3 ms·
>There are more people in schools, but they have to lower standards as a result. We have CS graduates who can't write fizzbuzz. >Unrestrained nepotism is stupi
by softg 3y ago
>There are more people in schools, but they have to lower standards as a result. We have CS graduates who can't write fizzbuzz.
>Unrestrained nepotism is stupid, but its opposite is equally absurd
I think the opposite of unrestrained nepotism is meritocracy, which is surely a good thing.
In the olden days we had few schools that made sure every CS graduate were fizzbuzz experts but back then computers were an expensive rarity that could only be touched by a fizzbuzz expert. Now that everyone and their grandma have a pocket computer that's more powerful than an IBM mainframe, of course the requirements will be different. Not every piece of software is mission critical, not everything has to be perfect. Crappy software is better than no software.
- b800h 3y agoThe opposite of nepotism isn't meritocracy, it's equality of outcomes.
- softg 3y agoI'm not sure what you think nepotism is. Per wikipedia, "Nepotism is the act of granting an advantage, privilege, or position to relatives or close friends in an occupation or field". The opposite of nepotism is where no one grants an advantage, privilege, or position to relatives or close friends in an occupation or field. That's not "equality of outcomes" by any stretch. A hypothetical system that grants privileges purely on merit would be its true opposite.
- b800h 3y agoThese are almost orthogonal concerns. I may use nepotism to choose people I know who are talented. I may use other systems which attempt to completely level the playing field to do so. This may result in worse outcomes.