12 ms·

On Elitism

39 points by unignorant 17y ago

tokenadult 17y ago
The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. We learn all about his academic credentials almost as soon as the blog post begins, but don't hear anything about his real-world accomplishments beyond attending great schools. What does everyone think of the blogger's academics page? http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm Disclaimer: I don't know the blogger, and as far as I know I don't know any of his professional colleagues or classmates from any era. I'm not competent to judge accomplishments in the domain of computer science, but I try to pick up nuances from English writing, just as does any other reader of English.
- catzaa 17y ago
  That is unfortunately true. There is this old joke: Q: How do you know someone is from MIT {Stanford, Havard, ...}? A: He tells you.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    Your joke makes the opposite claim that he does at the end of his post. With no data either way, I guess we all default to our biases.
  - jhancock 17y ago
    The refined version for those from Harvard is: Q: Where did you go to school? A: Boston. Q: uhh, where in Boston? A: Harvard. They make you draw it out of them. I have found at least three types of people that respond in this manner: 1 - The person that was raised elite since birth and really doesn't care at all what you think about him. So him dragging it out is him avoiding the question and hoping you'll learn not to pry. 2 - The person that is tired of being identified with this standard questioning. So him dragging it out is somewhere in the middle. He can use it to his advantage when needed but for the most part doesn't want to be identified in this way. 3 - The snob.
    - pgbovine 17y ago
      the motivation for people i know to do that is less disingenuous ... 4 - if you say that you went to Harvard (or another well-known university), lots of people automatically cringe and think "ugh this guy must be a snob!", so if you're really not a snob, then the reason for avoiding specifics is so that people don't pre-judge upon first impressions. the responses to my article sort of exemplifies this phenomenon. lots of readers didn't like how i 'name-dropped' where i attended school ... i was mentioning where i went to school because it's relevant for the point i'm making in my article, not merely to show off or brag. oftentimes i don't tell people where i went to school because i don't want to automatically be viewed as a snob on first impressions.
- Locke1689 17y ago
  This is pretty impressive: 2009 ACM SIGSOFT Distinguished Paper Award for HAMPI: A Solver for String Constraints, an ISSTA 2009 paper with Kiezun (lead author), Ganesh, Hooimeijer, and Ernst The rest is mediocre-impressive. Nothing to laugh at, but nothing to distinguish him from the other MIT/Stanford students either. I think he has a good point.
  - frig 17y ago
    Wow I've been looking for a library like HAMPI for a long time. Serendipity at its finest.
    - pgbovine 17y ago
      sorry it's off-topic, but you can download it from here: http://people.csail.mit.edu/akiezun/hampi/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/akiezun/hampi/
      - frig 17y ago
        Thanks, I found it already but I can see you're one of the co-authors so I appreciate your effort. It's going to be some time before I can get to using it but like I said this pretty much is exactly what a currently-stalled project has been looking for. If I make a real use of this library I'll pass along a proper description so you can see what use it's getting. As it'll be awhile I'll give you a minimal summary now (in as much detail as I can, which isn't that much sorry). The overall point is to take input (sequence of words), and then generate further input that is "related" but not identical (think: clearly a variation on the theme, but not rote repetition). The mechanism is that there's a set of grammars specifying overlapping formal languages; input is broken into words and each word is parsed in each grammar that contains that word; some inference and calculation is done to generate a sort-of style profile and then that profile is used together with the underlying grammars to drive generation of new output. The quality of the output has been underwhelming, mainly b/c doing exact parsing seems to leave a nasty trade-off between the "interestingness" of the grammars in the set and nontriviality of the "style profile": - having "interesting" grammars means the style profile is too constrained (so the generated output too closely resembles the input) - having "larger" grammars means the style profile is richer but the output is weak (doesn't adequately resemble the input to a human observer) Where a library like hampi fits into this is (hopefully) the ability to efficiently loosen-up the parsing in a nicely-constrained way; using some metadata attached to the grammars it ought to be possible to intelligently knock-out part of a word and ask hampi to find a replacement string that makes the word parse within a particular language. Essentially intentional misunderstanding of input => novel synthesis.
- jlees 17y ago
  Indeed, his point about name-brand universities is entirely backed up, albeit in a slightly ironic fashion, by his namedropping.
- jhancock 17y ago
  Its an interesting topic. Not sure the blog post really proved his point, but a bit of "arrogance in the large" (on the internet), doesn't bug me. I don't expect to be able to decide if his stated credentials mean anything; just that he is stating they do and establishes how he feels relative to the other statement he's making. I can be arrogant at times, both in public posts and with people that know me well. For the public assertions, I don't expect people to buy my assertions. Simply asserting them may set a tone I find, at the moment, to be useful. The reader can decide for themselves how to take it.
- rdr 17y ago
  ad hominem arguments detract from this discussion, i think :) plus, the blogger is still a student, so of course he's not going to have much in terms of real-world accomplishments.
- elblanco 17y ago
  He's on the fast path to a research job, buried in the bowels of some company, working on middle ware. Either that or he'll simply get a teaching job at one of the schools he decries in his post.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    Feel free to downvote, but at least bother to type some reasoning. The number of tier-1 PhD grads that end up in teaching posts at state schools is pretty tremendous. And as anyone who reads this site knows, good schooling != life/work experience. Unless Mr. Guo changes his attitude a bit, he's unlikely to find success outside of academia or pure research departments of large companies.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    I think you misunderstood his arguments. He did not in any way denigrate the non "name brand" schools.
    - elblanco 17y ago
      http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-school.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-s...
      - scott_s 17y ago
        Saying X has advantages over Y is not the same as saying Y is crap.
        elblanco 17y ago
        I don't believe you read the article. He's edited it now, but the ending was basically advice that "if you didn't go to X, don't try to compete, you'll only be met with disappointment". That's (was before the edit) calling Y crap pretty much.
        17y ago
- pgbovine 17y ago
  i also think this guy is a real tool who hasn't accomplished anything noteworthy in life. and what kind of a stupid username is pgbovine? but seriously, i'm hoping that the level of discourse on HN stays above ad hominem attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)
xilun 17y ago
Is it a sort of oxymoron exercise or something?
petercooper 17y ago
In The Psychology of Persuasion the author looks at how the appearance of authority yields big results: http://www.takebackyourbrain.com/2007/the-psychology-of-persuasion-authority/ http://www.takebackyourbrain.com/2007/the-psychology-of-pers... - The disconnect, then, is that confidence and arrogance are often interpreted as authority.
xiaoma 17y ago
>"The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-ethic and compliance.
- scott_s 17y ago
  If think you replace "smartest" with "most successful", the point he's trying to make does not change.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - Confusion 17y ago
    Which is still a ridiculous point: A/A+ students are not necessarily smarter, more successful, more intelligent, whatever-you-want-to-call-it than B+/A- students. His sole defense of that assertion is if you're so damn smart, wouldn't it take you just slightly more effort to get an A which I cannot characterize as anything else but a total lack of any sense of what someone may want to do with his time, other than obtain high grades, combined with the unfounded accusation that they all consider themselves capable of doing better. He completely rules out the possibility that out of numbers 5 through 15 out of a 100, five may rather want to spend their time, let's say, starting a company, practicing a sport or contributing code to some open source project. That's when the real problem shows it's ugly head: they are made to feel like they have to excuse themselves for their grades, as anything below 'perfect' is always questioned, as the article did: "why don't you get higher grades?" For me, the answer really was exactly as he says: because I have a fucking life out of school. However, the intention of that answer wasn't to play down the grades of others or to assert my intelligence. I won't deny they usually also have a life out of school. The intention was purely and solely: to answer the question that everyone keeps asking. I've given that answer so many times I can only think of it shouted with the expletive in it. And then grade-obsessed nitwits like this guy throw a hissy fit because they think I'm trying to trump them. No, I don't bloody care about trumping you. If I cared, I would spend my time trying to score higher grades, so I'd get into that prestigious university. I'm not sure I would succeed, but the point is: I'm not even trying to best you. God, guys like this still piss me off. They don't want to accept the fact that there may have been guys that could outdo them, but didn't bother.
fogus 17y ago
Unfortunately where I went to middle/high school there was very little elitism built around GPA and test scores. However, everyone just instinctively knew that the most dangerous bullies were not the most popular kids, but instead the kids just below them in the social heirarchy. The top tier were generally secure in themselves, but those below were always looking for an edge to get into the pantheon.
- zackattack 17y ago
  Indeed, pg addresses this in his essay on why nerds are unpopular in school. Here's my question: does bullying ever give an edge into the pantheon?
  - fogus 17y ago
    No. But that never stopped those guys from bullying. If they understood this then they may have been at the top.
sofal 17y ago
I haven't noticed anything to suggest that elitism is more prevalent among those without elite credentials. Two distinguished professors from my school come to mind. Both of them have very impressive track records and yet both of them are on opposite ends of the arrogance spectrum. I think it comes down to how comfortable you are with yourself. If you constantly wish you were higher up in the food chain, there's a good chance you are an elitist, and getting elite credentials likely won't satisfy you anyway.
rauljara 17y ago
I think it is true that the most insecure tend to exhibit the most elitism; elitism being defined as going out of your way to put down another group you consider inferior. The author, however, goes out of his way to condemn this sort of elitism, basically succumbing to the same elitism he is condemning. Just as I'm basically doing, going out of my way to write this comment. I think the thing to realize is that comparing yourself to others in a better/worse than relationship is a pretty human thing to do, even if it isn't good. It should be avoided and maybe even corrected, but it shouldn't be condemned or used as a way to put people down, lest you succumb to it yourself.
spiralhead 17y ago
Interesting article but I am not convinced outward expressions of elitism have much of a correlation with one's academic background. In my experience, the most talented and creative individuals are modest, hard working and often quiet while those lacking demonstrable talent are the ones who make the most noise. I'd wager talent has little to no correlation with academic background.
codexon 17y ago
It is probably true that people who scholastic reputation will try to make up for it in other ways. However the problem is that there may be too much authority placed in these usual standards of achievements. Philip forgets that people with academic credentials like himself are being smug when they complain about others. If your academic credentials represent you so well, why should it bother you if someone is simply acting? Another disingenuous behavior he describes is hiding that you went to a reputable school like Harvard. The reason people are afraid of living up to "artificially higher" expectations is because their school's reputation really is artificially high. What these type of people want is to have the "Harvard" reputation when it suits them, and the average Joe culpability should they ever fail. They want to further perpetuate the image of superiority that Harvard/Stanford entails without letting the public correct their perception that going to one of these top schools does not make you a Godly Genius.
- scott_s 17y ago
  I don't think hiding you went to a prestigious school has to be disingenuous. I can be, but it doesn't have to be. I have a purple belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. This is a mid-level rank, but it's also the point where a competitor is considered advanced. In tournaments that don't use belt level but Novice, Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, I compete Advanced. If I talk to a stranger about BJJ, I never start out with "I have a purple belt." I am going out of my way to avoid sounding like a braggart. I am not worried about failing to live up to my rank, but I am worried about appearing like a jerk.
  - codexon 17y ago
    What you are saying is completely different from someone asking you "What college did you go to", and responding vaguely "Boston" when most people just say the name of the school.
    - pgbovine 17y ago
      yes, "Boston" would be a disingenuous reply to "What college did you go to". But it would not be a disingenuous reply to "Where did you attend college?" Some people I know say "in China" or "in Canada" ... "in Boston" is just as legit of an answer, and often one that makes people not roll their eyes at you nearly as much as if you say "HAHHHHHHH-VARD!"
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Confusion 17y ago
People from reputable universities don't need to vocally assert their capabilities, because the mere mention of their university is enough for people to acknowledge their capabilities. On the other hand, people from more obscure universities need to vocally assert their skills and experience in order to obtain the same recognition of their capabilities. This is just a plain fact of society and asserting your skills and experience is not in any way arrogant or elitist behavior. He completely confuses being vocal about your capabilities with vocally downplaying the capabilities of others, for instance the capabilities of people from reputable universities. He seems completely unaware that people can feel the need to assert their capabilities without in any way wanting or trying to downplay the capabilities of others.
joe_the_user 17y ago
I'm sorry but this isn't a new one for sociology... I've observed that some of the people who display the greatest degrees of elitism and snobbery are those who are technically skilled in their given area of expertise but who do not necessarily have the most reputable externally-recognizable marks of status. Indeed. Those who need to display elitism are those who aren't automatically accepted as elite. Similarly, those who are naturally accepted as elite, don't need make as much of an effort to display their eliteness. This is so established that the act of not attempting to show one's eliteness is often subtler a mark of greater eliteness. And this is the basic conundrum of elitism: how the 'old guard' defends itself against the arriviste etc. I'd suggest a reading of De Tocqueville, Veblen and modern signalling theory.
- zackattack 17y ago
  Can you recommend a good book on modern signalling theory?
  - joe_the_user 17y ago
    What I have been reading recently is "Game Theory Evolving" by Herbert Gintis. The Wikipedia articles on signaling theory and evolutionary game theory are useful too.
richardw 17y ago
What's the motivation for writing the article? To me, there's always some way to feel superior by pointing fingers. I think he's driving his own brand of elitism. (Somebody please accuse me of the same thing, and let's see if we can recursively create a singularity)
- elblanco 17y ago
  The number of articles and editorials I've read in the last 5 years, written by people from tier-1 schools, decrying the tyranny and ill-manners of the unwashed masses, and the unfairness towards graduates of these so-called "top" schools, is enough to convince me that the reputation that grads from these schools have for being pompous windbags who went to these schools not for the education, but for the name brand, is well deserved. This article (hosted not insignificantly at standford.edu) is an absolutely textbook example of this phenomenon. Articles like this one, and numerous professional interactions with people who introduce themselves as "Suzy Sue, I went to Yale" or "Marcus Markk, I went to Harvard"...and then repeatedly fail to perform up to the expectations I'd have for community college dropouts...I've never heard somebody from a tier-2 or 3 school introduce themselves in this way. After so many of these kinds of experiences, when I hire people, a degree from a tier-1 school is an automatic mark against, not a mark for.
- drats 17y ago
  >What's the motivation for writing the article? Well, he managed to name-drop Stanford, MIT and Google in a short article with the nutritional value of cardboard. Everyone knows that after the first job or two flashing a ivy-league CV around it starts to matter what you have achieved not where you went.
  - kburn 17y ago
    funny
JeremyChase 17y ago
I think the author is in error to assume that all people attend elite schools for the same reasons. Some people are honestly the best in their field and will gravitate to the best schools, others simply desire the best pedigree, and some people simply want to go to the best school they can. I don't think that Ivy alumni are hesitant to name drop their school. Some are smug; most aren't. As I have gotten further from college the conversations generally swing toward what you are doing, rather than where you went. The generalization about 2nd tier students is also too broad. My CS degree is from a 2nd tier school (RIT 01), and when talking with others from similar schools it seems like there is occasionally an elitist; but it isn't that common. There are plenty of people who are elitist because they have something to prove. They may have gone to a great school, or no school at all. In the end it doesn't matter; they are simply annoying.
psyklic 17y ago
The author writes about himself, "Coming from two universities with world-renowned Computer Science departments (MIT and Stanford) and having worked at a top-tier software company (Google) as well as at several less high-profile companies ..." Meaning, of course, that he is not elitist -- he just had to share these crucial facts about himself.
- numair 17y ago
  I think the tide has really turned against name-brand institutions, leaving people such as the author in a position where they feel they have to defend themselves and their "prestige." This manifests itself in some peculiar ways, as we can see from this piece...
  - rdr 17y ago
    agreed, university reputation matters a lot less nowadays than it did in the previous generation ... nowadays anyone with a good idea can start up a tech company and get rich. nobody cares about ur college name
- Schtarflucz 17y ago
  An elitist disses people who he considers inferior to himself. Stating that you are Among the elites doesn't make you an elitist.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    "Stating that you are among the elites" implies that everybody else is inferior to you. By definition, that is elitism.
- pgbovine 17y ago
  fair enough, that does sound pretty elitist ;) sorry if i offended people with that language. but the rest of that sentence says "... , I have seen a wide variety of personalities and egos amongst computer scientists and software engineers." the point of that paragraph was to establish that i had experience in interacting with CS people from a variety of backgrounds, both from so-called elitist places and from less elitist places (i suppose i should've also listed the other lesser-known places where i've worked and gone to school, but since by definition they're not well-known 'elitist' places, you probably wouldn't have heard of them anyways) wow, had i known that my article would someday be posted on a news aggregator site, i would've definitely been more politically correct in my word choice :)
daveying99 17y ago
I think the guy has some smart points. But the fact that he has the MIT dome picture on his blog counters the point that if you're a high achiever from a top-tiered university, you don't need to show external signs of achievement...
- zackattack 17y ago
  I imagine that when you go to a place like MIT where life is like "getting kicked in the balls repeatedly", your alma mater becomes an important part of your identity.
  - jgrant27 17y ago
    This gave me a good laugh ! These same people also tend to bring this mind set with them to wherever it is they end up working. They seem to have a huge need to "kick others in the balls repeatedly" to feel better than others. Have you ever noticed how no matter what topic(it could even be about fingernail clippings) is being discussed with these types the conversation almost always degrades into them having to make repeated points to prove that they are right and you are wrong. Apparently this indoctrinated part of their identity is what they call 'education'. I guess they also need this to justify the 100-200k of debt they have after graduation and the calls they will receive for the rest of their life from their alma mater each year for donations.
dill_day 17y ago
When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you. -- Lao Tzu
- Eliezer 17y ago
  When everybody respects you, Without need for you to compare or compete, You will be content to be simply yourself. -- Eliezer Yudkowsky (that's right - ELIEZER YUDKOWSKY)
jgrant27 17y ago
Grades are a sign of intelligence ? This could simply be a student's willingness to parrot whatever answers or theory a teacher would like to hear. Ever notice that often when a student outdoes his teacher or his teacher's favorite 'pets' then he is down-graded ? The world's best scientists, mathematicians, physicists have all experienced this especially when their thinking was about to improve on and/or replace the old theories that their professors used for large grant money. Maybe there was a good reason that it was a crime in Socrates day for teachers to accept money from students. Does financial incentive corrupt education outright ? "Prestigious" schools also deny those that need tuition most when the whole point of attending is to gain something(knowledge etc.) that they do not already possess. These schools also pride themselves on cultural diversity but what about the classicism that defines their admissions ? Why should a decent degree run a student into 100-200k of debt after graduation ? Less wealthy countries provide comparable and even better education for free. Why ?
enthalpyx 17y ago
Wouldn't it be great if we could get to the point where the opinion of others didn't matter so much?
- sofal 17y ago
  The opinions of people who have resources are always going to matter. That in itself is not a bad thing. The bad thing is ill-informed opinions.
parse_tree 17y ago
The author sounds like a real jackass. Who else would be so concerned with the alma mater, "intelligence", or "technical skill" of other people that they feel the need to write an article about it.
invisible 17y ago
What I find truly misleading is that he labels "name-brand universities" as a form of adult elitism. He then goes on to explain that it is actually those that did not attend the best schools that are outwardly elite. I have heard stories of name-brand universities' alumni not even giving those outside of the best schools the time of day. Perhaps there is a cockiness to those that strive to prove themselves beyond grades and diplomas. Sure. However, I'd heavily argue that this is not elitism. Elitism requires grouping with those of similar backgrounds (e.g. Harvard, Yale, MIT, whatever). You cannot be an elitist unless you claim alumni from only your school - or brand of schools - are better than others. The author does mention that he went to a FEW prestigious schools and so doesn't follow his own advice on the matter. (Elitism can also be displayed by a position that only wealthy are better [1]. This unfortunately may plague these so-called name brand schools.) So, go be cocky and stop name dropping your prestigious university (or giving said university/universities more weight). Then you'll stop being an elitist, but you might just improve your former school's brand... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitism
pgbovine 17y ago
hi everyone, this is the author --- wow, i totally didn't expect a random rant of mine to be posted on hacker news :) after monitoring comments for a few hours, i finally had to sign up for an account. First off, I should mention the context of my article: I wrote that (admittedly not so well-written) article from personal observations I made of technical people in various fields working in various jobs at various companies (I don't want to name drop any further, heh). It was just my personal observation that given two people in the same exact job position WITH EQUAL INTELLIGENCE/SKILLS/EXPERIENCE/ETC., the one who went to a lesser-known university was usually more vocal about announcing his/her skills and, in a way, disparaging of people from so-called name-brand schools. Sorry I didn't intend to make any sorts of value judgments as to how university reputation correlates with intelligence, likelihood of success, etc. Now I'm gonna have some fun responding to other people's comments :)
- alexgartrell 17y ago
  Without passing any judgement whatsoever, I'm going to leave this link here :) http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-school.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-s...
  - pgbovine 17y ago
    ha thanks for the free advertising :) so, just to preempt any ad hominem attacks, here is what this article is NOT trying to say: 1.) people who did not go to 'name-brand' universities are somehow less intelligent or less deserving of professional success 2.) people who did go to 'name-brand' universities are somehow super awesome 3.) people who went to 'name-brand' universities are somehow more deserving of the advantages that are bestowed on them I'm just trying to tell a collection of stories i've heard from friends and learned through my own experiences. I hope that I don't come off as being too judgmental :)
    - alexgartrell 17y ago
      They figure that it's tough enough to get into and graduate from MIT, so even a mediocre MIT student might do the job as well as an exceptional student at a normal (lesser-known) university.
fburnaby 17y ago
This is a fun paradox: someone who graduated from {MIT, Harvard, etc.} can't say they did, since it would be elitist. They can stop mentioning their Alma mater when they realize that it sounds elitist to mention it. But then it just seems like they're not mentioning it, as a way of signaling their lack of need to mention it (their status is obvious). Once you graduate from any of these schools, there's no way not to sound elitist when asked where you went to school. You're trapped. PS - This, of course, doesn't mean someone graduating from these schools isn't elitist. It's just that the social exchange in which they tell you their Alma mater doesn't give you any information in regards to their elitism.

39 points by unignorant 17y ago

The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. We learn all about his academic credentials almost as soon as the blog post begins, but don't hear anything about his real-world accomplishments beyond attending great schools. What does everyone think of the blogger's academics page? http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm Disclaimer: I don't know the blogger, and as far as I know I don't know any of his professional colleagues or classmates from any era. I'm not competent to judge accomplishments in the domain of computer science, but I try to pick up nuances from English writing, just as does any other reader of English.

catzaa 17y ago
That is unfortunately true. There is this old joke: Q: How do you know someone is from MIT {Stanford, Havard, ...}? A: He tells you.
- scott_s 17y ago
  Your joke makes the opposite claim that he does at the end of his post. With no data either way, I guess we all default to our biases.
- jhancock 17y ago
  The refined version for those from Harvard is: Q: Where did you go to school? A: Boston. Q: uhh, where in Boston? A: Harvard. They make you draw it out of them. I have found at least three types of people that respond in this manner: 1 - The person that was raised elite since birth and really doesn't care at all what you think about him. So him dragging it out is him avoiding the question and hoping you'll learn not to pry. 2 - The person that is tired of being identified with this standard questioning. So him dragging it out is somewhere in the middle. He can use it to his advantage when needed but for the most part doesn't want to be identified in this way. 3 - The snob.
  - pgbovine 17y ago
    the motivation for people i know to do that is less disingenuous ... 4 - if you say that you went to Harvard (or another well-known university), lots of people automatically cringe and think "ugh this guy must be a snob!", so if you're really not a snob, then the reason for avoiding specifics is so that people don't pre-judge upon first impressions. the responses to my article sort of exemplifies this phenomenon. lots of readers didn't like how i 'name-dropped' where i attended school ... i was mentioning where i went to school because it's relevant for the point i'm making in my article, not merely to show off or brag. oftentimes i don't tell people where i went to school because i don't want to automatically be viewed as a snob on first impressions.
Locke1689 17y ago
This is pretty impressive: 2009 ACM SIGSOFT Distinguished Paper Award for HAMPI: A Solver for String Constraints, an ISSTA 2009 paper with Kiezun (lead author), Ganesh, Hooimeijer, and Ernst The rest is mediocre-impressive. Nothing to laugh at, but nothing to distinguish him from the other MIT/Stanford students either. I think he has a good point.
- frig 17y ago
  Wow I've been looking for a library like HAMPI for a long time. Serendipity at its finest.
  - pgbovine 17y ago
    sorry it's off-topic, but you can download it from here: http://people.csail.mit.edu/akiezun/hampi/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/akiezun/hampi/
    - frig 17y ago
      Thanks, I found it already but I can see you're one of the co-authors so I appreciate your effort. It's going to be some time before I can get to using it but like I said this pretty much is exactly what a currently-stalled project has been looking for. If I make a real use of this library I'll pass along a proper description so you can see what use it's getting. As it'll be awhile I'll give you a minimal summary now (in as much detail as I can, which isn't that much sorry). The overall point is to take input (sequence of words), and then generate further input that is "related" but not identical (think: clearly a variation on the theme, but not rote repetition). The mechanism is that there's a set of grammars specifying overlapping formal languages; input is broken into words and each word is parsed in each grammar that contains that word; some inference and calculation is done to generate a sort-of style profile and then that profile is used together with the underlying grammars to drive generation of new output. The quality of the output has been underwhelming, mainly b/c doing exact parsing seems to leave a nasty trade-off between the "interestingness" of the grammars in the set and nontriviality of the "style profile": - having "interesting" grammars means the style profile is too constrained (so the generated output too closely resembles the input) - having "larger" grammars means the style profile is richer but the output is weak (doesn't adequately resemble the input to a human observer) Where a library like hampi fits into this is (hopefully) the ability to efficiently loosen-up the parsing in a nicely-constrained way; using some metadata attached to the grammars it ought to be possible to intelligently knock-out part of a word and ask hampi to find a replacement string that makes the word parse within a particular language. Essentially intentional misunderstanding of input => novel synthesis.
jlees 17y ago
Indeed, his point about name-brand universities is entirely backed up, albeit in a slightly ironic fashion, by his namedropping.
jhancock 17y ago
Its an interesting topic. Not sure the blog post really proved his point, but a bit of "arrogance in the large" (on the internet), doesn't bug me. I don't expect to be able to decide if his stated credentials mean anything; just that he is stating they do and establishes how he feels relative to the other statement he's making. I can be arrogant at times, both in public posts and with people that know me well. For the public assertions, I don't expect people to buy my assertions. Simply asserting them may set a tone I find, at the moment, to be useful. The reader can decide for themselves how to take it.
rdr 17y ago
ad hominem arguments detract from this discussion, i think :) plus, the blogger is still a student, so of course he's not going to have much in terms of real-world accomplishments.
elblanco 17y ago
He's on the fast path to a research job, buried in the bowels of some company, working on middle ware. Either that or he'll simply get a teaching job at one of the schools he decries in his post.
- elblanco 17y ago
  Feel free to downvote, but at least bother to type some reasoning. The number of tier-1 PhD grads that end up in teaching posts at state schools is pretty tremendous. And as anyone who reads this site knows, good schooling != life/work experience. Unless Mr. Guo changes his attitude a bit, he's unlikely to find success outside of academia or pure research departments of large companies.
- scott_s 17y ago
  I think you misunderstood his arguments. He did not in any way denigrate the non "name brand" schools.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-school.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-s...
    - scott_s 17y ago
      Saying X has advantages over Y is not the same as saying Y is crap.
      - elblanco 17y ago
        I don't believe you read the article. He's edited it now, but the ending was basically advice that "if you didn't go to X, don't try to compete, you'll only be met with disappointment". That's (was before the edit) calling Y crap pretty much.
        17y ago
pgbovine 17y ago
i also think this guy is a real tool who hasn't accomplished anything noteworthy in life. and what kind of a stupid username is pgbovine? but seriously, i'm hoping that the level of discourse on HN stays above ad hominem attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)

xilun 17y ago

Is it a sort of oxymoron exercise or something?

petercooper 17y ago

In The Psychology of Persuasion the author looks at how the appearance of authority yields big results: http://www.takebackyourbrain.com/2007/the-psychology-of-persuasion-authority/ http://www.takebackyourbrain.com/2007/the-psychology-of-pers... - The disconnect, then, is that confidence and arrogance are often interpreted as authority.

xiaoma 17y ago

>"The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-ethic and compliance.

scott_s 17y ago
If think you replace "smartest" with "most successful", the point he's trying to make does not change.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- Confusion 17y ago
  Which is still a ridiculous point: A/A+ students are not necessarily smarter, more successful, more intelligent, whatever-you-want-to-call-it than B+/A- students. His sole defense of that assertion is if you're so damn smart, wouldn't it take you just slightly more effort to get an A which I cannot characterize as anything else but a total lack of any sense of what someone may want to do with his time, other than obtain high grades, combined with the unfounded accusation that they all consider themselves capable of doing better. He completely rules out the possibility that out of numbers 5 through 15 out of a 100, five may rather want to spend their time, let's say, starting a company, practicing a sport or contributing code to some open source project. That's when the real problem shows it's ugly head: they are made to feel like they have to excuse themselves for their grades, as anything below 'perfect' is always questioned, as the article did: "why don't you get higher grades?" For me, the answer really was exactly as he says: because I have a fucking life out of school. However, the intention of that answer wasn't to play down the grades of others or to assert my intelligence. I won't deny they usually also have a life out of school. The intention was purely and solely: to answer the question that everyone keeps asking. I've given that answer so many times I can only think of it shouted with the expletive in it. And then grade-obsessed nitwits like this guy throw a hissy fit because they think I'm trying to trump them. No, I don't bloody care about trumping you. If I cared, I would spend my time trying to score higher grades, so I'd get into that prestigious university. I'm not sure I would succeed, but the point is: I'm not even trying to best you. God, guys like this still piss me off. They don't want to accept the fact that there may have been guys that could outdo them, but didn't bother.

fogus 17y ago

Unfortunately where I went to middle/high school there was very little elitism built around GPA and test scores. However, everyone just instinctively knew that the most dangerous bullies were not the most popular kids, but instead the kids just below them in the social heirarchy. The top tier were generally secure in themselves, but those below were always looking for an edge to get into the pantheon.

zackattack 17y ago
Indeed, pg addresses this in his essay on why nerds are unpopular in school. Here's my question: does bullying ever give an edge into the pantheon?
- fogus 17y ago
  No. But that never stopped those guys from bullying. If they understood this then they may have been at the top.

sofal 17y ago

I haven't noticed anything to suggest that elitism is more prevalent among those without elite credentials. Two distinguished professors from my school come to mind. Both of them have very impressive track records and yet both of them are on opposite ends of the arrogance spectrum. I think it comes down to how comfortable you are with yourself. If you constantly wish you were higher up in the food chain, there's a good chance you are an elitist, and getting elite credentials likely won't satisfy you anyway.

rauljara 17y ago

I think it is true that the most insecure tend to exhibit the most elitism; elitism being defined as going out of your way to put down another group you consider inferior. The author, however, goes out of his way to condemn this sort of elitism, basically succumbing to the same elitism he is condemning. Just as I'm basically doing, going out of my way to write this comment. I think the thing to realize is that comparing yourself to others in a better/worse than relationship is a pretty human thing to do, even if it isn't good. It should be avoided and maybe even corrected, but it shouldn't be condemned or used as a way to put people down, lest you succumb to it yourself.

spiralhead 17y ago

Interesting article but I am not convinced outward expressions of elitism have much of a correlation with one's academic background. In my experience, the most talented and creative individuals are modest, hard working and often quiet while those lacking demonstrable talent are the ones who make the most noise. I'd wager talent has little to no correlation with academic background.

codexon 17y ago

It is probably true that people who scholastic reputation will try to make up for it in other ways. However the problem is that there may be too much authority placed in these usual standards of achievements. Philip forgets that people with academic credentials like himself are being smug when they complain about others. If your academic credentials represent you so well, why should it bother you if someone is simply acting? Another disingenuous behavior he describes is hiding that you went to a reputable school like Harvard. The reason people are afraid of living up to "artificially higher" expectations is because their school's reputation really is artificially high. What these type of people want is to have the "Harvard" reputation when it suits them, and the average Joe culpability should they ever fail. They want to further perpetuate the image of superiority that Harvard/Stanford entails without letting the public correct their perception that going to one of these top schools does not make you a Godly Genius.

scott_s 17y ago
I don't think hiding you went to a prestigious school has to be disingenuous. I can be, but it doesn't have to be. I have a purple belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. This is a mid-level rank, but it's also the point where a competitor is considered advanced. In tournaments that don't use belt level but Novice, Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, I compete Advanced. If I talk to a stranger about BJJ, I never start out with "I have a purple belt." I am going out of my way to avoid sounding like a braggart. I am not worried about failing to live up to my rank, but I am worried about appearing like a jerk.
- codexon 17y ago
  What you are saying is completely different from someone asking you "What college did you go to", and responding vaguely "Boston" when most people just say the name of the school.
  - pgbovine 17y ago
    yes, "Boston" would be a disingenuous reply to "What college did you go to". But it would not be a disingenuous reply to "Where did you attend college?" Some people I know say "in China" or "in Canada" ... "in Boston" is just as legit of an answer, and often one that makes people not roll their eyes at you nearly as much as if you say "HAHHHHHHH-VARD!"

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

Confusion 17y ago

People from reputable universities don't need to vocally assert their capabilities, because the mere mention of their university is enough for people to acknowledge their capabilities. On the other hand, people from more obscure universities need to vocally assert their skills and experience in order to obtain the same recognition of their capabilities. This is just a plain fact of society and asserting your skills and experience is not in any way arrogant or elitist behavior. He completely confuses being vocal about your capabilities with vocally downplaying the capabilities of others, for instance the capabilities of people from reputable universities. He seems completely unaware that people can feel the need to assert their capabilities without in any way wanting or trying to downplay the capabilities of others.

joe_the_user 17y ago

I'm sorry but this isn't a new one for sociology... I've observed that some of the people who display the greatest degrees of elitism and snobbery are those who are technically skilled in their given area of expertise but who do not necessarily have the most reputable externally-recognizable marks of status. Indeed. Those who need to display elitism are those who aren't automatically accepted as elite. Similarly, those who are naturally accepted as elite, don't need make as much of an effort to display their eliteness. This is so established that the act of not attempting to show one's eliteness is often subtler a mark of greater eliteness. And this is the basic conundrum of elitism: how the 'old guard' defends itself against the arriviste etc. I'd suggest a reading of De Tocqueville, Veblen and modern signalling theory.

zackattack 17y ago
Can you recommend a good book on modern signalling theory?
- joe_the_user 17y ago
  What I have been reading recently is "Game Theory Evolving" by Herbert Gintis. The Wikipedia articles on signaling theory and evolutionary game theory are useful too.

richardw 17y ago

What's the motivation for writing the article? To me, there's always some way to feel superior by pointing fingers. I think he's driving his own brand of elitism. (Somebody please accuse me of the same thing, and let's see if we can recursively create a singularity)

elblanco 17y ago
The number of articles and editorials I've read in the last 5 years, written by people from tier-1 schools, decrying the tyranny and ill-manners of the unwashed masses, and the unfairness towards graduates of these so-called "top" schools, is enough to convince me that the reputation that grads from these schools have for being pompous windbags who went to these schools not for the education, but for the name brand, is well deserved. This article (hosted not insignificantly at standford.edu) is an absolutely textbook example of this phenomenon. Articles like this one, and numerous professional interactions with people who introduce themselves as "Suzy Sue, I went to Yale" or "Marcus Markk, I went to Harvard"...and then repeatedly fail to perform up to the expectations I'd have for community college dropouts...I've never heard somebody from a tier-2 or 3 school introduce themselves in this way. After so many of these kinds of experiences, when I hire people, a degree from a tier-1 school is an automatic mark against, not a mark for.
drats 17y ago
>What's the motivation for writing the article? Well, he managed to name-drop Stanford, MIT and Google in a short article with the nutritional value of cardboard. Everyone knows that after the first job or two flashing a ivy-league CV around it starts to matter what you have achieved not where you went.
- kburn 17y ago
  funny

JeremyChase 17y ago

I think the author is in error to assume that all people attend elite schools for the same reasons. Some people are honestly the best in their field and will gravitate to the best schools, others simply desire the best pedigree, and some people simply want to go to the best school they can. I don't think that Ivy alumni are hesitant to name drop their school. Some are smug; most aren't. As I have gotten further from college the conversations generally swing toward what you are doing, rather than where you went. The generalization about 2nd tier students is also too broad. My CS degree is from a 2nd tier school (RIT 01), and when talking with others from similar schools it seems like there is occasionally an elitist; but it isn't that common. There are plenty of people who are elitist because they have something to prove. They may have gone to a great school, or no school at all. In the end it doesn't matter; they are simply annoying.

psyklic 17y ago

The author writes about himself, "Coming from two universities with world-renowned Computer Science departments (MIT and Stanford) and having worked at a top-tier software company (Google) as well as at several less high-profile companies ..." Meaning, of course, that he is not elitist -- he just had to share these crucial facts about himself.

numair 17y ago
I think the tide has really turned against name-brand institutions, leaving people such as the author in a position where they feel they have to defend themselves and their "prestige." This manifests itself in some peculiar ways, as we can see from this piece...
- rdr 17y ago
  agreed, university reputation matters a lot less nowadays than it did in the previous generation ... nowadays anyone with a good idea can start up a tech company and get rich. nobody cares about ur college name
Schtarflucz 17y ago
An elitist disses people who he considers inferior to himself. Stating that you are Among the elites doesn't make you an elitist.
- elblanco 17y ago
  "Stating that you are among the elites" implies that everybody else is inferior to you. By definition, that is elitism.
pgbovine 17y ago
fair enough, that does sound pretty elitist ;) sorry if i offended people with that language. but the rest of that sentence says "... , I have seen a wide variety of personalities and egos amongst computer scientists and software engineers." the point of that paragraph was to establish that i had experience in interacting with CS people from a variety of backgrounds, both from so-called elitist places and from less elitist places (i suppose i should've also listed the other lesser-known places where i've worked and gone to school, but since by definition they're not well-known 'elitist' places, you probably wouldn't have heard of them anyways) wow, had i known that my article would someday be posted on a news aggregator site, i would've definitely been more politically correct in my word choice :)

daveying99 17y ago

I think the guy has some smart points. But the fact that he has the MIT dome picture on his blog counters the point that if you're a high achiever from a top-tiered university, you don't need to show external signs of achievement...

zackattack 17y ago
I imagine that when you go to a place like MIT where life is like "getting kicked in the balls repeatedly", your alma mater becomes an important part of your identity.
- jgrant27 17y ago
  This gave me a good laugh ! These same people also tend to bring this mind set with them to wherever it is they end up working. They seem to have a huge need to "kick others in the balls repeatedly" to feel better than others. Have you ever noticed how no matter what topic(it could even be about fingernail clippings) is being discussed with these types the conversation almost always degrades into them having to make repeated points to prove that they are right and you are wrong. Apparently this indoctrinated part of their identity is what they call 'education'. I guess they also need this to justify the 100-200k of debt they have after graduation and the calls they will receive for the rest of their life from their alma mater each year for donations.

dill_day 17y ago

When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you. -- Lao Tzu

Eliezer 17y ago
When everybody respects you, Without need for you to compare or compete, You will be content to be simply yourself. -- Eliezer Yudkowsky (that's right - ELIEZER YUDKOWSKY)

jgrant27 17y ago

Grades are a sign of intelligence ? This could simply be a student's willingness to parrot whatever answers or theory a teacher would like to hear. Ever notice that often when a student outdoes his teacher or his teacher's favorite 'pets' then he is down-graded ? The world's best scientists, mathematicians, physicists have all experienced this especially when their thinking was about to improve on and/or replace the old theories that their professors used for large grant money. Maybe there was a good reason that it was a crime in Socrates day for teachers to accept money from students. Does financial incentive corrupt education outright ? "Prestigious" schools also deny those that need tuition most when the whole point of attending is to gain something(knowledge etc.) that they do not already possess. These schools also pride themselves on cultural diversity but what about the classicism that defines their admissions ? Why should a decent degree run a student into 100-200k of debt after graduation ? Less wealthy countries provide comparable and even better education for free. Why ?

enthalpyx 17y ago

Wouldn't it be great if we could get to the point where the opinion of others didn't matter so much?

sofal 17y ago
The opinions of people who have resources are always going to matter. That in itself is not a bad thing. The bad thing is ill-informed opinions.

parse_tree 17y ago

The author sounds like a real jackass. Who else would be so concerned with the alma mater, "intelligence", or "technical skill" of other people that they feel the need to write an article about it.

invisible 17y ago

What I find truly misleading is that he labels "name-brand universities" as a form of adult elitism. He then goes on to explain that it is actually those that did not attend the best schools that are outwardly elite. I have heard stories of name-brand universities' alumni not even giving those outside of the best schools the time of day. Perhaps there is a cockiness to those that strive to prove themselves beyond grades and diplomas. Sure. However, I'd heavily argue that this is not elitism. Elitism requires grouping with those of similar backgrounds (e.g. Harvard, Yale, MIT, whatever). You cannot be an elitist unless you claim alumni from only your school - or brand of schools - are better than others. The author does mention that he went to a FEW prestigious schools and so doesn't follow his own advice on the matter. (Elitism can also be displayed by a position that only wealthy are better [1]. This unfortunately may plague these so-called name brand schools.) So, go be cocky and stop name dropping your prestigious university (or giving said university/universities more weight). Then you'll stop being an elitist, but you might just improve your former school's brand... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitism

pgbovine 17y ago

hi everyone, this is the author --- wow, i totally didn't expect a random rant of mine to be posted on hacker news :) after monitoring comments for a few hours, i finally had to sign up for an account. First off, I should mention the context of my article: I wrote that (admittedly not so well-written) article from personal observations I made of technical people in various fields working in various jobs at various companies (I don't want to name drop any further, heh). It was just my personal observation that given two people in the same exact job position WITH EQUAL INTELLIGENCE/SKILLS/EXPERIENCE/ETC., the one who went to a lesser-known university was usually more vocal about announcing his/her skills and, in a way, disparaging of people from so-called name-brand schools. Sorry I didn't intend to make any sorts of value judgments as to how university reputation correlates with intelligence, likelihood of success, etc. Now I'm gonna have some fun responding to other people's comments :)

alexgartrell 17y ago
Without passing any judgement whatsoever, I'm going to leave this link here :) http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-school.htm http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/advantages-of-name-brand-s...
- pgbovine 17y ago
  ha thanks for the free advertising :) so, just to preempt any ad hominem attacks, here is what this article is NOT trying to say: 1.) people who did not go to 'name-brand' universities are somehow less intelligent or less deserving of professional success 2.) people who did go to 'name-brand' universities are somehow super awesome 3.) people who went to 'name-brand' universities are somehow more deserving of the advantages that are bestowed on them I'm just trying to tell a collection of stories i've heard from friends and learned through my own experiences. I hope that I don't come off as being too judgmental :)
  - alexgartrell 17y ago
    They figure that it's tough enough to get into and graduate from MIT, so even a mediocre MIT student might do the job as well as an exceptional student at a normal (lesser-known) university.

fburnaby 17y ago

This is a fun paradox: someone who graduated from {MIT, Harvard, etc.} can't say they did, since it would be elitist. They can stop mentioning their Alma mater when they realize that it sounds elitist to mention it. But then it just seems like they're not mentioning it, as a way of signaling their lack of need to mention it (their status is obvious). Once you graduate from any of these schools, there's no way not to sound elitist when asked where you went to school. You're trapped. PS - This, of course, doesn't mean someone graduating from these schools isn't elitist. It's just that the social exchange in which they tell you their Alma mater doesn't give you any information in regards to their elitism.