5 ms·

Go to Harvard. If you're smart enough to get into all three, you're not going to school for the knowledge. You can learn that on your own. You're going to schoo

by FD3SA 13y ago

Go to Harvard. If you're smart enough to get into all three, you're not going to school for the knowledge. You can learn that on your own. You're going to school to build a network, which is the most difficult and most important part of any successful venture. Having friends who are worth billions of dollars will come in handy much more so than a slightly better calculus course. There are millions of extremely brilliant people who end up nowhere. Their wasted potential is not a result of their lack of knowledge or technical ability, but their failure to establish a powerful personal network. P.S. Elon Musk is a perfect example. He initially went to Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario (I'll bet your future net worth you've never heard of this place). Then, he transferred to UPenn because he realized he needed to establish a network in the way only an Ivy League school can. What did he study at Queen's and UPenn? Economics, and later finished a dual degree in Physics. What did he do upon graduation? Dropped out of a Stanford PhD program in material science, started two successive software companies, an electric car company, and a rocket company. Critical thinking is something you develop on your own through practice, and can be applied to any sphere of understanding once your mind is accustomed to it. Additionally, knowledge outside of basic fundamentals is irrelevant until you select a domain to specialize in. Finally, this knowledge is freely available on the internet (mostly from MIT, no less).

grinich 13y ago
There's a big distinction between acquiring knowledge and learning how to think. MIT pushed me to my limits, and taught me how to systematically accomplish what I previously thought were impossible tasks. All while maintaining a principled sense of rigor and focus. A lot of people who are "smart" just ace high school and never are truly challenged. Harvard has insane grade inflation, because the students there are used to getting As. [1] The world has enough billionaires, but not enough fearless engineers. I've found it surprisingly easy to connect billionaires when you genuinely need it-- not just because you got drunk with them in your 20s. [1] http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-mode-a/ http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-...
- FD3SA 13y ago
  I heartily agree regarding your point on rigor, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that, because of MIT's excellent online offerings, legendary engineers like Musk no longer need to be in MIT to experience the MIT rigor. They can do the courses in the summers, and hangout with MIT students to build their teams for their first few startups. I vehemently disagree regarding grades. Grades are the stupidest measure of engineering ability. Paper tests are meaningless except as a measure for the most basic levels of competence in mathematics and physics. We are talking about people who push the state of the art. These people are often very annoyed by tests, since it is idiotic to use an extremely distant proxy (i.e. a test) for an ability like like engineering when it's much simpler (and infinitely more satisfying) to just practice engineering itself. The only measure of an engineer's skill is his ability to built elegant systems. This cannot be taught through a course. It must be learned through iteration, and repetitive failure.
  - grinich 13y ago
    I really hope that becomes the case! Honestly I learned most of my coursework from my peers, during late nights in the library or someone's dorm room. I haven't yet seen a compelling replacement for that yet, which is unfortunate. I think the only thing worse than using grades as a measure of mastery is using an inflated grading scale. :P
  - zhemao 13y ago
    > The only measure of an engineer's skill is his ability to built elegant systems. This cannot be taught through a course. This can be taught through a course if said course requires you to build an elegant system. Many courses in engineering schools are project-based.
  - Patrick_Devine 13y ago
    I absolutely agree with you in regards to grades. They are completely pointless; How does someone get an 'A' when they've missed over 10% of the questions on an exam? We should demand absolutely mastery in every subject, and thankfully we're starting to get the tools (in online courses) which allow us to do that. There is one point though which I think you're not giving enough; schools like MIT and Standford are all about connections and networking. You go to an MIT or a Stanford to have a pedigree, and it opens doors and opportunities which wouldn't be there if you hadn't gone there.

by FD3SA 13y ago

grinich 13y ago

There's a big distinction between acquiring knowledge and learning how to think. MIT pushed me to my limits, and taught me how to systematically accomplish what I previously thought were impossible tasks. All while maintaining a principled sense of rigor and focus. A lot of people who are "smart" just ace high school and never are truly challenged. Harvard has insane grade inflation, because the students there are used to getting As. [1] The world has enough billionaires, but not enough fearless engineers. I've found it surprisingly easy to connect billionaires when you genuinely need it-- not just because you got drunk with them in your 20s. [1] http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-mode-a/ http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-...

FD3SA 13y ago
I heartily agree regarding your point on rigor, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that, because of MIT's excellent online offerings, legendary engineers like Musk no longer need to be in MIT to experience the MIT rigor. They can do the courses in the summers, and hangout with MIT students to build their teams for their first few startups. I vehemently disagree regarding grades. Grades are the stupidest measure of engineering ability. Paper tests are meaningless except as a measure for the most basic levels of competence in mathematics and physics. We are talking about people who push the state of the art. These people are often very annoyed by tests, since it is idiotic to use an extremely distant proxy (i.e. a test) for an ability like like engineering when it's much simpler (and infinitely more satisfying) to just practice engineering itself. The only measure of an engineer's skill is his ability to built elegant systems. This cannot be taught through a course. It must be learned through iteration, and repetitive failure.
- grinich 13y ago
  I really hope that becomes the case! Honestly I learned most of my coursework from my peers, during late nights in the library or someone's dorm room. I haven't yet seen a compelling replacement for that yet, which is unfortunate. I think the only thing worse than using grades as a measure of mastery is using an inflated grading scale. :P
- zhemao 13y ago
  > The only measure of an engineer's skill is his ability to built elegant systems. This cannot be taught through a course. This can be taught through a course if said course requires you to build an elegant system. Many courses in engineering schools are project-based.
- Patrick_Devine 13y ago
  I absolutely agree with you in regards to grades. They are completely pointless; How does someone get an 'A' when they've missed over 10% of the questions on an exam? We should demand absolutely mastery in every subject, and thankfully we're starting to get the tools (in online courses) which allow us to do that. There is one point though which I think you're not giving enough; schools like MIT and Standford are all about connections and networking. You go to an MIT or a Stanford to have a pedigree, and it opens doors and opportunities which wouldn't be there if you hadn't gone there.