Live data from Hacker News

Kid Sends Blunt Cover Letter and Now People are Trying to Hire Him

finance.yahoo.com

91–93 of 93 posts

Re: Kid Sends Blunt Cover Letter and Now People are Trying to Hire Him

#91
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Course he wouldn't - they are all lauding him. So basically, the ends justify the means? That's like suggesting that me giving away your credit card number is okay if you end up buying the product that the third party tries to sell you.

The context justifies the means. Yes to forwarding resume/cover letter email to others who might seek to hire the applicant. No to sharing others' credit card numbers. Human beings - creatures capable of judgment and discretion - don't need to reduce every decision to predefined deontological criteria.

don't need to reduce every decision to predefined deontological criteria.

Actually, I'm pretty sure history suggests that we do.

Re: Kid Sends Blunt Cover Letter and Now People are Trying to Hire Him

#92
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, to be fair, honesty is probably something pretty unusual on Wall St.

No offense, but I think that's a pretty typical (and boring) statement that is probably less true than it is on "main street." Wall Street trading firms have to adhere to some pretty stringent SEC regulations; regulations no other private company has to deal with. That inherently means they're required to disclose more than the average "Main St." company. We all like to cite the bad apples (aka the exceptions), but b…

Actually, I'll just broaden it: honesty in business is pretty unusual, especially big business. Are you happy?

Re: Kid Sends Blunt Cover Letter and Now People are Trying to Hire Him

#93
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context justifies the means. Yes to forwarding resume/cover letter email to others who might seek to hire the applicant. No to sharing others' credit card numbers. Human beings - creatures capable of judgment and discretion - don't need to reduce every decision to predefined deontological criteria.

don't need to reduce every decision to predefined deontological criteria. Actually, I'm pretty sure history suggests that we do.

Do you care to elaborate? History, to me, suggests quite the opposite; you might argue that it's quite common for people to actually practice the application of a generalized set of pre-packaged criteria to all situations, but the actual patterns of events we can observe indicate that we might all be better off with fewer and fewer people doing so, and more and more developing the native intelligence necessary to evaluate every unique conjunction of circumstance on its own particular merits.
Post reply on HN