Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many have it. Much less people have the aptitude for quantum physics which is way harder. Programming is so easy that even as a teenager you have sufficient background to learn it. I assure you that as a teenager, it's very unlikely you had any aptitude for quantum physics or any of the hard mathematics required to understand general relativity.
Pointless debate when you do not define the level. Anyone can be surgeon, if you define 'surgery' as being able to 'remove mole'. Many programmers just remove moles. Some do coronary bypass surgeries.
Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
451–460 of 476 posts
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clutch those pearls harder. Your program wasn't more difficult because it was more selective. Stubbornness is refusing to believe difficulty can remain constant across varying degrees of selectivity of cohorts. You're making the assertion it can't, I'm simply calling bullshit on your unsupported and specious claim.
>Clutch those pearls harder. Your program wasn't more difficult because it was more selective. I never claimed such. I only know the hardness relative to another school I went too. That's as far as the anecdotal evidence goes for MY individual school. Still, we're not even talking about our respective schools anymore, I don't even care for that. I'm talking about a generality. The numbers illustrate a generality that…
But you did. You specifically said that selectivity influences your program to be harder than non-selective programs.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#453Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Clutch those pearls harder. Your program wasn't more difficult because it was more selective. I never claimed such. I only know the hardness relative to another school I went too. That's as far as the anecdotal evidence goes for MY individual school. Still, we're not even talking about our respective schools anymore, I don't even care for that. I'm talking about a generality. The numbers illustrate a generality that…
>I never claimed such. But you did. You specifically said that selectivity influences your program to be harder than non-selective programs.
I never mentioned that it was specific to my school. Thus with no specific mention the implied meaning is that it's applied to a generality.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#454Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I never claimed such. But you did. You specifically said that selectivity influences your program to be harder than non-selective programs.
No I didn't. I mentioned my anecdotal experiences as supporting evidence but ultimately the thesis is that selectivity is causal to difficulty. I never mentioned that it was specific to my school. Thus with no specific mention the implied meaning is that it's applied to a generality.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I didn't. I mentioned my anecdotal experiences as supporting evidence but ultimately the thesis is that selectivity is causal to difficulty. I never mentioned that it was specific to my school. Thus with no specific mention the implied meaning is that it's applied to a generality.
OK so selectivity is causal to difficulty, everywhere but at the school you attended? Are you sure you didn't study law, because this kind of insane logic is something I've only read in legal briefs.
I made no statement about my school or your school specifically in reference to how hard they are in general. We both did however use our schools as anecdotal supporting evidence for each of our respective opinions though.
But anecdotal evidence is worthless. That's why I moved to numbers. This is what the numbers say:
Selectivity is causal to difficulty in general.
Your school could be an exception and my school may be an exception as well. But given my statement above, by probability, it is highly unlikely.
In short, it's more probable that my school is harder than your school and this probability is only escapable if someone who attended both can give us a more accurate first hand comparison.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK so selectivity is causal to difficulty, everywhere but at the school you attended? Are you sure you didn't study law, because this kind of insane logic is something I've only read in legal briefs.
No I didn't say that. I made no statement about my school or your school specifically in reference to how hard they are in general. We both did however use our schools as anecdotal supporting evidence for each of our respective opinions though. But anecdotal evidence is worthless. That's why I moved to numbers. This is what the numbers say: Selectivity is causal to difficulty in general. Your school could be an excep…
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't give a full answer to your question without revealing things I don't want to put online. The best I can do is say I don't know. It's hard to judge what would have happened otherwise, what opportunities I might have pursued. So, I answered as best I can. But even if, under yours or anyone's definition, we were better off, what does that say? An economic system or society (can't really full disentangle the two)…
Appreciate the response. To answer your question >Is "better off [economically]" you're guide on ethical labor practices? No. But live in reality. I know people have to make hard decisions. If the choice is "Family starves to death" or "Child labor results in survival of family", I would never try to stop this family from having that opportunity to survive. Whether it is better to ban the job so the family starves to…
I live there, grew up with a strong dose of it, but I take your point and understand. I'm not ideological on the issue except that I think we can do better, so a viewpoint rooted in (for me, cynical) practicality is easy for me to relate to. It's different than an ideological one, which is what was the question I was trying to understand from your statement. It's harder to have productive conversation on matters of ideology.
At the end of the day your situation may have been more iffy (you don't know whether it was actually beneficial). That indicates to me you weren't going to starve to death
Eh, yes and no. Again, personal details involved. But, mostly, not about extreme food security problems. A parent worked in food service as a second job, which helped. (No theft, just generous owners)
In general I find child labor laws to be deeply ironic in a Kafka-esque way for the reasons you touch on. Out socioeconomic system produces situations that all but require such labor, but then it is outlawed. Like so many other laws, it doesn't solve the problem that leads to the bad thing in the first place.
Better to have an extremely strong safety net w/ a strong job training & job placement system. It's often a catch 22 though. In my state unemployed people can go to community college for free, and there are even 1-year full time programs for in-demand jobs that have okay pay. The problem is, how do you love during that the new period? That's one gap. Another one are people who are employed but don't make enough money-- no free college for them, so they're stuck in their economic niche. And if they lost the job they'd still face the first issue of living while they learn. Another gap is the job market: fix the above issues and the college programs I referenced would be flooded beyond their capacity and wages in the job market kept low by a higher labor supply.
I think we could chip away at some of these issues, but the most common political solution, probably because it seems quick and easy, is to raise the floor on minimum wage. There's a little elasticity there, but I don't think it can be raised enough to solve these problems. Low-margin businesses (supermarkets!) especially will have to raise prices, which will then eat into the cost of living. The idea that minimum wage can be doubled without inflation always strikes me as wishful thinking.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I didn't say that. I made no statement about my school or your school specifically in reference to how hard they are in general. We both did however use our schools as anecdotal supporting evidence for each of our respective opinions though. But anecdotal evidence is worthless. That's why I moved to numbers. This is what the numbers say: Selectivity is causal to difficulty in general. Your school could be an excep…
OK so selectivity is possibly causal to difficulty and possibly not? So 99.9% of non-selective schools could be as difficult as peer selective schools while the rare exception isn't? You may be on to something.... At least you finally admit you don't get to feel special about going through something more 'difficult' on account of whatever idea your school had of selectivity.
Where the hell are you getting that 99.9% number? I would think someone who went to a good school wouldn't pull random numbers out of thin air.
Selectivity is causal to difficulty. Period. But the causal connection like all things in reality is a connection built upon probability. Think of the luck stat in RPGs. On average the more selective the school the harder. If there's any school that breaks the model, that school is an exception and a minority. Your school might be an exception, but by probability it is most likely not and it is more likely you just think your school is harder.
>At least you finally admit you don't get to feel special about going through something more 'difficult' on account of whatever idea your school had of selectivity.
I never said my school was special or commented about how I feel. If you look at the initial posts, I was telling you that going to a non-selective school ISN'T anything special, because you were the one talking about it.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK so selectivity is possibly causal to difficulty and possibly not? So 99.9% of non-selective schools could be as difficult as peer selective schools while the rare exception isn't? You may be on to something.... At least you finally admit you don't get to feel special about going through something more 'difficult' on account of whatever idea your school had of selectivity.
>OK so selectivity is possibly causal to difficulty and possibly not? So 99.9% of non-selective schools could be as difficult as peer selective schools while the rare exception isn't? Where the hell are you getting that 99.9% number? I would think someone who went to a good school wouldn't pull random numbers out of thin air. Selectivity is causal to difficulty. Period. But the causal connection like all things in re…
Personally I think you just have a chip on your shoulder thinking a selective program is generally more difficult than a non-selective program. Elitist arrogance.
>Where the hell are you getting that 99.9% number? I would think someone who went to a good school wouldn't pull random numbers out of thin air.
I said could be, because you decoupled by saying now that it merely COULD be that a selectivity influences difficulty, before backtracking to play your devious and treacherous claim you were never talking about the school from which your anecdotes came. YOU pulled the figures like 25% and 50% out of a hat, which is fine because we acknowledged they weren't hard numbers. Don't be a hypocrite.
>Selectivity is causal to difficulty. Period
Selectivity doesn't confer difficulty. Period.
Edit: here's a comment from a student at one non-selective school
"This leads to > feeling very impersonal for Freshman and Sophmores while the university treats you more or less like an experiment to see if you can handle the pressure. This can lead to people that would normal be denied to being accepted and excelling, but it can also lead to other students who shouldn't have been placed in such rigorous programs having to drop out, transfer, or graduate late. This is from a personal observation and 2 good friends transferring schools and another friend who dropped out his Junior year."
they note the university "Put them in extremely tough classes go start with and weed out those who can't handle the pressure."
This is how it tends to work in non-selective schools. They hold students to the 'selective' school standard freshman/sophomore year until by junior year you're effectively in a cohort that looks like the cohort at the selective school. The difficulty is still there, although it's an independent variable from the selectivity.
Re: Amazon worker chat app to ban words such as “union”, “pay raise”, “slave labor”
#460Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pointless debate when you do not define the level. Anyone can be surgeon, if you define 'surgery' as being able to 'remove mole'. Many programmers just remove moles. Some do coronary bypass surgeries.
Then let's define the level. Whatever the level is for an Average programmer, my claim is anyone Normal can achieve that level.