Depends on your goals and much of the advice that you'll receive will revolve around maximizing the college experience. This is certainly important. However, as a hiring manager for several decades, one of the things that routinely frustrated me was a stream of candidates from very good schools that were totally ignorant of basic business practices. Most graduates will not work for FAANG companies upon graduation. They will go into industry. And yes, right now AI/vibe coding is all the rage. The issue becomes what value does one bring to the company. I've seen this play out many times over the decades. So my suggestion is to burn a couple of electives on things like accounting and business management. Learn to write well and speak well in front of any audience. When you interview with an insurance company after graduation, for example, the hiring manager isn't going to be overwhelmed with your ability to write a compiler or even necessarily your vibe coding skills. They will likely be impressed more by your presentation skills, your ability to grasp business concepts, etc. Enjoy college, but don't become so rigidly engaged with technical topics that you limit your future opportunities.
I fail to see how your past frustrations with the skills of your entry levels hires is OP's problem. OP should fulfill their own learning goals, not try to fit themselves into last century's corporate mold. If they have trouble getting hired because they need some accounting skills (unlikely, btw), they can solve that with a Coursera course or a few weeks at the local community college.
Undergrad is where you learn to learn, learn to think critically, and learn to adapt to changes in the world. Any coursework that fails to focus on those broader learning goals and just teaches vocational skills is an utter waste of their tuition money.
I'm not saying that such info is useless. I fully agree that it can be helpful. But don't burn tuition and college credits on that. Learn things in college that are more complex and require more engagement. Take yourself to a higher level of thinking, so instead of worrying about how some future interview at an insurance company would go, you never even have to step on the path that would make you want an interview at an insurance company in the first place.
Apparently, you missed my opening statement. It depends on the OP's goals. But, by no means is my advice "last century". Many here approach their careers as if FAANG and technology was all there is. It's not. Tuition is unquestionably an issue. Nonetheless, it should be viewed as an investment. And no, Coursa is generally not an adequate substitute for an actual education. It's a way to familiarize oneself with a topic but by no means is it comparable to the typical university treatment. It's fine to believe that "it's different this time or today". It's not. History has shown repeatedly that it repeats. And contrary to what many think and hype, the current "AI" trends are not going to replace the need for human thinking. And if you believe it is, then why go to college at all?
Why is it too many? Books are an experience that no digital medium can’t replicate or even imitate. Plus one owns their books in perpetuity, unlike digital that is merely licensed and ephemeral.
If they are actually interested in the profession, and not just the money, find a smaller company in the area that’s hiring for a less specialized role, one a generalist has a chance of performing, eg a customer support role somewhere that maintains some development efforts. Even this will be difficult if the last ten years or so hasn’t afforded them some basic people and business skills. In other words, regardless of the role, they have to bring something to the job. Assuming they do and can get hired, then it’s about learning that business, technical space, etc. It will be a lot of work regardless. Is FAANG a possibility? Yes, perhaps, but not a probable one. However, there thousands of commercial companies uilding and deploying interesting projects and paying very good salaries.
Turn off CNN , FoxNews, MSNBC or wherever you’re getting your hyperbolic reaction. You have much more to be concerned with, such as the DSA takeover of the Democratic Party and the alignment with antisemitism than anything Trump dreams up.
your responses are hyperbolic in themselves. you are accusing the folks in one of the highly educated forums to be not representative of real education. all the while you've not posted a single sentence of substance. be self-aware!
America is well into the midpoint of slow and steady decline; and balkanized states are not helping. Lots of other countries are going downhill as well, but nothing like the spectacular fall of USA.
I'll stand by my comments. There is a perception here that the Trump administration is historically dangerous and we've never seen anything like it. That's not factually defensible. Now in my 70s, I've seen presidents come and go and frankly the vast majority of them have left a lot to be desired. All presidents have engaged in activities that at best could be considered extralegal, particularly when viewed from the "other side". Realistically, Trump has done less damage to the country than Biden for example. Or more correctly Biden's team. The decline of western democracies stems from being unwilling to stand up for the very values that made those countries successful, massive immigration from Mexico and the Middle East, unwillingness to reject radical Islam, calling for the elimination of police, etc (the list is lengthy) are all reflections of a lack of civic courage on the part of elected officials the world over. France, Spain, Great Britain, Germany, as well as the US have all surrendered much of their culture to immigration. And the results aren't favorable to traditional Western countries. So yes, most are in decline. And attempts to halt the decline, as some of Trump's policies are directed, are met with scorn and derision, claims of fascism, etc. Such claims are historically inaccurate.
Another bad decision that won't stand the test of time. The decision says more about the justices themselves than it does the decision. Voting the "right way" gets positive press attention, invites to the DC social circle, etc. Kavanaugh and Barrett are both attention seeking, weak willed individuals that Roberts plays like puppets. Personally, Trump should not have nominated either of them. And W's nomination and selection of Roberts over Scalia was appalling. Neither a textualist or an originalist could have ruled that way. And using the 14th Amendment as justification is historically disingenuous, as Clarence Thomas pointed out. Birth tourism will thrive.
So pirating is the answer? I don't think so. It's unethical and illegal. Buy the physical media of the books, movies, and music that you consume. Quit screwing the creators. I've seen numerous complaints on HN about one's code being stolen. What's the difference?
I don't think it's unethical. It's illegal on the distribution side, but not if you're just downloading. I don't really care either way, because I don't think it's unethical.
> I've seen numerous complaints on HN about one's code being stolen. What's the difference?
The 'stealing' in those cases is usually plagiarism; copying someone's work and not attributing it to them. I will happily attribute all media I've ever downloaded to their creators. If that's all it would take to make 'piracy' legal, I would happily do it.
The government can't fund everything. Too much of the budget is tied up in transfer and interest payments squeezing out other more viable research. The federal government doesn't have unlimited funds. Something has to give.
Just so I’m not misunderstanding, you felt that science funding should be the first thing to give? And that other recent controversial expenditures should take priority?
I know it's fashionable to say stuff like this, but you know what's also a rounding error by that logic? THE SCIENTIFIC GRANTS WE'RE DISCUSSING.
Like, sure, 600million for a ballroom is small compared to the annual interest payments but it could fund, dunno, at least a dozen scientists. Maybe even 2 dozen! Add in the 1.6 billion dollars trumo was trying to embezzle from the irs and we could get a couple dozen more studies going.
If that number is too small and trifling for you, how about the $80+ billion dollar budget for ice? Think we could afford a few studies with that?
Perhaps it could. And perhaps you think erecting tents on the White House grounds for state events, like a third world country, is okay as well. The government funds a ridiculous amount of "science", some of which has no utility. That's not the government's role. These types of projects can be funded by the university or private industry or not at all. Being a "scientist" and wanting to research some idea DOES NOT entitle you to taxpayer funding. Again, as I and others here have noted, the money is in interest, defense, and transfer payments. Personally, I'd like to see reforms on all social programs. If one is capable of working, then they work. Until you live somewhere that has a thriving economy in government money and see the abuse, you have no idea what you're talking about. Should government money be used to buy booze? Potato chips? I assure you that it happens everyday. I've seen it first hand. So fix the social programs and then we'll talk about funding fringe science research. And let's quit funding the 120+ foreign biolabs doing DOF research. We've seen that script before.
I agree with all of that but you don't put a dent in spending outside of tackling ICE budget. TSA is more neutral since a lot of funding from that comes from airline ticket fees.
These counter arguments would be more persuasive if they didn't sound like left wing talking points. No one on this thread nor in the media knows the reality of what happened in Iraq. That most here dislike Trump, I get it. But, to pretend that this administration is somehow behaving differently than others in the past is ahistorical and disingenuous at best.
You’ll get downvoted to hell for this comment but it’s a legitimate concern, especially as Europe throws more of its money into socialist nonsense. It’s time for Europe to start picking up more of the tab, NATO included.
Term limits. Congress was never intended as a profession. I wish the Constitution had included term limits from the beginning. Alas, everyone wants to get rid of someone else's senator/representative but are never willing to vote against their own.
This is not inflation. The is a supply and demand issue. There are two factors: increasing energy costs due to the season and the rising costs of AI data centers (a big impact in my area). And secondly, the disruption of the oil supply during the continued Middle East conflict. These two issues have caused an energy price spike. Yes, it will eventually result in wide spread costs. But, as the components in the above report indicate, it is not yet spread widely. We are all sensitive to gas price fluctuations. We'd all be better off if we admitted that alternative fuels, other than nuclear, will never provide the requisite energy required to advance civilization. It's time to quit pretending that it will and start building nuclear power plants. Wind and solar farms are not the answer. And end the Iraq war aggressively. It's been nearly 50 years and it's clear that Iraq will never negotiate honestly. So Trump and his allies need to stop pretending and end it. And the same applies to the Ukraine-Russia conflict - no more US tax dollars to the Ukrainian dictator.
