A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM • Hacker News Board

Re: A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM

#11

Post by oneplane » Sat, May 18, 2019, 4:51 PM UTC

bsenftner wrote: post #8

kurthr wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Science Technology Engineering and Math aren't just for business, but I think you mean that the business managers end up owning their product? MBAs seem mostly centered on the US (some in Europe, but much less in Asia) business experience. I haven't noticed that it's made the US much more successful, but it is important to have the MBA tool set to fairly get money out of the US banking/venture system. In other places…

I'm not saying Science Technology Engineering and Math are just for business; I'm saying a knowledge of business is essential to achieving large ambitions.

The knowledge of business isn't the same as MBA. And plenty of large ambitions work out pretty well without either.

Business knowledge and/or MBA's are only relevant for large ambitions if those large ambitions are actually not large ambitions but rather large amounts of money instead, which in itself is without intrinsic value.

Re: A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM

#12

Post by 781 » Sat, May 18, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

bsenftner wrote: post #2

I've always felt STEM as yet another compartmentalization of people that create from the business side that manages to own all of the profits from said object/process the STEMs create. A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions, so why is an MBA level education not a critical component of a STEM education? Seem like a critical oversight, or intentional for some odd valued reason.

> A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions

Funny how many billionaires are out-there without an MBA.

> Of the top 100 people listed by Forbes as the world’s richest, a grand total of 16 have MBAs. The highest-ranking MBA is Michael Bloomberg at number 11

https://www.businessbecause.com/news/making-the-headlines/52...

Re: A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM

#13

Post by ThrowawayR2 » Sat, May 18, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

781 wrote: post #12

bsenftner wrote: post #2

I've always felt STEM as yet another compartmentalization of people that create from the business side that manages to own all of the profits from said object/process the STEMs create. A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions, so why is an MBA level education not a critical component of a STEM education? Seem like a critical oversight, or intentional for some odd valued reason.

> A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions Funny how many billionaires are out-there without an MBA. > Of the top 100 people listed by Forbes as the world’s richest, a grand total of 16 have MBAs. The highest-ranking MBA is Michael Bloomberg at number 11 https://www.businessbecause.com/news/making-the-headlines/52...

> Funny how many billionaires are out-there without an MBA.

The OP said "business education", not MBA. That article points out that a number of the top 100 richest who do not have a MBA do have a bachelor's degree in business administration (e.g. Warren Buffet) or dropped out of business school (e.g. Steve Ballmer). So it's not as cut and dried as that.

Re: A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM

#14

Post by harimau777 » Sat, May 18, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

781 wrote: post #12

bsenftner wrote: post #2

I've always felt STEM as yet another compartmentalization of people that create from the business side that manages to own all of the profits from said object/process the STEMs create. A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions, so why is an MBA level education not a critical component of a STEM education? Seem like a critical oversight, or intentional for some odd valued reason.

> A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions Funny how many billionaires are out-there without an MBA. > Of the top 100 people listed by Forbes as the world’s richest, a grand total of 16 have MBAs. The highest-ranking MBA is Michael Bloomberg at number 11 https://www.businessbecause.com/news/making-the-headlines/52...

I think the issue might be that the exceedingly vast majority of people have no chance of becoming a billionaire and a lot of it is down to luck. On the other hand, an MBA might allow someone to become a millionaire while they are still young enough to enjoy it.

Re: A Legendary Scientist Sounds Off on the Trouble with STEM

#15

Post by bsenftner » Wed, May 22, 2019, 12:37 PM UTC

soundness-mess wrote: post #10

bsenftner wrote: post #2

I've always felt STEM as yet another compartmentalization of people that create from the business side that manages to own all of the profits from said object/process the STEMs create. A business education is essential to anyone with larger than a job ambitions, so why is an MBA level education not a critical component of a STEM education? Seem like a critical oversight, or intentional for some odd valued reason.

You don't need to understand business to be an engineer, meaning you can fix something an engineer can be expected to without knowing a damn thing about business. Also, business is just not interesting for some people. I am one of them and I'm glad I wasn't made to agree with something I don't believe in, in order to be what I do believe in.

And then you only have a job. With any sort of business education (even on the job training how to operate a business) turns an engineer occupying a job into an independent professional capable of striking out on their own.