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

Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 386 posts

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#161

Post by zzzeek »

glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

right well, the problem is people are not iphones, they're human beings. we can throw away our cheap android phones and get iphones, but as a society, we might decide that we should not be throwing away humans who don't come from the right "brand"

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#162

Post by 8note »

glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

The question is, could you do a similar filter by asking each applicant about their parents wealth? Perhaps ultra-wealthy parents is the decent proxy for productivity?

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#163

Post by less_less »

I agree that there are many aspects of how elite universities work that are not what's best for society. I don't think this is the best thinkpiece on it though. One small thing that jumped out at me is the bit about "we don't have to sort kids at 18, because most colleges teach the same stuff". To support this point, the author compared Harvard Math 1a to SIUE Math 150.

This is a bad comparison, because these are introductory math classes for first-year students who aren't math majors, used to satisfy distribution requirements or give math background for non-math-intensive courses. There's a placement system to decide what math class to take, probably at both universities, but here is Harvard's (2020-2021):

https://www.math.harvard.edu/media/Math-for-first-year-stude...

As you can see, first-year Harvard math or physics majors sometimes take Math 21, but more likely Math 23, 25, or 55. (Math 55 is weirdly fetishized, but that's another story.) These classes are significantly more rigorous than Math 1.

Having taken math courses for math majors at both an Ivy school and a decent non-Ivy, it is my experience that while they teach roughly the same subjects, they do not teach the same things within those subjects, nor at the same pace, nor to the same level of rigor. Nor are the students in those classes equally good at math. So, while sorting those students can and does contribute to injustice (especially with the actual way it's done!), it's also not a completely pointless just for the sake of giving gold stars.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#164

Post by monktastic1 »

blitzar wrote: post #73
samvher wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have worked in an environment where it really did seem to matter. An organization set up by Harvard folks where other Harvard folks seemed to have advantages in (a) getting in and (b) getting ahead. It wasn't ever really addressed explicitly (though "credentialism" was occasionally mentioned by others as well, I wasn't the only one who noticed). It definitely played a role in my leaving that organization. Edit - I…

I live in a non US country so we can for once have the counterfactual, as for us harvard does not exist. I have worked in an environment where {maths degrees} really did seem to matter. An organization set up by people with {maths degrees} where other people with {maths degrees} seemed to have advantages in (a) getting in and (b) getting ahead. It wasn't ever really addressed explicitly (though "credentialism" was oc…

Surely you can see the difference between having domain expertise and having association with a particular brand?

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#165

Post by fnordpiglet »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #56
Barrin92 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I’ve never once felt someone else going to Harvard impacted my life in any way whatsoever Eight of the nine current sitting Supreme Court Judges are either Yale or Harvard Law graduates. It's pretty likely Harvard has had an impact on your life in a lot of ways because a lot of people who govern you went there. Degrees from those schools are basically licenses to occupy the highest positions in the country's adminis…

> It's pretty likely Harvard has had an impact on your life in a lot of ways because a lot of people who govern you went there. And, in addition, because at least presently, anyone who didn't do Ivy+ is essentially never going to be a SCOTUS judge. The obvious objection is that given there are only 9 justices at a time, essentially nobody is ever going to be a SCOTUS judge anyway. But that misses the important gating…

So, according to Wikipedia, 18 justices graduated Harvard, 9 Yale, and 39 some other law school. Yes, it helps to go to Harvard or Yale. But most justices didn’t.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#166

Post by JohnBooty »

neilv wrote: post #125
glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

> Not very different than an Apple product being generally better than a product from some random vendor from Amazon with names like "GREAT TECH" or "SUPER QUALITY PRO". I think "SUPER QUALITY PRO" almost certainly isn't as good of quality as Apple. So I disagree with the analogy, when we're talking about people who went to big-name schools vs. everyone else.

    I think "SUPER QUALITY PRO" almost certainly isn't 
    as good of quality as Apple.
I don't want to get too deep in the weeds w.r.t. this analogy, but generic stuff is very often as good as Apple.

It's just that with Apple (substitute another high-prestige name brand, if you prefer) you are typically getting a certain guaranteed level of quality.

I've had Apple-branded phone cases. They are always top-tier. I've had generic ones that were just as good or maybe better. Also had some godawful ones. I can afford to experiment with phone cases because I can tolerate a $15 failure that takes a small amount of my time. But this isn't as true for potential hires so companies gravitate toward those "big-name" schools.

When you are in a hiring role, it's often impossible to avoid this kind of bias. If you hire a Harvard grad and they don't work out, at least you made the safe choice in your manager's eyes. Much easier to defend than taking a chance on some rando wildcard person.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#167

Post by tzs »

jyscao wrote: post #121
glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

>Having managed over 100+ people, I can say that on average the people from better institutions are better employees - even though I have managed amazing people without college degrees and bad people with amazing degrees. There is a better method for selecting candidates: IQ testing. For better or worse, that's illegal. In fact college degrees are merely proxies for the lack of IQ data.

If the degree is from a college where it takes hard work to get that degree that tells you a lot more than an IQ test would tell you.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#168

Post by ghaff »

jyscao wrote: post #121
glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

>Having managed over 100+ people, I can say that on average the people from better institutions are better employees - even though I have managed amazing people without college degrees and bad people with amazing degrees. There is a better method for selecting candidates: IQ testing. For better or worse, that's illegal. In fact college degrees are merely proxies for the lack of IQ data.

>For better or worse, that's illegal.

Problematic/controversial but not necessarily illegal. They can probably ask for SAT/ACT scores which are probably a pretty good proxy as well.

>In fact college degrees are merely proxies for the lack of IQ data

Disagree to a fair degree. The college degree (and grades/other experiences) tell more than how well you do on a multiple choice test. One can of course argue how much more.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#169

Post by kevinventullo »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #146
torstenvl wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What law schools are admitting 18yos? I don't know if it's intentional but you're conflating mutually exclusive lines of thought. The argument that such decisions should be made at age 22 instead of age 18 doesn't support — in fact contradicts — your argument that trajectories toward SCOTUS should not be related to law school admissions (which do indeed happen at age 22 instead of age 18).

The argument is not about Harvard Law, it's about Harvard. Yes, 8 of the 9 went to Harvard or Yale Law. But 6 of the nine went to Harvard, Yale or Princeton as undergrads.

In my mind, the latter is the more damning statistic.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#170

Post by lapcat »

amluto wrote: post #138
lapcat wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. I think you missed the point of the article, which was "Harvard exists to make society less meritocratic, and it does that while subsidized by everyone else." > Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. The author discusses this: "The hardest part of Harvard is g…

The “Harvard exists to make society less meritocratic” idea is repeated a couple of times, and the article doesn’t seem to make any argument at all that it’s correct. An alternative hypothesis, entirely consistent with the author’s arguments, is that Harvard exists to educate its students (and to do research and have fancy sports and pretty buildings and cultural events, etc), that it’s quite good at this but not nec…

> its gating function developed over time and is unfortunate.

It seems like you're mistaking the article for some kind of historical origin hypothesis?

Harvard as it currently exists has the function of making society less meritocratic, while society continues to subsidize Harvard in various ways. How Harvard came into existence originally and its function in the 17th century are not particularly relevant to the argument.

Post reply on HN