5 ms·

Whichever college allows YOU to grow creatively, socially, and intellectually. This college is not necessarily Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, or Somestate University.

by bharris 19y ago

Whichever college allows YOU to grow creatively, socially, and intellectually. This college is not necessarily Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, or Somestate University. As far as a degree, whichever you enjoy the most. Don't focus on the product; rather, HOW you reach it.

motoko 19y ago
...A not-so-subtle way to make one look "wise" without an accountable response. Not useful.
- bharris 19y ago
  So you'd rather spend four years of your life at a school which stymies your growth rather that nourishes it? I'd much rather make a decision to spend four precious years based on whether or not I feel like I would benefit, not because Bill Gates did.
  - motoko 19y ago
    No, I'd rather keep discussions mature. It "feels good" to devolve into diatribes, and trust me, if you know me, I HAVE... but the question here is "what undergrad schools should I consider." Back on topic, empirically, I know many people involved in startups with _some_ connection to Stanford, probably more so than any other single school. I know many people from UC Santa Cruz, too. Both may be because these are the two nearest good universities near Silicon Valley. Not so many from San Jose State University. Maybe stay away from that one.
    - chengmi 19y ago
      Gordon Moore (Intel) and Ed Oates (Oracle) both attended SJSU at some point in their careers. I think they turned out ok...
      - motoko 19y ago
        How could I say that attending SJSU precludes one from success? I'm saying if one could attend either SJSU or UCSC that SJSU may not be the best choice generally even though SJSU is closer to silicon valley.
nostrademons 19y ago
I think this needs some context. I felt much the same way when I decided on a college, and made my decision based on that. I won't exactly say I was wrong, but 7 years later I've got a better perspective on the tradeoffs involved. Understand that your raw intellectual prowess is a depreciating asset. I'd guess that I peaked in programming ability at about 19, and 18-20 seems a pretty common age range based on famous programmers. I'm certainly not as productive a programmer as I was at my first professional job at 19, and my 35 year old coworkers have said that there's no way they can keep up with what I do now at 26. You continue gaining experience for a while after that, so it's not like you're over the hill at 20. The mid/late 20s seems to be the "sweet spot" where you still have decent technical prowess and yet enough experience to avoid blind alleys. But if you fritter away your early 20s, you lose the benefits of high ability and don't have the experience to show for it. You're starting behind and have to play catch-up to more youthful and more energetic competitors, which is possible but can be kinda discouraging. OTOH, trying out a variety of things gives you a lot of perspective on what you do or don't want to pursue. I was certain I wanted to be a physics major and then a theoretical physicist when I entered college. I flirted briefly with majoring in philosophy or sociology when it turned out physics was much harder than I bargained for. I tried out fiction writing and found I wasn't any good at it. I made all-state violin in high school, but again realized that I didn't have the passion for it needed to be a professional. The one downside of having all those options open is that I never finished anything. There was always some other avenue that looked more attractive. It was only in my senior year, when I was practically flunking out of physics and had a bunch of hobbies that weren't all that useful, that I decided I was gonna close off all the other avenues and focus on computers. And it was only then that I started actually producing stuff that was useful. So, I'll agree with the parent post that it's important to grow creatively, socially, and intellectually in college. But understand that there are doors that going to Stanford/Harvard/MIT opens, and those doors tend to slam shut afterwards. It's possible to prop them back open, but it takes a lot more effort, because you're working against people's expectations. Similarly, there're doors that open from focusing deeply on one field, and it's much harder to achieve mastery in a subject than it seems in high school. I remember thinking in high school "I've got 70 years left in my life, that's plenty of time to accomplish everything." But you don't - you've got maybe 10-15 years (between the ages of 20 and 35) to really make a mark on the world, and then the rest is for raising kids, writing books, passing on your wisdom, and generally enjoying the fruits of those 10-15 years. (I do reserve the right to change my mind in 10 years and say "Pish-posh. Life's not over at 35 - keep an open mind and you can keep doing cool stuff until the day you die." But this is how it looks from the mid-20s.)

by bharris 19y ago

motoko 19y ago

...A not-so-subtle way to make one look "wise" without an accountable response. Not useful.

bharris 19y ago
So you'd rather spend four years of your life at a school which stymies your growth rather that nourishes it? I'd much rather make a decision to spend four precious years based on whether or not I feel like I would benefit, not because Bill Gates did.
- motoko 19y ago
  No, I'd rather keep discussions mature. It "feels good" to devolve into diatribes, and trust me, if you know me, I HAVE... but the question here is "what undergrad schools should I consider." Back on topic, empirically, I know many people involved in startups with _some_ connection to Stanford, probably more so than any other single school. I know many people from UC Santa Cruz, too. Both may be because these are the two nearest good universities near Silicon Valley. Not so many from San Jose State University. Maybe stay away from that one.
  - chengmi 19y ago
    Gordon Moore (Intel) and Ed Oates (Oracle) both attended SJSU at some point in their careers. I think they turned out ok...
    - motoko 19y ago
      How could I say that attending SJSU precludes one from success? I'm saying if one could attend either SJSU or UCSC that SJSU may not be the best choice generally even though SJSU is closer to silicon valley.

nostrademons 19y ago

I think this needs some context. I felt much the same way when I decided on a college, and made my decision based on that. I won't exactly say I was wrong, but 7 years later I've got a better perspective on the tradeoffs involved. Understand that your raw intellectual prowess is a depreciating asset. I'd guess that I peaked in programming ability at about 19, and 18-20 seems a pretty common age range based on famous programmers. I'm certainly not as productive a programmer as I was at my first professional job at 19, and my 35 year old coworkers have said that there's no way they can keep up with what I do now at 26. You continue gaining experience for a while after that, so it's not like you're over the hill at 20. The mid/late 20s seems to be the "sweet spot" where you still have decent technical prowess and yet enough experience to avoid blind alleys. But if you fritter away your early 20s, you lose the benefits of high ability and don't have the experience to show for it. You're starting behind and have to play catch-up to more youthful and more energetic competitors, which is possible but can be kinda discouraging. OTOH, trying out a variety of things gives you a lot of perspective on what you do or don't want to pursue. I was certain I wanted to be a physics major and then a theoretical physicist when I entered college. I flirted briefly with majoring in philosophy or sociology when it turned out physics was much harder than I bargained for. I tried out fiction writing and found I wasn't any good at it. I made all-state violin in high school, but again realized that I didn't have the passion for it needed to be a professional. The one downside of having all those options open is that I never finished anything. There was always some other avenue that looked more attractive. It was only in my senior year, when I was practically flunking out of physics and had a bunch of hobbies that weren't all that useful, that I decided I was gonna close off all the other avenues and focus on computers. And it was only then that I started actually producing stuff that was useful. So, I'll agree with the parent post that it's important to grow creatively, socially, and intellectually in college. But understand that there are doors that going to Stanford/Harvard/MIT opens, and those doors tend to slam shut afterwards. It's possible to prop them back open, but it takes a lot more effort, because you're working against people's expectations. Similarly, there're doors that open from focusing deeply on one field, and it's much harder to achieve mastery in a subject than it seems in high school. I remember thinking in high school "I've got 70 years left in my life, that's plenty of time to accomplish everything." But you don't - you've got maybe 10-15 years (between the ages of 20 and 35) to really make a mark on the world, and then the rest is for raising kids, writing books, passing on your wisdom, and generally enjoying the fruits of those 10-15 years. (I do reserve the right to change my mind in 10 years and say "Pish-posh. Life's not over at 35 - keep an open mind and you can keep doing cool stuff until the day you die." But this is how it looks from the mid-20s.)