4 ms·
That relies on the faulty assumption that you will learn just as much in 9 months as in four years. If that were true, saving time would be great. It isn't.
by diffeomorphism 7y ago
That relies on the faulty assumption that you will learn just as much in 9 months as in four years. If that were true, saving time would be great. It isn't.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago>> You may be thinking that the education you get at the CSU is better than what you get at Lambda School, but "higher price, better product" is the opposite of the argument you actually made. Saving time may be great anyway. You have a high-cost product and an ultra-high-cost product. The fact that one of them is more valuable isn't enough to decide which one is a better purchase.
- austenallred 7y agoWell apples to apples would be one year studying CS at Lambda School then three years on the job vs four years of university. Financially you’re wildly better off attending Lambda School, and I think you’d be hard-pressed to make an argument that the four years of university provide a vastly superior education to a year of Lambda School and three years working as a software engineer.
- diffeomorphism 7y ago> Well apples to apples would be I don't think so. This is again making the big assumption that you get the same outcome and the same jobs coming out of Lambda School. Might be, might not be, but so far you just claimed grandiose properties without any argument behind them (and changing from comment to comment).
- gowld 7y agoOr 1 year at college and then drop out having learned as much as Lambda teaches you.
- austenallred 7y agoIf you can do that, sure!