5 ms·
This is a bit like saying that Rhodes scholarships are challenging the status quo of academic advancement. A program for a select few works for them because a
by muglug 3y ago
This is a bit like saying that Rhodes scholarships are challenging the status quo of academic advancement.
A program for a select few works for them because a lot of resources can be channeled to a small group of bright people — but that system absolutely cannot scale.
The Thiel Fellow program “works” because not that many people get to be Thiel Fellows.
- dmix 3y agoI don’t think the idea was for it to scale broadly? You could make a similar argument about higher education anyway, the current cultural mantra is that every single kid would benefit from university and should be the top goal broadly, which cannibalized a ton of useful industry and left tons of kids with $100k in debt and no life skills - yet still thinking they should have a university-type job, so they sit around depressed in their parents house and wash out into some low paying job like journalism or some unsatisfying gov job demanding 2 degrees. There’s a ton of smart go-getting kids across every country in the west who would have benefited from having someone tell them that there’s great options outside of college. It’s still going to be a niche but that doesn’t mean it’s a tiny one. It’s not just tech startup’s and programming either, there’s a million entrepreneurial type skills that can be developed just by going out in the world at 18 and taking a risk. This is more than just who Thiel invested in too, he’s still a VC, it was an idea (and marketing tool) as much as a specific investment program.
- the_snooze 3y agoIt's not particularly surprising that there's a higher-than-baseline success rate for a program that selects people who are already best-positioned for success. Can't help but wonder what the value-add of the program is at that point. If a billionaire instead sets up a similar program for, say, parolees and sees higher-than-baseline success, then that's something to celebrate.
- nordsieck 3y ago> Can't help but wonder what the value-add of the program is at that point. If the only thing you think is important is making society more equal, I guess I could see how you could come to that conclusion. That's a pretty weird way to think, though.
- bumby 3y agoEquality of opportunity is a cornerstone of a meritocratic society. Why would you think that’s a weird value?
- adammarples 3y agoThis is mentioned as a point of comparison in the article. Rhodes scholarships offer more value in terms of money, greater connections, more students, and still doesn't produce unicorns like this.
- bumby 3y agoI think the counterargument would be they are different programs with different goals. TF is decidedly focused on innovation and entrepreneurship so it is obviously focused on cultivating that, while the Rhodes scholarship has a different angle. Comparing the two by the number of entrepreneurs they create is like measuring a sports car and tractor by comparing their top speeds.