> unless they somehow have substantial work experience at the age of 20 This is going to be very anecdotal, but that merit is even more run by buzzwords than q

> unless they somehow have substantial work experience at the age of 20 This is going to be very anecdotal, but that merit is even more run by buzzwords than qualitative inspection of one's skills compared to a degree. I had the privilege to be employed as 20-year old in Silicon Valley as a foreigner, but I did not find myself doing more challenging work than I had before. However, namedropping Silicon Valley on my CV had huge implications back in my home country once I returned (because ironically I did not have a degree). The interesting part is that not a single workplace back in my home country has yet conducted a technical review for me, yet I have been given offer letters. What I am saying is that while some people feel like a BSc is a dumb obligation, the path of having a prestigious CV isn't much better. Instead, if you happen to have one, the chances are that some CV buzzwords are regarded as, as you said about degrees: > considered a signifier of some minimal level of skill and will of course be one of the primary ways that applicants are evaluated Yet I find this alarmingly false. This has caused me to stray away of those companies, as I don't really want to be employed somewhere where people are hired like this either.