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

US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 286 posts

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#161

Post by VLM »

whimsicalism wrote: post #139
VLM wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with redefining, such as redefining success, is it eliminates any possibility of a conversation.

Your comment is opaque. As far as I know, a successful surgical operation is generally pretty cut and dry. No redefining here.

I mean with reference to a sophistry technique to shut down discussion. Were the individual example to be computer scientists instead of surgeons, then the definition of a successful computer scientist can be redefined to a suitable outcome as proof that racial discrimination does not harm consumers of surgeons or computer scientists. Its avoiding the core discussion via wordplay. Furthermore if no individual example were provided then the sophistry method would be to complain there is no specific example of an individual being harmed therefore there is no harm and racial discrimination is an inherently good process.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#162

Post by hindsightbias »

kennend3 wrote: post #8
timmg wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think it is ? As-in, is it the right (legal) decision in your view?

From the article: ""Americans have come to view diversity as integral to learning and to trust that the path to leadership is open to all," lawyers representing Harvard University wrote in a court filing." Do you see the "open to all" statement? Is this true? What about the Asians who were denied entry based on their race? Is this "open to all"?

Asians are over-represented by population at Harvard.

Whatever magic equation replaces AA, you can rest assured that there will be more whites and less Asians. And SCOTUS will be perfectly fine with that.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#163

Post by Overtonwindow »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #25

About time. The whole idea behind it is stupid and racist... "if you're a certain skin color, you're too stupid, to compete on merit"... then when people complain, they add the "socioeconomic" factors: "if you're a certain color, you're too poor to compete on merit, but instead of looking at your family income, we'll look at your skin color". I have no idea how something like this gets support in developed western co…

It gets support because it gets votes. If Democratic voters weren’t asking for affirmative action, the Democratic Party would not pursue it, regardless if it’s bad policy or not, it’s pandering to the base.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#164

Post by kennend3 »

kevinsundar wrote: post #153
kennend3 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because no one has ever worked for cash and lied about it? Do you suspect that someone who launders dirty money for a living did their taxes and listed "money launderer" as occupation and reported their income? Assets like this are often hidden behind shell companies to prevent law enforcement from taking them under "proceeds of crime" charges.

There are so few people this would apply to (wealthy individuals with large amounts of unreported cash income who are applying to college) that its not even worth considering as an edge case for college admissions. The point isn't to eliminate every possible way college admissions can be gamed but to get the best method that works for the majority of applicants.

> There are so few people this would apply to (wealthy individuals with large amounts of unreported cash income who are applying to college) that its not even worth considering as an edge case for college admissions.

You would be mistaken.. This is actually a rather serious problem.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/income...

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-van...

https://torontosun.com/2016/05/12/311-million-vancouver-mans...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wd7wz4/student-owns-this-31-...

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#165

Post by eli »

pueblito wrote: post #62
eli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. If I were on SCOTUS I would probably vote to uphold the existing precedent.

Which precedent? The one where the 14th Amendment forbids racial discrimination, or the narrow carve out 20 years ago that has allowed it to continue in higher education?

I don't think they are incompatible and I don't think the people who voted for the 14th Amendment would think so either.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#166

Post by danenania »

adastra22 wrote: post #134
danenania wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It strikes me as naive to think it would ever work otherwise. Justices are political appointees and political actors. I see no reason to expect anything different. Believing they are somehow "above politics" strikes me as similarly fanciful to believing in the divine right of kings.

Judges are NOT political appointees. Within the civil service a political appointee is one that can be and usually is dismissed in a change of government. Heads of agencies and such. Supreme Court justices serve lifetime appointments specifically so that they are not subject to political interference.

Appointed by politicians = political appointee in my book. But yes, they are lifetime political appointees.

"Supreme Court justices serve lifetime appointments specifically so that they are not subject to political interference."

I also think this is naive. In my view, they serve lifetime appointments because they don't want to give up power, and no one's been able to force them to so far.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#167

Post by legitster »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #60
legitster wrote: post #34

> Institutions like Harvard say they consider an applicant's race as one of several factors - including economic status and religious belief - in order to build classes that accurately represent the racial and ethnic diversity of the country. I mean, this is all kind of window dressing for elite institutions to be elite, right? There are millions of people qualified to attend these university, Harvard gets to hand se…

> they could always expand the size of their enrollment There are reasons beyond manufactured exclusivity for why this doesn’t work. College education isn’t just about students soaking up material. We need more online vocational schools where that’s the sole purpose. But let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water.

I largely agree, except: When I look back on my own college experience, the actual academic content might only account for, like, a quarter of the value I got out of it.

And data seems to back this out - entirely online degrees don't nearly drive as much success as the in-person experience.

So universities are certainly not going to admit that the content and learning portion of their experience are not important. But moreover I suspect what Harvard and others don't want to admit is that they don't fully understand what makes alumni successful, and are terrified of changing the recipe too much.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#168

Post by legitster »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #158
btown wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expanding the size of enrollment isn't just something that can flipped like a switch. One cannot simply build a high-rise dormitory without increasing the capacity of all other facilities in lockstep - and a university designed to be fully walkable can only accommodate so much simultaneous construction. And more generally, you have the use of applicants' race backwards - the entire point of affirmative action is to t…

Ivy schools have some of the largest endowments, rivaling the GDP of some small countries. If Harvard, and Yale were serious about diversity, they would let people attend for free.

Ummm, they largely do.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#169

Post by Overtonwindow »

kevinsundar wrote: post #124
kennend3 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socioeconomic status is a much better goal if you want to "even the playing field" but it has serious flaws. The most obvious is it is incredibly easy to game: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/income... Any ideas on how students with no income managed to own $57 million in houses? Would these people qualify for a socio-economic advantage when applying for school?

Race is easy to game too, in fact far easier. I know people who were around 5% Hispanic who would then write Hispanic on college applications. They're technically not lying. There's also just plenty of people that just straight up lie about their race on college applications. It's not like its being verified at all. I went to high school with a lot of White - Asian mixed kids. None of them wrote Asian on their colleg…

There was even a United States senator who claimed to be Native American, was awarded academic positions based on that, but a DNA test proved her native ancestry to be so minuscule as to not even be measurable.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#170

Post by syrrim »

dongobongo wrote: post #4

I have a feeling that in hindsight, 30-40 years from now, this will seem like no brainer and that the period prior was heavily anti-meritocratic and counterproductive.

This sort of thing is endemic to most parts of the world, and I doubt the rest of the world will come around in that period. The political forces that drive this will likely be as strong in fifty years, just as they were as strong fifty years ago.
Post reply on HN