Live data from Hacker News

Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

stanford.edu

111–120 of 169 posts

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#111
post #53

I went to school, then dropped out, and then went back. I finished my BS last week with a 4.0 GPA. I dropped out because I wasn't learning anything, and it was an incredibly time consuming grind that wasn't any fun. I dropped out to start a company, and probably learned more every few weeks doing that, than it would be possible to learn in years of classes. There isn't a guide and every problem requires actual though…

> People hire college graduates because they have demonstrated that they can be given a list of work, and a criteria for how their work will be judged, and complete the work. That's it.

One of my professors (Dr. Mazumdar, NMT) had a saying about complexity theory: "A computer science degree will never get you a job, but it may keep you from getting fired."

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#112
post #46

I am getting quite tired of listening to people argue for or against conformity. You don't become a shepherd by making yourself into a black sheep. And there is nothing wrong with conforming. There is nothing wrong with wearing fashionable status symbols. There is nothing wrong with climbing hierarchies, nothing wrong with pleading for a comfortable life, or listening to what your friends think is cool. There really…

The post is not arguing against conformity - it is arguing against submission. It is arguing against a system that rewards submission.

I believe that a generation of extremely sophisticated, powerful, people who are eager to submit is a powerful and evil tool.

Fashionable status symbols are means by which one man dominates another. Many believe that a society of mutual respect will not seek tools of domination.

The issue with hierarchies is that they are historically weapons of oppression wielded against the marginal and unprivileged.

The issue with listening to what your friends think is cool is that your friends might be twats.

There really are problems with these behaviors, categorically. There really is a problem with submission, categorically. We are animals, we are spirits, we are not robots.

There's nothing wrong with robots. Be a robot if you want to. There are many people eager to use and reward you.

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#113
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could graduate, and do the same thing, except making $10k+ a month while you are doing it. The idea that college is now about romance and partying is part of what's skewing the prices.

When has college not been about party and romance?

Probably up until 1968.

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#114
post #57

We've created a winner-take-all society where the cost of losing is a soul-sucking micro-managed job and the constant worry that getting sick could mean medical bills that can never be paid off. In this society you do not get points for asking big questions. You get points for getting the right degrees to serve the right signaling functions to get the right jobs which offer luxuries like health insurance and the flex…

Daniel Brook's book "The Trap: Selling Out to Stay Afloat in Winner-Take-All America" [1] does a great job showing how the rising costs of student loans, urban living, and health care drive students into corporate jobs.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003F76G2Q/ref=as_li_tf_tl?...

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#115
post #46

I am getting quite tired of listening to people argue for or against conformity. You don't become a shepherd by making yourself into a black sheep. And there is nothing wrong with conforming. There is nothing wrong with wearing fashionable status symbols. There is nothing wrong with climbing hierarchies, nothing wrong with pleading for a comfortable life, or listening to what your friends think is cool. There really…

"And there is nothing wrong with conforming. There is nothing wrong with wearing fashionable status symbols. There is nothing wrong with climbing hierarchies, nothing wrong with pleading for a comfortable life, or listening to what your friends think is cool. There really isn't. These are all suitable ways of enjoying your life."

There are important contextual distinctions that need to be addressed here. There is nothing wrong? That's as foolish as saying conformity isn't wrong. Right or wrong, it's not about the morality of it. It's about the message you're sending about yourself and your abilities.

A sheep needs to be guided, everyday and everywhere. If you're the kind of person that needs to be shown what's cool/interesting/important/not important/funny/stupid then ultimately you have no leadership abilities and I would never hire you for anything useful. It not only speaks volumes about your leadership abilities, but also about your self-confidence. You don't value your own personal views enough to act on them. You don't look/act/create with the belief that YOU know what you're doing.

If, at the end of the day, you find you're not very useful as your own body, then conforming is ultimately the best thing to do. I personally feel that anyone that tries to stop conforming and just act and be according to their own personality 100% won't fail though. You'll find your niche, and you'll dominate it.

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#116
post #53

I went to school, then dropped out, and then went back. I finished my BS last week with a 4.0 GPA. I dropped out because I wasn't learning anything, and it was an incredibly time consuming grind that wasn't any fun. I dropped out to start a company, and probably learned more every few weeks doing that, than it would be possible to learn in years of classes. There isn't a guide and every problem requires actual though…

So: you went to college determined to find a path through it that would let you "get straight A's" and "graduate as quickly as possible", and then treated each course as a list of stuff to "check off"... and you're upset that you didn't get very much out of college? Well, duh. Every year I get a number of students whose entire motivation to be in my class is that they want to get the piece of paper. This sort of pure…

While I understand what you're saying, I'm not sure that the purpose of a university education is to "make it fun" for professors.

More likely, the purpose of a university education is to learn.

And that does not necessarily require the professor to happen.

There should never be anything wrong with doing work outside of class, or any implication that doing the work is "not enough". Often learning happens in that time outside of class spent "just doing the work", not "in class" where a professor is struggling to "have fun".

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#117
post #22
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The toxic liquids tend to be actually fun to many :)

Thank you for being a part of my statistic. Alcohol makes you misrable. Say baaa sheep. :) you were trained to say it's fun by billion dollar psychoogical ad campaigns to brainwash you to think it fun. It's abuse in a bottle, wolves realize this and profit off the sheep.

You know you can say what you want, but I'm living for a year in a country where alcohol is illegal and quite frankly I think it's a detriment. Why? because alcohol helps fuel the rhythms of the week, where people are "on" during work days and "off" during the weekend. How? by making it acceptable to not be mentally in a state to do work outside of work hours.

Here the weekend means nothing. People work 6-7 days per week, and are always on. They lose the rhythm. Religion fills the void a bit with friday prayers an excuse to work less, but really.

You should be more grateful for what you've got... you benefit from a society that doesn't expect you to be on 7 days per week.

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#119
post #53

I went to school, then dropped out, and then went back. I finished my BS last week with a 4.0 GPA. I dropped out because I wasn't learning anything, and it was an incredibly time consuming grind that wasn't any fun. I dropped out to start a company, and probably learned more every few weeks doing that, than it would be possible to learn in years of classes. There isn't a guide and every problem requires actual though…

This is nice summary. I would add that one of the major things you are paying for with university is the opportunity to be assessed. You are paying for the right to sit the exams and to be graded. You can then take that document evidencing your marks with you to future "assessors" such as HR departments. The grading function you are paying for is important. Otherwise you could just take a syllabus, go off and complet…

> A criticism that has sometimes been levelled at Stanford is that once you are admitted you can coast your way to graduation.

This is an odd criticism. While I was at Stanford, the school administrators were extremely concerned with a ubiquitous problem on campus called "Stanford Duck Syndrome": looking serene and peaceful above the surface, but underneath the water, paddling as hard as possible to keep from sinking.

You could say I was an academically-inclined kid. I started high school a year early. And during that year, I passed AP Calculus with the maximum score of 5. I studied for the SAT for a week, took it only once, and if I recall correctly scored in the 98th percentile. And finally, I matriculated at Stanford at age 16.

But still, Stanford was by a large margin the most difficult thing I'd ever done up to that point. And it would not be a huge stretch to include everything I've done ever since.

I've come to understand since graduating that, for many other institutions, the professor applies a curve to an exam in response to the overall performance of the class being poor. At Stanford, it is expressed at the start that the exam will be curved -- because the professors intend to make it so difficult that they are confident that, in their classroom of highly motivated, intelligent students, only a small handful will be able to get As; it is intended to be a way to differentiate the very top students.

Let me give you a sense of what this feels like. I was taking the freshman physics series with the world champion in physics. Blake Ross, one of the guys behind Firefox, was attending while I was there. Even while I was learning how to swim at Avery Aquatic Center, I saw Don Knuth finishing up lap swimming....

Re: Are Stanford Students Just (Really Excellent) Sheep?

#120
post #53

I went to school, then dropped out, and then went back. I finished my BS last week with a 4.0 GPA. I dropped out because I wasn't learning anything, and it was an incredibly time consuming grind that wasn't any fun. I dropped out to start a company, and probably learned more every few weeks doing that, than it would be possible to learn in years of classes. There isn't a guide and every problem requires actual though…

"Getting an A is as easy as doing everything, it doesn't require any real intelligence or understanding. This is really what college is all about." You don't have a representative experience. Try going to a top 5 school in science/ engineering/ math.

Isn't by definition going to a "top 5 school" not a representative experience.

Maybe his experience is the representative of most colleges and yours from a "top 5 school" the exception.

Post reply on HN