6 ms·

That sounds like an awful way of thinking.

noahc 15y ago
Why is that? You're not adding much to this conversation just by saying "That's an awful way of thinking." Why is it so awful that I realize that technology and business can be learned much faster, much cheaper, and more indepth by actually doing them than going to school for them? Why is it so awful that I value someone figuring out a better way to spend a recession than in school learning something that may or may not help them and for most of them puts in solidly in debt with few options after graduation.
- pork 15y ago
  I can't speak to business, but I can about technology. When you're "on the job", you don't have extended periods of time where you have the luxury of studying a complicated topic in depth. Many tech jobs also don't give you the luxury of breadth, but rather are guided by an overarching practical purpose -- to get the "job" done. Your generalization of the knowledge one gains by doing a degree is much too broad.
  - noahc 15y ago
    Those things are all mostly true. But, Here's what I'm saying is that you can spend 2 - 4 years going to school to learn about big 0, or red-black trees or whatever. That's fine. Or you could spend 2 - 4 years hacking 3/4 to 1/2 time and hanging out on HN and building cool projects and learning about those things as you go. I will ALWAYS pick the second person after those 2 - 4 years. Always.
    - vecter 15y ago
      It depends on what you're doing. If you're writing java/python/ruby plumbing, sure some practical experience is great. If you're job is to improve PageRank, I'd rather much take the person with a strong theoretical background linear algebra, probability, machine learning, and algorithms. That person is more than smart enough to learn the coding on the job.
      - achompas 15y ago
        Seriously. It's unbelievable how people on HN have noahc's attitude. Look, if you want to build a Rails app, go build the app and post it on HN afterwards. If you want to (1) develop an incremental optimization algorithm, (2) push the boundaries of appsec, (3) revolutionize mobile software UI at a handset manufacturer, (4) or research cryptographic algorithms for the NSA, well, you need school. Period.
    - elemeno 15y ago
      Here's the dirty little secret that people like you overlook - spending four years hacking around and hanging out on HN will teach you nothing about Big O notation and how to analyse it or about advanced data structures. What it will teach you is plenty about chasing low hanging fruit and very little about tackling big and difficult problems. Sure, someone who's very driven will learn the same amount regardless - mostly by reading all the same books that someone who's gone to school will have read. But most people are not that driven. Most people are happy to hack around building webapps on the back of other people's libraries and then deluding themselves into thinking that gluing together a bunch of libraries and adding a pretty frontend counts as a significant achievement. Frankly, with your attitude you're doomed to hire the mediocre while the people with the brain and skills to do any form of non trivial analysis go elsewhere - as they well should.
      - randomdata 15y ago
        This is not a binary issue. There are many facets to software development. Knowing Big O will not teach you how to best use git in a production setting. It turns out they are both useful and important. And that is the crux of the matter. A college graduate that is not driven to learn about the practical aspects of programming is no better for the job than the non-graduate who is not driven to learn about the theoretical side. After only four years of study, I would say that both applicants in the previous example are on equal ground. Both are lacking, just in different areas. It is not really clear at that stage which one of the two will have the drive to fill the gaps. The dirty little secret is that you cannot apply generic processes to find the best applicant. Doing so will lead to mediocre selection no matter which bias you choose.
        noahc 15y ago
        This is an awesome, insightful comment and really highlights what I'm getting at. You're right that they both have weaknesses. What I'm saying is I'm willing to go all in on the person who figured out much of it by himself using whatever he had available to him than the person who had a college instructor put together everything for him and then provide additional readings, power points, and web links to all their students. A smart person has to think their way out of a box. A resourceful person can just hack their way out of the box. I don't mind a little mess, so I'll take the resourceful person over the smart person everyday of the week.

noahc 15y ago

Why is that? You're not adding much to this conversation just by saying "That's an awful way of thinking." Why is it so awful that I realize that technology and business can be learned much faster, much cheaper, and more indepth by actually doing them than going to school for them? Why is it so awful that I value someone figuring out a better way to spend a recession than in school learning something that may or may not help them and for most of them puts in solidly in debt with few options after graduation.

pork 15y ago
I can't speak to business, but I can about technology. When you're "on the job", you don't have extended periods of time where you have the luxury of studying a complicated topic in depth. Many tech jobs also don't give you the luxury of breadth, but rather are guided by an overarching practical purpose -- to get the "job" done. Your generalization of the knowledge one gains by doing a degree is much too broad.
- noahc 15y ago
  Those things are all mostly true. But, Here's what I'm saying is that you can spend 2 - 4 years going to school to learn about big 0, or red-black trees or whatever. That's fine. Or you could spend 2 - 4 years hacking 3/4 to 1/2 time and hanging out on HN and building cool projects and learning about those things as you go. I will ALWAYS pick the second person after those 2 - 4 years. Always.
  - vecter 15y ago
    It depends on what you're doing. If you're writing java/python/ruby plumbing, sure some practical experience is great. If you're job is to improve PageRank, I'd rather much take the person with a strong theoretical background linear algebra, probability, machine learning, and algorithms. That person is more than smart enough to learn the coding on the job.
    - achompas 15y ago
      Seriously. It's unbelievable how people on HN have noahc's attitude. Look, if you want to build a Rails app, go build the app and post it on HN afterwards. If you want to (1) develop an incremental optimization algorithm, (2) push the boundaries of appsec, (3) revolutionize mobile software UI at a handset manufacturer, (4) or research cryptographic algorithms for the NSA, well, you need school. Period.
  - elemeno 15y ago
    Here's the dirty little secret that people like you overlook - spending four years hacking around and hanging out on HN will teach you nothing about Big O notation and how to analyse it or about advanced data structures. What it will teach you is plenty about chasing low hanging fruit and very little about tackling big and difficult problems. Sure, someone who's very driven will learn the same amount regardless - mostly by reading all the same books that someone who's gone to school will have read. But most people are not that driven. Most people are happy to hack around building webapps on the back of other people's libraries and then deluding themselves into thinking that gluing together a bunch of libraries and adding a pretty frontend counts as a significant achievement. Frankly, with your attitude you're doomed to hire the mediocre while the people with the brain and skills to do any form of non trivial analysis go elsewhere - as they well should.
    - randomdata 15y ago
      This is not a binary issue. There are many facets to software development. Knowing Big O will not teach you how to best use git in a production setting. It turns out they are both useful and important. And that is the crux of the matter. A college graduate that is not driven to learn about the practical aspects of programming is no better for the job than the non-graduate who is not driven to learn about the theoretical side. After only four years of study, I would say that both applicants in the previous example are on equal ground. Both are lacking, just in different areas. It is not really clear at that stage which one of the two will have the drive to fill the gaps. The dirty little secret is that you cannot apply generic processes to find the best applicant. Doing so will lead to mediocre selection no matter which bias you choose.
      - noahc 15y ago
        This is an awesome, insightful comment and really highlights what I'm getting at. You're right that they both have weaknesses. What I'm saying is I'm willing to go all in on the person who figured out much of it by himself using whatever he had available to him than the person who had a college instructor put together everything for him and then provide additional readings, power points, and web links to all their students. A smart person has to think their way out of a box. A resourceful person can just hack their way out of the box. I don't mind a little mess, so I'll take the resourceful person over the smart person everyday of the week.