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

Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

firstpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 154 posts

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#141

Post by Aloisius »

dpeck wrote: post #88
Aloisius wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethnicity is an accident of birth. Nationality can be chosen. Indeed it was chosen by Nobel laureate who made the quote.

Nationality can be chosen by people like Nobel Laureates who can move anywhere, for most people they're more or less stuck where they started unless they get lucky in a lottery

The gentleman was not a Nobel laureate at the time of course. He came here for his graduate degree and stayed.

But you're right, unless you happen to be born gifted or are exceptionally driven (to the point where you'd migrate illegally for instance), you're stuck.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#142

Post by hga »

gohrt wrote: post #86
mkartic wrote: post #52

Comparing IIT/IIM entrance exams to caste system is a very cheap shot. IITs are no more exclusionists than Harvard or MIT. Its the country's premier place for education, so everyone is going to want to study there.

I, for one, believe that Harvard/MIT/Stanford have a habit of "picking winners" not in line with egalitarian meritocracy (promoting those willing and able to learn), a system for "converting privilege to credentials" as is said -- witness the bias in tech company hiring practices, and the classic "management consulting" culture, where CEOs and government leaders higher newly-minted Ivy grads to rubber-stamp the leade…

I'm not at all familiar with Stanford's admissions system, but lumping in MIT's with the official Ivies is bogus.

MIT does no legacy admits, because the core curriculum required of all students is so much harder, e.g. lots of calculus and physics, vs. Harvard in the '80s requiring you to prove you can do algebra. So MIT doesn't admit anyone they don't think can "do the work". although if you make that cut I'm sure it doesn't hurt to be the child of an alum, but it didn't come up all that often in the '80s at least.

MIT specifically looks for evidence that applicants can do projects. Beyond that, as far as I can remember they're pretty generic in trying to construct a class (trying since yield, acceptances of admission offers, is very hard to predict), favoring the things every high end college looks for such as geographic diversity (both of those helped me a lot).

So the very first thing strongly aligns with the school's goal of overall being an "egalitarian meritocracy"; what you do and can do is where it's at. MIT students do not as a rule aspire to be lower tier corporate yes-men.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#143

Post by VexXtreme »

nightski wrote: post #137
VexXtreme wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seconded. Nationalism is just outdated tribalism that requires you to put your societal overlords' agendas above your own. When they call for you to go to war and kill your brothers and sisters from different places, you do it. When they ask you to give them the fruits of your labor so they can fund their war games and send your children to die in trenches while shifting wealth from the poor to the already wealthy, y…

An artificial divide eh? If it wasn't for nationalism everyone would hug and be friends? I think nationalism is more of an effect than a cause.

> If it wasn't for nationalism everyone would hug and be friends?

Did I ever say that? If I did, please point out where.

Absence of one type of divide doesn't imply that there wouldn't be others. But the less the better.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#144

Post by VexXtreme »

coldtea wrote: post #89
mhurron wrote: post #3

“We are all human beings, and our nationality is simply an accident of birth.” This is my position on the Olympics and basically all national pride. It has nothing to do with anything, there is nothing to be proud of. No one cares when I think it, it's nice to see others say it.

> “We are all human beings, and our nationality is simply an accident of birth.” Well, this is obviously wrong. Birth is not just a random momentary thing. It involves your parents. And they already had a nationality too. You couldn't have been born by any two random other people and still be the same person (DNA, childhood raising, education, food, native language, et al). Second, you is not your birth only. It's al…

> It's also a potentially harmful way to see things. It's basically just an excuse to feel independent and non-connected and owning solidarity to anyone. Home country in danger? "Fuck it, I'll just flee. After all, it's only me, me, me that matters".

What's wrong with that mindset? The way I see it, a rational actor would be inclined to think like that. I am an expat living halfway around the world and I have virtually zero sense of national identity. I am loyal to whatever place is aligned with my personal interests the most. When the place where I live stops serving my interests as an individual, I will go elsewhere. I give back to the community by working here, paying taxes and being a productive member of the society. Is there something wrong or dishonorable with that approach? Why shouldn't we be allowed to dynamically choose and reevaluate where we want to live throughout our lifetime?

The moment you ask me to die for you simply because we are from the same town/city/country, you are crossing into irrational territory and losing me right there and then. The only thing worth dying for is a good cause (so you'd better have one ready), and most of the time, wars started by nation-states are rooted in anything but good causes.

Convince me I'm wrong.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#145

Post by kamaal »

enscr wrote: post #123
r0h1n wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not all that hard to get into an IIM these days actually. Last year 1,73,735 candidates took the CAT admission test through which the IIMs admit 3,335 MBA students. That's a 1:52 ratio. Now you could argue that not everyone who takes the CAT is an IIM applicant. So let's take IIM Ahmedabad's (slightly dated) data for 2006-08 admission [1]. Of the 1,44,027 who applied to the institute, 273 secured an admission…

A caveat : The pool of IIM or IIT aspirants is a very low signal to noise ratio. It's not just that they are hard to get into, it's the number of people who aren't prepared for it but still pony up the entrance fee. I'm sure that's not the case with Ivy leagues.

That's just not correct. IIT's are exceptionally difficult to get into. The entrance exams(IIT JEE) nearly kill the kids.

Plus in the scale of India's population you get a lot of kids, who are working for years to crack the examination. So the only way to create a selection process is to have a crazy difficult exam.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#146

Post by kamaal »

dhaneshnm wrote: post #13
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #2

Since it isn't explained in the article: IIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Institutes_of_Technology IIM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Institutes_of_Management

It is interesting that, Nadella is from Manipal Institute and not a product of "elite" IIT/IIM system. It is rare to see an Indian born techie, doing well abroad, not from the IIT/IIM system.

>> It is rare to see an Indian born techie, doing well abroad, not from the IIT/IIM system.

That's just plain untrue. The problem is IIT alumnus works double time to do their marketing. The IIT entrance exams are super difficult to ensure only the most hard working of all India gets through. This inturn creates a situation where you have all that good people at one place. Its but other wise obvious they do well.

But to say the ordinary Indian doesn't do well is plain wrong. Today's India was built by ordinary guys. The IIT'ians well most of them contribute to the growth of countries like US, not India.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#147

Post by kamaal »

dhaneshnm wrote: post #18

"If Satya Nadella had remained in India,he would probably be working as a coder in Infosys or TCS. Earning a high salary no doubt, but an unlikely candidate for CEO" TCS(Tata Consultancy Services) CEOs, current or past, were not from IITs.

Are you serious?

Nandan Nilekani was hired at Infosys as a programmer. He ultimately went on to become the CEO.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#148

Post by kamaal »

mkartic wrote: post #52

Comparing IIT/IIM entrance exams to caste system is a very cheap shot. IITs are no more exclusionists than Harvard or MIT. Its the country's premier place for education, so everyone is going to want to study there.

>>Comparing IIT/IIM entrance exams to caste system is a very cheap shot.

Why?

Caste system survived because an exclusivity principle was employed to keep the lower caste's out of systems which could benefit them on the longer run like education, employment, religious institutions.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#149

Post by dasil003 »

cloverich wrote: post #106
dasil003 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The second we get over this concept, the world will be a better place. Thus paving the way for our multinational corporate overlords to consolidate control. Personally I am very scared for the type of global corruption that will be possible without national boundaries.

As opposed to the national corruption that lends itself to global warfare, genocide, and nuclear warfare? I don't see it as good, nor do I see it as inherently worse.

Agreed, but my fear is that unification allows for consolidation of power in a way that current nation states prevent.

Re: Nadella as Microsoft CEO: A slap in the face for Indian system

#150

Post by jwr »

tobiasu wrote: post #66
jwr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you do something to earn your nationality? Some people did. As an example, my grandfather had to fight for the right to live according to his culture, because our country was invaded. Once you fought for your freedom, you begin to feel rather strongly about "nationality", defined as belonging to a group of people that share your cultural beliefs. And yes, you could say he "earned" his nationality. He did not fi…

Was he, per chance, invaded by a nation that loved its nationalism uber alles? A nation that was only recently unified from many tribes, and whose politicians longing for a great nation resulted in 50-70 million dead? No thanks. Nationality is whose warlords turf you are born on. The second we get over this concept, the world will be a better place.

Well, close, but Poland was invaded by a number of neighbors (we also did some invading ourselves, back when we actually could).

Your reasoning makes me think of the prisoner's dilemma. Sure, if everyone agreed to just abandon the concepts of cultural identity (leading to nationality) and live in peace, the world would be a better place. But for the moment, I'm afraid that "world peace" is something that only Miss World candidates speak of regularly.

Post reply on HN