding things like ball pits. Most of these places have huge lines. For me this always seemed pretty anti social.

Lots of people want to be influencers, probably the same people that wanted to be actors in previous eras.

Performativity extends to politics since the bar is so low for expressing support for idea X or Y. Lots of people feel like they're doing something when they post a political message, which might be true considering how much time people spend in them. The youth political movements are completely ineffective at all levels in my experiance. They're handily beaten by geriatrics nationally, look at the presidents these last like 8 years, and locally, look at the handful of NIMBYs who have destroyed Bay Area housing for that. I think it's generally harder to commit crimes, and easier to be a criminal than it was before which influences the type of protests you can have.

Lots of people also aren't willing to risk their lives for politics when things are so precarious economically and socially particularly when nothing is expected to change.

- Wealth inequality has lead to rich kids pretending to be poor or underprivileged at record numbers, always been a problem in punk (To the point where it's a meme.) but you see it on campus as well. It adds to the performativity problem above. There are lots of rich kids who say things like capitalism is broken.

- There is an undercurrent of people who explicitly subscribe to Malthusian/Hobbesian ideologies, and they seem to be dominant right now. Generally these break down to "there's only so many resources to go around so we much divide them according to X thing.". Lots of people believe the topline solutions and tenents generally even if they can't articulate where it comes from. This isn't a left vs right thing, both have different, insidious imo, strains of this ideology.

- People in charge have the same ideology as the students. I think this is a big change for a lot of professors who are used to having to fight a right wing admin. (The biggest factor in who you vote for is your college degree.). I think it also incentives following what the admin says, b/c you're on the same "team". There is an expectation of capitulation of the admin to the most vulnerable and "vulnerable" students. The admin also viciously deals with people not in these camps. This is expected by everyone, and if the admin were to respond to everyone equally that would be a shock.

This isn't always a negative! If you actually need help, disability etc, the admin will usually help you. It is a double edged sword since students expect the admin to take care of them in lots of ways.

- Discussion around sexual assault/consent are constant and pervasive. Shared responsibility if you see it happening or potentially happening is expected. It's never considered one persons fault, especially in student orgs. This also is double edged sword imo. It seems like it's had a cooling effect on some peoples sex lives and sexual freedom in general, but sexual assault reporting has become much easier and more expected if something happens. I doubt you could have a co-ed shower room now, or a nudist house etc.

EDIT: I think campus "free speech" issues are a red herring mostly capitalized on by a multitude of grifters, both professors and political pundits. Things are a lot more nuanced than that on campuses.

0 - Bo burnham actually has a lot of great insights into this! I'll submit some links to HN.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#367

Sometimes it feels like we're living in the second Victorian age. Living sanitized lives and speaking sanitized language, with recurring bouts of moral panic. Even in the early 00s when I was in college everything seemed to have become lamer than it was just a decade prior. 20th century libertinism peaked in the 70s and has been in retreat since then.

I dunno, I think the 90s were pretty great.

Except the drugs I suppose.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny/sad thing is that mostly our society doesn't actually work that way -- we just believe that it does. You can absolutely have a highly successful career and life, for a wide variety of definitions of successful, without attending a top college, and while having "interesting" life experiences for all sorts of definitions of interesting. There are many paths through life even in our current bureaucracy-ridden…

It really depends on your definition of success. If you know enough Stanford grads - you’d know that many of them will consider themselves failures in life if they haven’t founded and IPO/sold a company for $100m+. I know quite a few like this… I also know quite a few who did it and only think they’re a success in life because of said event.

If you want to IPO a tech company and make a minimum of 9 figures, then going to Stanford is probably a part of the most reliable (or, at least, "least unreliable") path to doing so.

Or, at least, it was back when Stanford was the kind of place that it is in the process of not being anymore.

Even then, though, realistically if you're not already part of the "Stanford Set", following that path probably doesn't radically change your chances of success at that specific mission.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. You don't need "a good, respectable career" to have a good life. Even if you wish to have a life containing moderate wealth, you still don't need that. (Up to you whether you believe that moderate wealth is either required or desirable for a "successful" life) And even if you want "a good, respectable career", there are many paths to achieving that goal as well. I feel that we have allowed too much "program t…

> You don't need "a good, respectable career" to have a good life. Unless you're willing to live as a hermit in the wild or as a hobo/beggar on the streets - which if it suits you is fine, not taking that away - you don't have another choice because you all but need a very well paying job simply to afford a shack to live in. The number one thing that forces young people into the crushing grinds of big corporate life…

There are other paths. You can operate all sorts of small independent businesses (not just "the trades"). It's a challenging path that requires lots of hustle and produces less reliable (but not necessarily lower) economic results.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#370
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God bless the USCA (or BSC, or whatever they call it now). It breaks my heart that other students don’t have that opportunity for community. It’s not for everyone, but by far the most interesting years of my life were living in the Berkeley coops 2002-2005.

But you were still too late for the infamous Barrington Hall[0]. When I first arrived in Berkeley in the early 1980s, a hitchhiker from Europe who had traveled across the country with me somehow immediately found Barrington as a place where he could crash for a week while he visited the area, this was pre-internet times of course. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrington_Hall_(Berkeley,_Cal...

One of the stated reasons one of the houses in the article was eliminated was because it let a nonstudent crash there, and my own house constantly had issues with the administration over the same thing.
Post reply on HN