Post: #1

A page he made on Facebook page on December 1, 2013:

"You can tell if a discipline is BS if the degree depends severely on the prestige of the school granting it. I remember when I applied to MBA programs being told that anything outside the top 10 or 20 would be a waste of time. On the other hand a degree in mathematics is much less dependent on the shool (conditional on being above a certain level, so the heuristic would apply to the differene betwewn top 10 and top 2000 schools)."

Just another reminder of what separates STEM degrees from social science/humanities degrees - the former has inherent value from the type of knowledge that is contained within it while the worth of the latter is heavily based on appealing to the right authorities and gatekeepers of knowledge.

Post: #2

Very good point.

Post: #3

I guess I'm old cause I know STEM degree holders that are underemployed or jobless. There isn't a lot of security in being an employee. Industry constantly changes, but the top employers always prefer the newest top students from the top schools.

And a lot of skill sets are useless, unless you're employed by a fortune 500 company.

Post: #4

What can you do that an educated English speaker in a third world country can't? Nothing? Your income will be about the same as theirs in 20 years.

Post: #5

The people who know how ALWAYS work for the people who know why, it doesn't matter what fucking degree either of them have, or from where.

Post: #6

Majors are bullshit if your banking on the major. The value of a degree is in the degree itself. Out of the corral, you have something that says you're trainable and ambitious enough to get through a 4 year program.

A great salesman with a degree in theology will always have work, whereas a passive engineer may not.

Internships are key. Get experience in something that has a broad appeal. Publishing (most major universities have an academic publishing house), advertising agencies, PR firms, and similar firms allow you to get "business" experience, even if you're only designing book covers or writing catalog copy. Work part-time sales. Wireless is a great gig in school. You make decent money, refine social skills, and talk to cute girls all day. Pair 2-3 years of that with an internship @ one of the above and you'll be ahead of 90% of grads.

Work for a small biz (after or during school) and pay attention. Take notes, figure out how you can use what you know to provide value to businesses on your own terms. People constantly want to do this B2C startup crap. No idea why. B2B startups can be proven in just a few months if you provide value. Also substantially easier to get started.

The value of a degree is subjective to your experience, circumstances, personality, and other factors. Don't count on your degree being "worth" any specific salary range.

Post: #7

I think STEM should be changed to MELTS to include Law.

Post: #8

(12-04-2013 01:35 AM)Vendetta Wrote:  I think STEM should be changed to MELTS to include Law.

There's too many lawyers. Even top 15 law grads have issues getting jobs.

Post: #9

Quote:I guess I'm old cause I know STEM degree holders that are underemployed or jobless.

I do believe a lot of the "STEM shortage" talk is just part of a campaign to get more H1B visas for engineers from India and China.

Post: #10

(12-04-2013 06:10 AM)cibo Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 01:35 AM)Vendetta Wrote:  I think STEM should be changed to MELTS to include Law.

There's too many lawyers. Even top 15 law grads have issues getting jobs.

Really? I didn't know that. What about architects?

Post: #11

Lawyers, architects, accountants, dentists, pharmacists all used to be immediately lucrative professions.

Right now STEM is still the best bet, but it's not a slam dunk long term.

There are always going to be technicians, but the valuable person in that organization is the person that can find customers.

Post: #12

(12-04-2013 01:35 AM)Vendetta Wrote:  I think STEM should be changed to MELTS to include Law.

There was a discussion on Taleb's page about what subjects would fall under BS and which would fall under non-BS and a few people mentioned law would be BS since the value of your degree depends heavily on the reputation and ranking of the school you graduated from. There's a big difference between a tier 1 and tier 3 and maybe even tier 2 law school. The difference between an engineering degree from MIT and some random state school isn't nearly as large.

Post: #13

Both my brothers are engineers.

They say if you are an engineer you are best off getting as many finance qualifications you can through work.

The top people are the engineers who also get to control the budgets. That is where the power is.

Post: #14

Engineer is overrated.

The problem with being an engineer is you then have the personality of an engineer.

Post: #15

That quote is abysmal.

Would you rather hire an engineer who graduated from Stanford or Devry. Ummm Stanford.

Literally all professions rely heavily on where you were taught. This is universal in every industry.

You want the guy playing hoops for your team if he played for duke versus Utah state? Etc etc.

Who gets more money on average endorsements etc, a guy playing for the Knicks or the Pelicans.

Get the best degree you can from the best school you can get without going into debt that's the solution. That or start a company yourself.

I would argue the reverse. Get the best school always. Why? Drum fucking roll = connections.

Do you want a rollodex full of people from money or a rollodex of people from poverty. You always want the best possible connections. This is every industry in the world.

Post: #16

(12-04-2013 03:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  Do you want a rollodex full of people from money or a rollodex of people from poverty. You always want the best possible connections. This is every industry in the world.

It is however not realistic for many people to put on the debt an Ivy league school enrolment would result in.

Post: #17

^ yes so you choose the best you can get for next to no debt.

Example: Ucla or Stanford. If ucla is for free or $200K for Stanford go to ucla.

If you are at the high end, getting admitted to ivy's you can get a full ride to a ton of places.

Post: #18

(12-04-2013 03:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  I would argue the reverse. Get the best school always. Why? Drum fucking roll = connections.

Do you want a rollodex full of people from money or a rollodex of people from poverty. You always want the best possible connections. This is every industry in the world.

Yeah, I have said that many times on here to deaf ears.

Do you want to go to school with a kid who's Dad owns Casinos?

Or do you want to go to school with a guys kid from Zanesville who loses his whole paycheck in Casinos?

Post: #19

(12-03-2013 11:02 PM)babelfish669 Wrote:  What can you do that an educated English speaker in a third world country can't? Nothing? Your income will be about the same as theirs in 20 years.

Filipinos and Indians are going to take over the world.

Post: #20

(12-04-2013 03:46 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 03:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  Do you want a rollodex full of people from money or a rollodex of people from poverty. You always want the best possible connections. This is every industry in the world.

It is however not realistic for many people to put on the debt an Ivy league school enrolment would result in.

The point of the matter is that the connections you make will FAR outweight the debt you incur. Think about it, when else will you have time to network and meet some of the future potential leaders of the world? Not to mention the fact that when you are surrounded by remarkable/well-connected individuals it will motivate you to hustle harder and stay on top of your chit. Versus going to some shitty university down the road, you're less likely to make good connections as well as push yourself.

I'm speaking from experience, I had the chance to go to a university near my home that wasnt as reputable to save money, however I chose to go to a prestigious school and its phucking crazy how much of a difference in the quality of students as well as teachers. I'd gladly pay the debt just so that I could maintain this network of alumni.

Post: #21

A lot of people here have unrealistic expectations on these "connections". Athlone is one of the forums few bona fide Ivy League students and I vividly remember how he described how the true movers and shakers seal themselves off in clubs within the school and informal networks from which he was firmly although politely evicted. This is also one of the forums smartest posters.

So I'd be a little more careful about throwing my money on something as 'soft' as "connections".

Post: #22

Connections is a broad topic.

I wrote above a dude from poverty should choose ucla over Stanford if ucla is a full ride. No brainer.

Go to the career center and look at the jobs they land. If you see the same lists of companies you're good to go.

The extremely high end = not gonna break in. You have to literally be born rich.

What the other type of connection is = other future successful people.

All my contacts are from college or work at this point.

So yeah the guy has it dead wrong. Going to a bad university and majoring in X doesn't mean anything because the people you compete against are a joke. That's all it really is.

Another example is if you get into cornell and NYU... Definitely choose NYU to save that $$. Aim for a partial scholarship or full ride. Debt = death.

There are really two major turning points in your life. No one will tell you this to your face but it's 100% true.

1. The college you attend
2. The first job out of college you obtain

If you can knock those out of the park it's almost inevitable you'll be sitting pretty in a few years. It is absolutely not an "or" topic you have to do both. If you went to MIT and end up working in accounting you're fucked. If you went to NYU but got into Barclays front office... I'll guarantee you the NYU kid will be doing better in 5 years.

All decisions in life compound over time, make good ones when you're young and you'll be great. Make bad ones and you've created new hurdles to jump later. It's how life works.

One extra note. Notice I don't care what you major in it's simply school + job. Smart move is to apply to a bullshit major, get into an elite school and get a full ride, halfway through "switch" majors to ones that don't need a separate application and then use that. Just cut your tuition in half as you bullshit the admins that you want to major in humanities fucking LOL just write a "I want to save the world essay" get that scholarship and "whoops" switching majors as you took the real classes over the summer freshman year to make it cheaper and jump all of the enrollment issues.

Post: #23

(12-04-2013 06:23 PM)Vicious Wrote:  A lot of people here have unrealistic expectations on these "connections". Athlone is one of the forums few bona fide Ivy League students and I vividly remember how he described how the true movers and shakers seal themselves off in clubs within the school and informal networks from which he was firmly although politely evicted. This is also one of the forums smartest posters.

So I'd be a little more careful about throwing my money on something as 'soft' as "connections".

Lmao, the point is that YOU have to start those clubs and informal networks. Jesus you realize that in first year for the most part people dont know each other? Thats when you hustle hard and make some real connections, lettuce be reality as long as you arent some awkward phuck it shouldnt be too hard to make friends with people, and for the most part if you attend a prestigious university 9 times out of 10 that new friend you made can help land you an internship during the summer with his dads company. (Again, I know based off of personal experience, I come from a poor as phuck family, had to pay my own tuition to go to a prestigious university and already halfway through first year I'm reaping the benefits, sure I'm in debt, but I'm glad to put it on)

Post: #24

(12-04-2013 06:23 PM)Vicious Wrote:  A lot of people here have unrealistic expectations on these "connections". Athlone is one of the forums few bona fide Ivy League students and I vividly remember how he described how the true movers and shakers seal themselves off in clubs within the school and informal networks from which he was firmly although politely evicted. This is also one of the forums smartest posters.

So I'd be a little more careful about throwing my money on something as 'soft' as "connections".

Yeah, I wouldn't generalize based on one person's experience, but it may be that an Ivey is different than the top non-iveys out there in terms of the kids who go there. Buddy of mine had no problem networking in a top 20 Southern university and everyone there was super chill and friendly(if a bit crazy).

Post: #25

(12-04-2013 03:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  That quote is abysmal.

Would you rather hire an engineer who graduated from Stanford or Devry. Ummm Stanford.

Literally all professions rely heavily on where you were taught. This is universal in every industry.

You want the guy playing hoops for your team if he played for duke versus Utah state? Etc etc.

Who gets more money on average endorsements etc, a guy playing for the Knicks or the Pelicans.

Get the best degree you can from the best school you can get without going into debt that's the solution. That or start a company yourself.

I would argue the reverse. Get the best school always. Why? Drum fucking roll = connections.

Do you want a rollodex full of people from money or a rollodex of people from poverty. You always want the best possible connections. This is every industry in the world.

Point of the quote isn't about what will result in the most success for the person going to school. The point is to identify what majors teaches fluff and which will actually teach you actual concrete knowledge.

Sure the guy majoring in women's studies or sociology at Harvard will most likely be more successful then some guy studying mathematics at a state university because the person going to Harvard will get those Ivy League connects. However does that mean the knowledge he is acquiring in the classroom is better then the one the guy majoring in engineering at the state school is? Hardly. The Harvard kid is going to be successful because of the reputation of his school and because of his connects, NOT because of what the body of knowledge he studied. The whole point of the quote is to show fields of studies that depend heavily on the reputation of the school granting the degree tend to be BS.

To use your example, someone who graduated as an engineer from Stanford will obviously be more likely to get hired then someone who did the same major at a school school. There is a gap of course. However, the gap would be exponentially higher if the major was English literature as opposed to engineering. According to the person who was quoted this shows that a discipline like engineering is solid while one like English literature is not.

The guy who I quoted in the opening post is simply offering a heuristic to figure out which fields of study are BS and which are not. He is not making any sort of analysis on whether it's worth it financially to go to a Ivy League schools or not. It looks like most of the people on this thread got de-railed and instead are concentrating on the real world value of a major and whether you'll be able to get rich off of it rather then focusing on the original idea of the author which was to identify what fields have high standards of rigor and BS-detection and which ones don't. This is a completely separate issue from the economic value of a degree. As has been stated, even people who major these days in STEM are having trouble finding work. However, this in no way invalidates that STEM fields have higher standards for intellectual rigor compared to say comparative literature.

To sum it up: the quote has absolutely nothing to do with analyzing how successful a person be if he majors in X subject. Rather, it is a heuristic to identify if X subject tends to be full of BS or not.