> Take the legend of Lake Lagunita Island. In the early 1990s, the Kappa Alpha fraternity decided to embark on an audacious plan. One fraternity brother rented a commercial bulldozer, another cleared sand from around the house, and a third charmed Stanford’s head groundskeeper to sneak the equipment across university land to reach the lake. A Cabo-themed island was constructed in the middle of the lake overnight. They later rigged a zipline from their roof to the sandbar.
This hits close for me. I have immense respect for the students who pulled this off. 2 years ago, a much (much) smaller stunt got me nearly fired at $FAANG, and all I could think was "where has the culture gone?"
I get the impression this is not at all confined to Stanford and is really just everywhere in the country at the moment. Not sure the word 'coward' is right though. Feels more like... people are far more interested in being 'normal' than ever before. Maybe a side effect of there being so much economic opportunity in regular jobs and career trajectories that nobody considers riskier paths?
I honestly think it’s the opposite cause. The odds of success have gotten way narrower than they used to be. When kids at Stamford are afraid of failure that says to me that failure is way more likely for everyone. People are taking safe options because the unsafe ones can lead to bottomless pits that even Stanford grads are concerned they cannot climb out of.
This is a very strange article. The lament about how Stanford students "said things that made people mad and didn’t immediately apologize", but the example linked is a newspaper story about students screaming homophobic slurs at people and telling them they hope they die of AIDS. This is the supposed "courage" Stanford students used to have?
Even weirder that the author complains about people being mean to a Federalist Society judge right next to that. This whole thing reads like an incoherent rant.
Both YC and Stanford have had their admissions process cracked for some time by resume maximalists. Those institutions are largely free to design their admissions process, yet I haven’t really heard of any innovation going on in that space. For example, Stanford could use their admissions data, correlated with college grades and starting salary, to figure out what is the cut-off for “good enough” and allocate 20% of the slots to a random lottery of good-enoughs. It’s akin to temperature in tuning a model
I don't think that's true. I've been getting so many interviews lately. You just need to apply early or read the job description, they sometimes include some sort of alternate way of applying (to avoid the bots). A lot of companies are now asking for personal projects, etc. So you need to have that.
Yes, like on LinkedIn there is "Easy Apply" and lots of companies either ask (in the job description) to DM them or to apply by email, and this interesting because LinkedIn still shows hundreds of people applied through "Easy Apply"
> Take the legend of Lake Lagunita Island. In the early 1990s, the Kappa Alpha fraternity decided to embark on an audacious plan. One fraternity brother rented a commercial bulldozer, another cleared sand from around the house, and a third charmed Stanford’s head groundskeeper to sneak the equipment across university land to reach the lake. A Cabo-themed island was constructed in the middle of the lake overnight. They later rigged a zipline from their roof to the sandbar.
This hits close for me. I have immense respect for the students who pulled this off. 2 years ago, a much (much) smaller stunt got me nearly fired at $FAANG, and all I could think was "where has the culture gone?"
You mean those people in the 90s? Sacramento, mostly. Lake Shasta goes hard.
I get the impression this is not at all confined to Stanford and is really just everywhere in the country at the moment. Not sure the word 'coward' is right though. Feels more like... people are far more interested in being 'normal' than ever before. Maybe a side effect of there being so much economic opportunity in regular jobs and career trajectories that nobody considers riskier paths?
I honestly think it’s the opposite cause. The odds of success have gotten way narrower than they used to be. When kids at Stamford are afraid of failure that says to me that failure is way more likely for everyone. People are taking safe options because the unsafe ones can lead to bottomless pits that even Stanford grads are concerned they cannot climb out of.
This is a very strange article. The lament about how Stanford students "said things that made people mad and didn’t immediately apologize", but the example linked is a newspaper story about students screaming homophobic slurs at people and telling them they hope they die of AIDS. This is the supposed "courage" Stanford students used to have?
Even weirder that the author complains about people being mean to a Federalist Society judge right next to that. This whole thing reads like an incoherent rant.
Both YC and Stanford have had their admissions process cracked for some time by resume maximalists. Those institutions are largely free to design their admissions process, yet I haven’t really heard of any innovation going on in that space. For example, Stanford could use their admissions data, correlated with college grades and starting salary, to figure out what is the cut-off for “good enough” and allocate 20% of the slots to a random lottery of good-enoughs. It’s akin to temperature in tuning a model
Of course there is no innovation. This is the case for all of higher education where old farts are in charge.
Ironical that this article was flagged.
Is that the Peter Thiel dinstancing himself from the homophobic student the author calls brave (referring to the newspaper article scan).
Imagine being such an asshole that even Peter Thiel condemns you...
Oh and it also makes it very obvious that the author and I apparently don't share an understanding of what brave and daring is...
YC acceptance rate is 1%? Sure beats the job market right now!
Skill issue
I don't think that's true. I've been getting so many interviews lately. You just need to apply early or read the job description, they sometimes include some sort of alternate way of applying (to avoid the bots). A lot of companies are now asking for personal projects, etc. So you need to have that.
> they sometimes include some sort of alternate way of applying (to avoid the bots)
This looks interesting, could you please elaborate? Do you mean like on social networks?
Yes, like on LinkedIn there is "Easy Apply" and lots of companies either ask (in the job description) to DM them or to apply by email, and this interesting because LinkedIn still shows hundreds of people applied through "Easy Apply"