7 ms·

Not sure I agree with this. The real world is very much about optimizing for and beating tests. It might be producing a specific CV or preparing for an interv

Not sure I agree with this. The real world is very much about optimizing for and beating tests. It might be producing a specific CV or preparing for an interview whiteboard session to land a job. It might be socializing and networking in a specific way in order to land funding. The real world does not commonly reward just being really good at arbitrary things. It's almost always focused on meeting a need that someone else has defined, much like a test.

buboard 7y ago
There is truth to this. It reflects the shift of mentality in tech entrepreneurs since the 2000s (experimentally entrepreneurial, introverted hackers, libertarian) to the 2010s (work for FANG or make a feature that FANG wants to buy, well-curated github and social media, social justice). I could dare say that this mentality flowed from academia to the greater economy. Academic funding has been generally formalistic and test-driven for decades.
- fhennig 7y ago
  So in the greater economy, how was funding allocated before that?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- BlueTemplar 7y ago
  How many decades? I've heard that things were very different in the 60's/70's...
chadcmulligan 7y ago
> The real world It's not the real world - its the human world. The real world is very different, and getting more so imho. Skills to survive the human world are usually useless in the real physical world. It's a distinction I read recently from a philosopher that I lost track of, maybe someone here knows. Her point was (I think) that when someone says the real world, with relation to education, it's not really - it's the world of human systems that are very much open to degradation and corruption, and they can be changed.
- buboard 7y ago
  > and they can be changed is that a hard fact or wishful thinking? In the context of this discussion, the rewards do not come from "the physical world" but from other humans (money) , so generic mountain-survival skills are irrelevant
  - chadcmulligan 7y ago
    Of course they can be changed - how hard they are to change is another matter. The current system isn't set in stone, or handed down from above.
- chadcmulligan 7y ago
  Found the article in case anyone is still browsing here http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/humevas.html http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/humevas.html its interesting
matwood 7y ago
Agreed. Life is a series of tests. The big difference between life and school, is that it is usually much harder in life to anticipate what is going to be tested. That is where the real skill lies. When a startup prioritizes feature A over feature B, they are making a decision on what is going to be tested by customers. The startup then optimizes for passing the anticipated test.
xorcist 7y ago
That is only true if your life ambition is securing a job with that successful tech company. If your ambition is being successful on your own, as an academic, an entrepreneur or as an artist, there are no standardized tests to beat.
- watwut 7y ago
  Being successful academic is all about optimizing for various tests and metrics and beating tests. It would be hard to find more institutionalized occupation.
- buboard 7y ago
  disagree about academics. it's a job that's so mindnumbingly bureaucratic these days. perhaps you mean "science"
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  There is a predictable component to the market. When we exchange articles about "how we did $something-entrepreneurish right and reaped rewards", we're essentially trading exam questions from previous years.
blondin 7y ago
> The real world is very much about optimizing for and beating tests. thank you. it's awesome for someone like PG to bring the subject upfront. but what you are saying resonates with me. genuine interest is missing in our field, and to some extent many others. "beating tests", as PG puts it, is at all time high. i am at a point where i don't know who or what is right. the numbers are telling an important story! those who learned to hack the tests or the system are popular online or offline. and they are "succeeding" in life. they seem to have outnumbered those who put genuine interest first. for instance, as many of my peers, i wanna learn machine learning and AI. but it is hard for me to find materials that resonate with me. materials that teach from first principles like those that got me hooked back in the days. they are lacking because we are so good at shortcuts and hacking. maybe we don't know how to do it anymore? but who am i to blame anyone? there are so many, many, ways to hack and beat the tests and the system. and seemingly you can get ahead of many others in life by doing so. #AceYourFirstInterviewAfterBootcamp #TensorflowPyTorch #BeSureToLikeBelow #ThanksToMyPatreons #SubForChatAndEmojis #InstagramFacebookDown i am very thankful for PG for starting the discussion. and for this comment.

buboard 7y ago

There is truth to this. It reflects the shift of mentality in tech entrepreneurs since the 2000s (experimentally entrepreneurial, introverted hackers, libertarian) to the 2010s (work for FANG or make a feature that FANG wants to buy, well-curated github and social media, social justice). I could dare say that this mentality flowed from academia to the greater economy. Academic funding has been generally formalistic and test-driven for decades.

fhennig 7y ago
So in the greater economy, how was funding allocated before that?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
BlueTemplar 7y ago
How many decades? I've heard that things were very different in the 60's/70's...

chadcmulligan 7y ago

> The real world It's not the real world - its the human world. The real world is very different, and getting more so imho. Skills to survive the human world are usually useless in the real physical world. It's a distinction I read recently from a philosopher that I lost track of, maybe someone here knows. Her point was (I think) that when someone says the real world, with relation to education, it's not really - it's the world of human systems that are very much open to degradation and corruption, and they can be changed.

buboard 7y ago
> and they can be changed is that a hard fact or wishful thinking? In the context of this discussion, the rewards do not come from "the physical world" but from other humans (money) , so generic mountain-survival skills are irrelevant
- chadcmulligan 7y ago
  Of course they can be changed - how hard they are to change is another matter. The current system isn't set in stone, or handed down from above.
chadcmulligan 7y ago
Found the article in case anyone is still browsing here http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/humevas.html http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/humevas.html its interesting

matwood 7y ago

Agreed. Life is a series of tests. The big difference between life and school, is that it is usually much harder in life to anticipate what is going to be tested. That is where the real skill lies. When a startup prioritizes feature A over feature B, they are making a decision on what is going to be tested by customers. The startup then optimizes for passing the anticipated test.

xorcist 7y ago

That is only true if your life ambition is securing a job with that successful tech company. If your ambition is being successful on your own, as an academic, an entrepreneur or as an artist, there are no standardized tests to beat.

watwut 7y ago
Being successful academic is all about optimizing for various tests and metrics and beating tests. It would be hard to find more institutionalized occupation.
buboard 7y ago
disagree about academics. it's a job that's so mindnumbingly bureaucratic these days. perhaps you mean "science"
TeMPOraL 7y ago
There is a predictable component to the market. When we exchange articles about "how we did $something-entrepreneurish right and reaped rewards", we're essentially trading exam questions from previous years.

blondin 7y ago

> The real world is very much about optimizing for and beating tests. thank you. it's awesome for someone like PG to bring the subject upfront. but what you are saying resonates with me. genuine interest is missing in our field, and to some extent many others. "beating tests", as PG puts it, is at all time high. i am at a point where i don't know who or what is right. the numbers are telling an important story! those who learned to hack the tests or the system are popular online or offline. and they are "succeeding" in life. they seem to have outnumbered those who put genuine interest first. for instance, as many of my peers, i wanna learn machine learning and AI. but it is hard for me to find materials that resonate with me. materials that teach from first principles like those that got me hooked back in the days. they are lacking because we are so good at shortcuts and hacking. maybe we don't know how to do it anymore? but who am i to blame anyone? there are so many, many, ways to hack and beat the tests and the system. and seemingly you can get ahead of many others in life by doing so. #AceYourFirstInterviewAfterBootcamp #TensorflowPyTorch #BeSureToLikeBelow #ThanksToMyPatreons #SubForChatAndEmojis #InstagramFacebookDown i am very thankful for PG for starting the discussion. and for this comment.