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

Vint Cerf’s career advice for engineers

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–95 of 95 posts

Re: Vint Cerf’s career advice for engineers

#91

Post by II2II »

meltyness wrote: post #69
coldtea wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the worse are often those that brag about how "open to criticism" they are. It's a trap for literally-minded/low-EQ people. There are those that are indeed open to criticism, but those are almost never the one's that are gonna tell you about how open they are. Rather they are the ones that will actively engage in such discussions and technical arguments with you, and even enjoy it. You wont be "invited to critici…

This is a bad attitude, and doesn't acknowledge the importance of collaboration. Now in a given position you may not have appropriate communications skills (or missed a memo, intent, constraint) but if you keep your criticisms objective and organized, this probably isn't a trap. Leveraging some hard to address criticism in a public setting, too late, and viciously is very different from a timely, short, semi-private…

I don't see this view as being an indicator of a bad attitude. Actions are louder than words, and that is acknowledged in their post.

(That said, I do view the implied motive as a negative. The intent of open communication may be honest, while the actions may not reflect it.)

Re: Vint Cerf’s career advice for engineers

#92

Post by hnfong »

karpierz wrote: post #17
anonylizard wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, liberal arts is valuable, but the degree isn't. I've seen plenty of programmers who are very educated in history, philosophy, economics etc. The problem with the actual degree. 1. Liberal arts degrees have terrible economic returns, almost always negative, especially for men. Because... 2. Liberal arts is ill-suited for mass-market higher education. Can you really teach liberal arts with underpaid teach assistant…

> I've seen plenty of programmers who are very educated in history, philosophy, economics etc. I've seen plenty of programmers who think they're well educated in history, philosophy, economics, etc. But actually being educated is rare. Much easier to read stuff like "Guns, Germs, and Steel" uncritically and just quote it at people.

Agreed. There's a difference between systematically studying a subject for 4 years and reading the equivalent of "Learn Java in 14 days". Or even attending bootcamp for a couple months.

That said, the indoctrination of liberal arts degrees is a thing IMHO. I would very value the opinions of those who have, after obtained the degree, are able to recognize and critically comment on the indoctrination. If they're just paraphrasing the textbooks I'd lose interest very quickly.

Re: Vint Cerf’s career advice for engineers

#93

Post by hnfong »

emodendroket wrote: post #21
anonylizard wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, liberal arts is valuable, but the degree isn't. I've seen plenty of programmers who are very educated in history, philosophy, economics etc. The problem with the actual degree. 1. Liberal arts degrees have terrible economic returns, almost always negative, especially for men. Because... 2. Liberal arts is ill-suited for mass-market higher education. Can you really teach liberal arts with underpaid teach assistant…

> The degree introduces indoctrination. I have yet to hear a principled distinction between "education" and "indoctrination" that doesn't boil down to whether the speaker agrees with the content being taught.

I agree with your point, but most of the contents of STEM education aren't that controversial. You can't really disagree with the AM-GM Inequality for example, and most of undergraduate level laws of physics are well accepted by most people. The meta-philosophy of STEM subjects does carry certain amount of indoctrination, but they're usually not explicitly taught as-is.

Re: Vint Cerf’s career advice for engineers

#94

Post by hitekker »

stakhanov wrote: post #35
emodendroket wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your approach is personal insult then I can see why it isn’t that well received. To answer your question, though, I was saying I feel I have had success raising disagreements and didn’t ask for or particularly want to read something explaining to me why I should ignore over a decade of my own experience. Hey maybe I’m just really dull like you suggest.

If you really want to call in the tone police on this: My initial comment was reacting to the article saying "This doesn't match my experience" in which I've simultaneously made myself vulnerable to ad-hominem attack because it was implying that my career wasn't going so well. And your response was to step on that vulnerability and say: "Well, take it from someone whose career is going great: If you're the sort of pe…

FWIW, I think resistance, as hinted at in Disciplined Minds, is a weak basis for an identity. A "truth to power" speaker is only good for certain kinds of truths and certain kinds of power. Its a role that doesn't mean much outside of that; it doesn't hold up in the long run.
Post reply on HN