More than half the Thiel Fellows plan on returning to school(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
More than half the Thiel Fellows plan on returning to school
http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/08/more-than-half-the-thiel-fellows-plan-on-returning-to-school/
93 comments
You're right, but I still think Thiel is on to something. At first I agreed that it was about a 'you don't need college' message, which I thought was a sort of a bad idea for the same reasons as you.
But after hearing him speak at length about his ideas in person my impression is that he feels college as it currently exists is not serving people that well, and he's frustrated by the lack of viable alternatives as much as anything else, so he's attempting to establish alternative career paths by subsidizing people who are willing to blaze new trails. Likewise I realized that his economically libertarian views are not so much a position of 'don't regulate' as a wish for a flatter and more responsive regulatory system.
College is still a good financial proposition in terms of having a net positive effect on lifetime earnings, but it has become commoditized in some very unhealthy ways that don't serve the public or students well. I thought MOOCs might be an answer to this but they;re not quite there yet, raw knowledge acquisition is only part of the equation.
But after hearing him speak at length about his ideas in person my impression is that he feels college as it currently exists is not serving people that well, and he's frustrated by the lack of viable alternatives as much as anything else, so he's attempting to establish alternative career paths by subsidizing people who are willing to blaze new trails. Likewise I realized that his economically libertarian views are not so much a position of 'don't regulate' as a wish for a flatter and more responsive regulatory system.
College is still a good financial proposition in terms of having a net positive effect on lifetime earnings, but it has become commoditized in some very unhealthy ways that don't serve the public or students well. I thought MOOCs might be an answer to this but they;re not quite there yet, raw knowledge acquisition is only part of the equation.
Sure, there are problems with higher ed. Esp w.r.t. cost.
Popularizing a myth that skipping out on college is a rational self-interested choice for most actors is ethically dubious, especially when the people you're convincing are kids (who you aren't simultaneously handing 100k to). I think it's fair to say that the effect of rhetoric counts as much as intent.
Any deeper argument about the structure of US higher education is really beside the point.
edit: removed some thoughts about the matter that's beside the point.
Popularizing a myth that skipping out on college is a rational self-interested choice for most actors is ethically dubious, especially when the people you're convincing are kids (who you aren't simultaneously handing 100k to). I think it's fair to say that the effect of rhetoric counts as much as intent.
Any deeper argument about the structure of US higher education is really beside the point.
edit: removed some thoughts about the matter that's beside the point.
[deleted]
Seems like the criteria use to select Thiel Fellows is the same criteria used by top schools. Probably the reason why many return to school, because they have that option available to them.
A better experiment would be something similar to the movie "Trading Places" where they pluck disadvantaged youths from the ghetto, trailer park, or whatever. Send them through a mentorship program or real internship and see if they can become productive citizens. I believe Xavier Neal is on the right track with his School 42.
A better experiment would be something similar to the movie "Trading Places" where they pluck disadvantaged youths from the ghetto, trailer park, or whatever. Send them through a mentorship program or real internship and see if they can become productive citizens. I believe Xavier Neal is on the right track with his School 42.
You picked an extremely loaded way to express something that's presumably meant to be uplifting.
I think it's only loaded if you want it to be. People from economically depressed areas are... economically depressed. People from ghettoes and trailer parks are typically underprivileged and tend not to do economically as well as others. If doing economically well were not important or a measure of success, well, we would not be worrying about economic success...
I believe it's a matter of tact, not a matter of fact
"pluck disadvantaged youths from the ghetto, trailer park, or whatever" ... "see if they can become productive citizens"
Wow, just wow.
Wow, just wow.
"However, the fact that 1/2 of recipients of a very prestigious award (and the associated money/opportunity) decided it was in their best interest to return to university is important."
Where did you get that from? The quotations and paraphrases from the article don't indicate any real decision to me. Just people (wisely) keeping their options open.
Where did you get that from? The quotations and paraphrases from the article don't indicate any real decision to me. Just people (wisely) keeping their options open.
I don't understand. What's wrong with my original sentence?
About 1/2 are returning to college: (However, the fact that 1/2 of recipients of a very prestigious award (and the associated money/opportunity)).
No one is forcing them: (decided)
Presumably they made the choice by deciding it would benefit them to do so (because it keeps their options open, maybe, and maybe other reasons as well): (it was in their best interest to return to university).
I don't see the flaw is reasoning here. Help?
About 1/2 are returning to college: (However, the fact that 1/2 of recipients of a very prestigious award (and the associated money/opportunity)).
No one is forcing them: (decided)
Presumably they made the choice by deciding it would benefit them to do so (because it keeps their options open, maybe, and maybe other reasons as well): (it was in their best interest to return to university).
I don't see the flaw is reasoning here. Help?
From the article:
"...said at one point or another in our conversation that they’d consider going back to college after they are done..."
"On top of that, some of the kids I spoke to from the previous year also said they would go back or at least might consider it at the end of their two years"
Those are the author paraphrasing the students. They don't back up the claim that half are returning to college, or that they even plan to -- the students are just keeping their options open.
If I missed a more clear quotation supporting the claim, let me know.
The author says "half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date", but that seems to be based entirely on his interpretation. It seems clear the author is not in favor of Thiel's program, so I am not taking his interpretation for granted.
"...said at one point or another in our conversation that they’d consider going back to college after they are done..."
"On top of that, some of the kids I spoke to from the previous year also said they would go back or at least might consider it at the end of their two years"
Those are the author paraphrasing the students. They don't back up the claim that half are returning to college, or that they even plan to -- the students are just keeping their options open.
If I missed a more clear quotation supporting the claim, let me know.
The author says "half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date", but that seems to be based entirely on his interpretation. It seems clear the author is not in favor of Thiel's program, so I am not taking his interpretation for granted.
Thanks for clarifying.
If 1/2 are planning to go back at a later date, that means they've decided attending college is in their best interest. Which was my claim; I didn't say they are currently attending.
I guess it ultimately boils down to whether you trust the author's reporting; I typically assume everyone takes the article's contents as granted unless they've explicitly stated otherwise.
But in any case, "keep your options open" is not exactly the message touted by the Thiel et al PR campaign surrounding the fellowship program.
If 1/2 are planning to go back at a later date, that means they've decided attending college is in their best interest. Which was my claim; I didn't say they are currently attending.
I guess it ultimately boils down to whether you trust the author's reporting; I typically assume everyone takes the article's contents as granted unless they've explicitly stated otherwise.
But in any case, "keep your options open" is not exactly the message touted by the Thiel et al PR campaign surrounding the fellowship program.
"If 1/2 are planning to go back at a later date,"
I still see no evidence of this. The statements provided do not indicate a plan to return.
"But in any case, "keep your options open" is not exactly the message touted by the Thiel et al PR campaign surrounding the fellowship program."
Fair enough.
I still see no evidence of this. The statements provided do not indicate a plan to return.
"But in any case, "keep your options open" is not exactly the message touted by the Thiel et al PR campaign surrounding the fellowship program."
Fair enough.
If you got into Harvard for a full ride and don't yet have a company with significant traction and upside (see Microsoft or Facebook, the early years), you'd be silly to not accept the offer and go to school.
I don't consider the CTO a scum for making a ridiculous offer, but I would consider the student an idiot if he accepted. An 18 year old Harvard kid should be smart enough to not make major errors like this.
When Bill Gates and Zuckerberg left Harvard, it was already clear that their companies would be successful. At that point their opportunity cost of staying in school was massive. Most of us will never have this high quality problem however, so don't follow in their footsteps if you're not in a comparable situation.
I don't consider the CTO a scum for making a ridiculous offer, but I would consider the student an idiot if he accepted. An 18 year old Harvard kid should be smart enough to not make major errors like this.
When Bill Gates and Zuckerberg left Harvard, it was already clear that their companies would be successful. At that point their opportunity cost of staying in school was massive. Most of us will never have this high quality problem however, so don't follow in their footsteps if you're not in a comparable situation.
> An 18 year old Harvard kid should be smart enough to not make major errors like this.
High academic performance doesn't necessarily indicate good judgement or emotional well-being.
Five to ten years later, that same kid will probably look back at his 18-year-old self and reflect on how he has matured since, just like most people do.
High academic performance doesn't necessarily indicate good judgement or emotional well-being.
Five to ten years later, that same kid will probably look back at his 18-year-old self and reflect on how he has matured since, just like most people do.
> I don't consider the CTO a scum for making a ridiculous offer
It's the pressure that bothered me.
The offer is also kind-of scummy even without pressure, though. High school kids are still kids, even the really smart ones. Role models matter a lot. Also, and this is pure conjecture, I imagine it's harder to walk away from the cash when you're coming out a low-income background, even if it's the completely rational self-interested thing to do.
It's the pressure that bothered me.
The offer is also kind-of scummy even without pressure, though. High school kids are still kids, even the really smart ones. Role models matter a lot. Also, and this is pure conjecture, I imagine it's harder to walk away from the cash when you're coming out a low-income background, even if it's the completely rational self-interested thing to do.
Bill Gates and Zuckerberg didn't leave Harvard permanently though. They took a leave of absence which means they'd the option to come back if things went south. Also both (and Gates especially) were from quite well off families.
> 8 of the 20 kids I spoke to ... said at one point or another ... they’d consider going back to college ... Even the ones who said they would definitely not go back ... said they might also go back.
So far so good...
> 6 of the Thiel Fellows have gone back to college so far [out of 80]
So far so reasonable...
> half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date.
What the... I don't even... My god... facepalm
From your comment (emphasis mine):
> the fact that 1/2 of recipients
Fact? Not even.
So far so good...
> 6 of the Thiel Fellows have gone back to college so far [out of 80]
So far so reasonable...
> half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date.
What the... I don't even... My god... facepalm
From your comment (emphasis mine):
> the fact that 1/2 of recipients
Fact? Not even.
that 1/2 of recipients.... decided it was in their best interest to return to university.
This is consistent with the author's statement that "half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date". Just because you're not currently in college doesn't mean they've not decided returning is in their best interest.
I just assumed the author of the article was reporting facts. there's no way to no either way, so I'm not sure there's much value in speculating.
This is consistent with the author's statement that "half of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date". Just because you're not currently in college doesn't mean they've not decided returning is in their best interest.
I just assumed the author of the article was reporting facts. there's no way to no either way, so I'm not sure there's much value in speculating.
The author was not reporting facts. The article is one giant editorial. People tend to forget that TechCrunch is a blog (that evolved into a pseudo-news site).
There is value in speculating, because I've been proven correct. The author has retracted her previous statement. If you look at the article again, you'll notice that the article has been changed to remove the specific assertion that more than half are thinking about going back to college:
It now says:
>And yet, here these kids are dropping out... at least for two years, with a good lot of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date..
There is value in speculating, because I've been proven correct. The author has retracted her previous statement. If you look at the article again, you'll notice that the article has been changed to remove the specific assertion that more than half are thinking about going back to college:
It now says:
>And yet, here these kids are dropping out... at least for two years, with a good lot of them admitting they plan to go back at a later date..
[deleted](1)
seems to me you misunderstand Thiel's thesis
might I suggest you re-read the MIT class startup notes..you might find some of your assumptions changing
might I suggest you re-read the MIT class startup notes..you might find some of your assumptions changing
> seems to me you misunderstand Thiel's thesis
Frankly, I don't give a damn.
What matters to me is that kids make decisions about their lives for the right reasons and with all the available information. And I like to think that Thiel, on an individual basis, wants the exact same thing. Which is why, I imagine at least, he's perfectly okay with these fellows returning to university.
But I think Thiel's (and other's) "don't need college" PR is unproductive in this respect. The nuance of the actual positions is irrelevant when that's not what is (very intentionally) communicated.
Frankly, I don't give a damn.
What matters to me is that kids make decisions about their lives for the right reasons and with all the available information. And I like to think that Thiel, on an individual basis, wants the exact same thing. Which is why, I imagine at least, he's perfectly okay with these fellows returning to university.
But I think Thiel's (and other's) "don't need college" PR is unproductive in this respect. The nuance of the actual positions is irrelevant when that's not what is (very intentionally) communicated.
As someone who was influenced by Peter Thiel to drop out of college and do a startup with my room mate, I can say it was a mistake in hindsight. Even though I was able to land on my feet (I'm now 25 and making 6 figures), I had to go through a lot of extra hurdles, stress, and doubt to prove my worth to the world and employers when starting out my career.
The odds were greatly against it working out favorably in my circumstances (I went to a tier 3 school, didn't get my startup funded, etc) and I had to possess serious hustle and grit to make it to where I am. I see people who simply studied hard, followed a plan, and graduated from an Ivy or similar college coasting by much easier - that's the path I would take if I could do it over again.
Because Peter Thiel was a big influence on my decision 4-5 years ago to drop out, I look back in hindsight on my experience and think he is wrong to advocate a path he didn't take. He went to Stanford, then got a JD, worked at a hedge fund (try getting that job as a college dropout), and then became a monstrous success at PayPal & Founders Fund after building credibility & success. To think he could have replicated his career path as a college dropout is incredulous. The odds are 10x more against you, and many more doors are closed than open (finance, grad school, etc).
If you want to be successful there is a very easy path if you're mature enough to work hard during high school: goto the best school you can, study a science, engineering, or finance major, and you will have >50% chance of becoming rich enough to live comfortably and retire if you continue to work hard and hustle after you graduate.
The odds were greatly against it working out favorably in my circumstances (I went to a tier 3 school, didn't get my startup funded, etc) and I had to possess serious hustle and grit to make it to where I am. I see people who simply studied hard, followed a plan, and graduated from an Ivy or similar college coasting by much easier - that's the path I would take if I could do it over again.
Because Peter Thiel was a big influence on my decision 4-5 years ago to drop out, I look back in hindsight on my experience and think he is wrong to advocate a path he didn't take. He went to Stanford, then got a JD, worked at a hedge fund (try getting that job as a college dropout), and then became a monstrous success at PayPal & Founders Fund after building credibility & success. To think he could have replicated his career path as a college dropout is incredulous. The odds are 10x more against you, and many more doors are closed than open (finance, grad school, etc).
If you want to be successful there is a very easy path if you're mature enough to work hard during high school: goto the best school you can, study a science, engineering, or finance major, and you will have >50% chance of becoming rich enough to live comfortably and retire if you continue to work hard and hustle after you graduate.
Are you sure that you wouldn't have had to face those hurdles even if you'd gone to college? I went to Amherst (#1 liberal arts college in the country when I matriculated). A number of my classmates are almost a decade older than you and would love to be making 6 figures.
I don't know a single Millenial who hasn't struggled with reality post-graduation. (Actually, that's not quite true, I know a couple Googlers who got in straight out of school. They're a minority, though.)
Personally, I think that the biggest advantage a person can have today is to consider rejection Somebody Else's Problem. The people who can get rejected over and over again and still bounce back to full energy immediately tend to succeed no matter where or whether they went to college and no matter what they try.
I don't know a single Millenial who hasn't struggled with reality post-graduation. (Actually, that's not quite true, I know a couple Googlers who got in straight out of school. They're a minority, though.)
Personally, I think that the biggest advantage a person can have today is to consider rejection Somebody Else's Problem. The people who can get rejected over and over again and still bounce back to full energy immediately tend to succeed no matter where or whether they went to college and no matter what they try.
I'm sure I still would have had plenty of hurdles even with a degree, and I don't mean to discount that starting a career is hard for anyone, but the matter at stake here is whether it's optimal for smart, young people to go to college or skip it/drop out.
My personal experience is full of rejection, stress, and closed doors (I still can't go to grad school to get a higher paying job such as an MBA or Law Degree in my 30's, and finishing my bachelors has a huge opportunity cost).
Compare that to liberal arts students at Ivy League colleges who a few years ago were getting handed $100 bills to attend a 1 hour on-campus recruitment session with the hedge fund Bridgewater. That path for capable people seems much better to me than what I had to go through.
If you're a smart, talented young person, I advocate studying hard and going to a top college rather than dropping out. You might just end up becoming a billionaire and paying people to skip college as part of a personal experiment :)
My personal experience is full of rejection, stress, and closed doors (I still can't go to grad school to get a higher paying job such as an MBA or Law Degree in my 30's, and finishing my bachelors has a huge opportunity cost).
Compare that to liberal arts students at Ivy League colleges who a few years ago were getting handed $100 bills to attend a 1 hour on-campus recruitment session with the hedge fund Bridgewater. That path for capable people seems much better to me than what I had to go through.
If you're a smart, talented young person, I advocate studying hard and going to a top college rather than dropping out. You might just end up becoming a billionaire and paying people to skip college as part of a personal experiment :)
I think that even the hedge fund stories have more to them than meets the eye for a casual observer. I have a classmate who works at Bridgewater, and has since graduation (well, graduation plus the six months of unemployment it took to find a job). He got there by e-mailing everybody in the Amherst alumni directory who worked in finance and asking if they'd give him a job, and an alum at Bridgewater was the only person who responded affirmatively. Now, he ultimately got the job through the alumni network, which is a tool that wouldn't be available to someone who didn't go to school - but his path was still full of rejection, stress, and closed doors.
I suspect that college does help skew peoples reactions toward you favorably, but that the ability to hustle ultimately matters more to your long-term success. Then the question is whether having that lifetime skew effect is worth the $100K+ and 4 years of opportunity cost. My personal feeling is that it probably is if a.) you get into an Ivy League or "brand name" college or b.) you come from a lower-class background and your parents don't have a network or much cultural capital. But for most middle-class kids going to a second-tier college, the opportunities it opens up are mediocre, and you are far better off putting the $100K+ and 4 years to work distinguishing yourself in some other way.
I suspect that college does help skew peoples reactions toward you favorably, but that the ability to hustle ultimately matters more to your long-term success. Then the question is whether having that lifetime skew effect is worth the $100K+ and 4 years of opportunity cost. My personal feeling is that it probably is if a.) you get into an Ivy League or "brand name" college or b.) you come from a lower-class background and your parents don't have a network or much cultural capital. But for most middle-class kids going to a second-tier college, the opportunities it opens up are mediocre, and you are far better off putting the $100K+ and 4 years to work distinguishing yourself in some other way.
> I went to Amherst (#1 liberal arts college in the country when I matriculated). A number of my classmates are almost a decade older than you and would love to be making 6 figures.
I bet a some of them are in or finishing up graduate school, pursuing a subject that they're interested in though. Plenty of smart and well-adjusted people I know from undergrad make less than me, but for some of them - tbh, I'd switch places with them in a heartbeat for personal, job security and job satisfaction reasons.
I used to laugh secretly at my liberal arts peeps at Wesleyan (a worse liberal arts college) when we just graduated 6 years ago. But now peeps are pushing out their films in film festival, post-doc research at conferences and published novel tours and still relatively poor; but I'm quite envious of people taking creative control of their destiny and shipping something, which IMHO more important than the dollar figure. But ironically, it took me making six figures the confidence of reaching a certain "threshold" and the disillusionment of that "threshold" to realize this.
> a couple Googlers who got in straight out of school. They're a minority
Yes. I bet most of them are graduates of top US engineering schools whom arguably have had a very sheltered experience (but probably still less sheltered than Amherst or Wes tho). They for sure got a head start compared to everyone else in "personal finance." But tbh, like you say, dealing with personal difficulties is actually a blessing in disguise and an important phase in your life to know to keep going and going esp. when the going is tough. In some ways, I think the jury is still out for your Googler youn'g vs. the battered Amherst post-grad's toughing it out. I'd give it another 25 years when everyone's in their 40's, 50's to make the judgement.
I bet a some of them are in or finishing up graduate school, pursuing a subject that they're interested in though. Plenty of smart and well-adjusted people I know from undergrad make less than me, but for some of them - tbh, I'd switch places with them in a heartbeat for personal, job security and job satisfaction reasons.
I used to laugh secretly at my liberal arts peeps at Wesleyan (a worse liberal arts college) when we just graduated 6 years ago. But now peeps are pushing out their films in film festival, post-doc research at conferences and published novel tours and still relatively poor; but I'm quite envious of people taking creative control of their destiny and shipping something, which IMHO more important than the dollar figure. But ironically, it took me making six figures the confidence of reaching a certain "threshold" and the disillusionment of that "threshold" to realize this.
> a couple Googlers who got in straight out of school. They're a minority
Yes. I bet most of them are graduates of top US engineering schools whom arguably have had a very sheltered experience (but probably still less sheltered than Amherst or Wes tho). They for sure got a head start compared to everyone else in "personal finance." But tbh, like you say, dealing with personal difficulties is actually a blessing in disguise and an important phase in your life to know to keep going and going esp. when the going is tough. In some ways, I think the jury is still out for your Googler youn'g vs. the battered Amherst post-grad's toughing it out. I'd give it another 25 years when everyone's in their 40's, 50's to make the judgement.
> liberal arts...would love to be making 6 figures
It should be pretty obvious that your classmates' experiences aren't at all representative of what engineering/finance majors go through.
It should be pretty obvious that your classmates' experiences aren't at all representative of what engineering/finance majors go through.
First year Thiel Fellow here. Just wanted to add that the Thiel Foundation(who oversee the program) isn't necessarily against going back to school and never have been.
They've been very open that for some projects, academia is a good place to be.
They've been very open that for some projects, academia is a good place to be.
"Thiel Fellows are given a no-strings-attached grant of $100,000 to skip college" - thielfellowship.org
"The fellowship is intended for students under the age of 20 and offers them a total of $100,000 over two years as well as guidance and other resources to drop out of school" - Wikipedia
"Everybody believes that you need to go to college... the average plumber makes as much as the average doctor." - Peter Thiel in video interview: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/billionaire-offers-college-alter...
If the Thiel Fellowship isn't about convincing kids to drop out of college and not go back, someone should tell Peter Thiel and the person that runs the website. :-)
Glad to hear the fellowship is working out great for you, though! I'm not a big fan of college myself.
"The fellowship is intended for students under the age of 20 and offers them a total of $100,000 over two years as well as guidance and other resources to drop out of school" - Wikipedia
"Everybody believes that you need to go to college... the average plumber makes as much as the average doctor." - Peter Thiel in video interview: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/billionaire-offers-college-alter...
If the Thiel Fellowship isn't about convincing kids to drop out of college and not go back, someone should tell Peter Thiel and the person that runs the website. :-)
Glad to hear the fellowship is working out great for you, though! I'm not a big fan of college myself.
To be clear, you cannot be enrolled at a university and go through the Fellowship at the same time. My comment above referred to post-Fellowship.
Then why doesn't he give people fellowships to become apprentice plumbers?
Peter Thiel is lying. Plumbers make about 1/4 as much money as a doctor:
http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/plumber/salary http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/physician/salary
http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/plumber/salary http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/physician/salary
Haven't done the math myself, but if you factor in years of salary earned while the doctor in training would be at school/residency/fellowship and the salary on that page is for folks who have been at it for a while and either have a private practice with many clients or have been in academia for 10-15 years.
That's a misleading way of comparing them because the doctor has radically higher startup costs in both time and money.
Once that's factored in, the doctor still has higher lifetime earnings, but not nearly the 4x you're pointing at. More like 1.8x.
And it's not until about age 40 that the doctor breaks even relative to the plumber.
And the doctor can only pull all that off in the first place with access to about $500,000 in credit.
Once that's factored in, the doctor still has higher lifetime earnings, but not nearly the 4x you're pointing at. More like 1.8x.
And it's not until about age 40 that the doctor breaks even relative to the plumber.
And the doctor can only pull all that off in the first place with access to about $500,000 in credit.
What are your plans for the future? And if it doesn't work out, do you have anything else in mind? Just curious.
Does it get very stressful feeling like you have to live up to everybody's expectations?
Does it get very stressful feeling like you have to live up to everybody's expectations?
I'm working on http://usebloom.com for the foreseeable future with another Thiel Fellow.
I find I learn best by reading books and talking with smart people, both of which can be done outside an academic setting, so I've decided not to go to college.
I find I learn best by reading books and talking with smart people, both of which can be done outside an academic setting, so I've decided not to go to college.
While plausible, there is an aspect of a filter bubble / confirmation bias you are ignoring that comes with a formal degree. In particular, liberal arts degrees.
Being forced to look beyond one's bubble is extremely rewarding. Being forced to tackle trying tomes of knowledge that test the will may be the only chance one can have to learn on certain topics.
The whole “skip university” trope is a sad meme to push were it only for these reasons.
It is sadder still when one performs a reducto ad absurdun where the sole metric is formal education as monetary gain.
Where would our culture be without music, literature, philosophy, and art? Is there value in studying these worlds beyond monetary gain?
What sort of an elevated impact might the brilliant minds around HN offer with a diverse and eclectic formal education?
Being forced to look beyond one's bubble is extremely rewarding. Being forced to tackle trying tomes of knowledge that test the will may be the only chance one can have to learn on certain topics.
The whole “skip university” trope is a sad meme to push were it only for these reasons.
It is sadder still when one performs a reducto ad absurdun where the sole metric is formal education as monetary gain.
Where would our culture be without music, literature, philosophy, and art? Is there value in studying these worlds beyond monetary gain?
What sort of an elevated impact might the brilliant minds around HN offer with a diverse and eclectic formal education?
I believe the "skip university" trope is sad. I also believe "everyone has to go to college" is sad. There is a huge disparity between universities -- I went to an average state university, and in most aspects I firmly believe it was more damaging to my being than helpful (it has been over 5 years since I graduated and I am still realizing and overcoming personal problems that I believe were partly inculcated in me from college and K-12).
My sisters went to decent liberal arts universities and, through observation, believe theirs to much more worthwhile. Of course each person is different, so others may not have had as worthless of an experience as I did.
Point being that (although I can't back this up) I'm pretty sure no university is better than 50%+ of universities out there, and so the endless expectation bias is often harmful.
My sisters went to decent liberal arts universities and, through observation, believe theirs to much more worthwhile. Of course each person is different, so others may not have had as worthless of an experience as I did.
Point being that (although I can't back this up) I'm pretty sure no university is better than 50%+ of universities out there, and so the endless expectation bias is often harmful.
Since all my other comments are quite negative, I'll take a moment to defend the OP here.
Notice their justification begins with "I find I learn best...". Sounds like perhaps the best way to justify a decision about one's education.
As for breadth, it's true. College makes accumulating these experiences very easily. Luckily, there are lots of smart people out there for anyone who might want to broaden their horizons while not attending college. In fact, part of the point of college is realizing this is true and figuring out how to benefit from these opportunities.
Notice their justification begins with "I find I learn best...". Sounds like perhaps the best way to justify a decision about one's education.
As for breadth, it's true. College makes accumulating these experiences very easily. Luckily, there are lots of smart people out there for anyone who might want to broaden their horizons while not attending college. In fact, part of the point of college is realizing this is true and figuring out how to benefit from these opportunities.
>I find I learn best by reading books and talking with smart people
How do you know how you "learn best" as a 16-19 year old who has never even been to college?
How do you know how you "learn best" as a 16-19 year old who has never even been to college?
> How do you know how you "learn best" as a 16-19 year old who has never even been to college?
I think I understood how I learn best by the time I was in middle school or so. Hasn't changed much since then.
I think I understood how I learn best by the time I was in middle school or so. Hasn't changed much since then.
I can very honestly say I never learned how to learn in college. I was finally forced to learn as soon as I finished and entered the "real world".
That's precisely my point. You tried it, it wasn't for you. It isn't for everyone. But trying it out is important.
I mean, the OP said he learns best being surrounded by books and smart people; that's college in a nutshell. You're unlikely to ever find a better library.
I mean, the OP said he learns best being surrounded by books and smart people; that's college in a nutshell. You're unlikely to ever find a better library.
Perhaps they've spent most of their life studying and learning and have taken mental note of what works best for them.
To be quite blunt, most of their life is not a very long time.
I, too, had a good idea of my learning style and aptitude going into college. It has not changed all that much since.
What did change was my ability to use that learning style to link together fields, knowledge, information, and people that appear extremely complex and disparate on their own.
The world needs specialists, for sure, and perhaps you can level up your knowledge in the field of your interest by using books and web research. That's valuable.
If you really want to be valuable, do what no one else seems to be able to do right now: put everything together. Everything. Not just different parts of your own field, but throw chemistry and poetry and literature in there. How about music? How does that affect your work? What about history and philosophy or shoot, most importantly, psychology? How will you not only create great products, but also know how they affect people, and exactly what ways other people will think about them? How will you discover what people really need if you don't understand them on a basic level?
What about theology and philosophy? If you just rejected the possibility of their importance to your work, then you're not the kind of person I want to work with. Rejection of knowledge is already failure.
College, above all, gives you breadth and the tools to deal with it. Use that and you'll be ten times more valuable than even the best specialist.
Can you get that elsewhere? Maybe. Does everyone need it? Probably not. But I've never seen anything that kicks you out of your own head more swiftly or effectively than a good university—and that alone makes you better in my book.
I, too, had a good idea of my learning style and aptitude going into college. It has not changed all that much since.
What did change was my ability to use that learning style to link together fields, knowledge, information, and people that appear extremely complex and disparate on their own.
The world needs specialists, for sure, and perhaps you can level up your knowledge in the field of your interest by using books and web research. That's valuable.
If you really want to be valuable, do what no one else seems to be able to do right now: put everything together. Everything. Not just different parts of your own field, but throw chemistry and poetry and literature in there. How about music? How does that affect your work? What about history and philosophy or shoot, most importantly, psychology? How will you not only create great products, but also know how they affect people, and exactly what ways other people will think about them? How will you discover what people really need if you don't understand them on a basic level?
What about theology and philosophy? If you just rejected the possibility of their importance to your work, then you're not the kind of person I want to work with. Rejection of knowledge is already failure.
College, above all, gives you breadth and the tools to deal with it. Use that and you'll be ten times more valuable than even the best specialist.
Can you get that elsewhere? Maybe. Does everyone need it? Probably not. But I've never seen anything that kicks you out of your own head more swiftly or effectively than a good university—and that alone makes you better in my book.
Interesting. I suspect this varies a lot person to person - I'm thinking about Meyers-Briggs and the S/N divide here. I knew how to throw everything together from a very early age. I wrote one of my physics exams in rhyming couplets of iambic pentameter (you try rhyming ∇ · B, I dare ya :-)). I was making hanging mobiles out of the periodic table elements at 12, and my dad taught me how to balance chemical equations and graph exponential decay curves at 7.
What I didn't know how to do was put my nose to the grindstone and rigorously study one subject in depth until I learned all the dusty corners. I was very good at impressing people with off-the-wall connections and intuitions that they would never have dreamed of, but I couldn't finish my homework or solve textbook problems. I did learn that in college (but in an unorthodox way - by nearly flunking out).
But I can't help but wonder if this is a maturity thing and it would've happened without college. I actually felt that the greatest improvement in my ability to persevere and get through the boring things that weren't immediately obvious happened in the 5 years after college, once I got into the working world.
What I didn't know how to do was put my nose to the grindstone and rigorously study one subject in depth until I learned all the dusty corners. I was very good at impressing people with off-the-wall connections and intuitions that they would never have dreamed of, but I couldn't finish my homework or solve textbook problems. I did learn that in college (but in an unorthodox way - by nearly flunking out).
But I can't help but wonder if this is a maturity thing and it would've happened without college. I actually felt that the greatest improvement in my ability to persevere and get through the boring things that weren't immediately obvious happened in the 5 years after college, once I got into the working world.
You're very much still in your own head. I have confidence you're going in a good direction, but I encourage you to work on your ego.
There wasn't anything egotistical about his comment. It was relevant and thoughtful. The topic just happened to include his personal experience.
>Perhaps they've spent most of their life studying
Most of their life studying? How much relevant experience do you think one obtains in years 0 to 16? Up to that point school is a complete and utter joke, especially if you're even modestly intelligent.
A 16-19 year old, no matter how intelligent, doesn't have much wisdom.
Most of their life studying? How much relevant experience do you think one obtains in years 0 to 16? Up to that point school is a complete and utter joke, especially if you're even modestly intelligent.
A 16-19 year old, no matter how intelligent, doesn't have much wisdom.
"A 16-19 year old, no matter how intelligent, doesn't have much wisdom."
I couldn't help but be reminded by the Good Will Hunting scene - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBjWHfBHKos
I couldn't help but be reminded by the Good Will Hunting scene - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBjWHfBHKos
Is this really surprising? Thiel Fellows are by in large precisely the type of individuals who most belong on a university campus. Many of them, by virtue of their interests in science, math and engineering, will find it difficult to advance those interests professionally outside of the university environment.
The young folks who really need the encouragement and permission to take a path that doesn't involve a four year university are those who aren't prepared intellectually or socially and those whose aptitudes and interests point to vocational training.
In my opinion the Thiel Fellowship program is a poor vehicle for questioning the necessity of a university education and calling attention to the higher education bubble. Unless the program starts serving future plumbers and electricians instead of future engineers and doctors, it has no business being promoted as such a vehicle.
The young folks who really need the encouragement and permission to take a path that doesn't involve a four year university are those who aren't prepared intellectually or socially and those whose aptitudes and interests point to vocational training.
In my opinion the Thiel Fellowship program is a poor vehicle for questioning the necessity of a university education and calling attention to the higher education bubble. Unless the program starts serving future plumbers and electricians instead of future engineers and doctors, it has no business being promoted as such a vehicle.
> Many of them, by virtue of their interests in science, math and engineering, will find it difficult to advance those interests professionally outside of the university environment.
Would more money solve that problem? If 100k is legitimately not enough to "advance professional interests", then what about 200k? 500k? 1M?
Also, consider the subset of them wanting to do a biotech startup, where everyone pitching must be a PhD (reality isn't this bad)--- $100k of pre-vet is probably not enough to make up for the lack of credentials to flash around to raise money to do the more costly biotech ventures.
Would more money solve that problem? If 100k is legitimately not enough to "advance professional interests", then what about 200k? 500k? 1M?
Also, consider the subset of them wanting to do a biotech startup, where everyone pitching must be a PhD (reality isn't this bad)--- $100k of pre-vet is probably not enough to make up for the lack of credentials to flash around to raise money to do the more costly biotech ventures.
Sadly, a strong argument could be made that the technology sector / startup scene is perhaps one of the most desperate cultures in need of formal liberal arts knowledge.
Sexism, invisible privilege, and other forms of uneducated myopia stand as obvious examples. Interesting technological / sociological solutions to hidden issues possibly another.
Sexism, invisible privilege, and other forms of uneducated myopia stand as obvious examples. Interesting technological / sociological solutions to hidden issues possibly another.
You can add total historical ignorance, even for matters related to the product they are building. Reinventing the wheel over and over again.
Spoiler: The students interviewed are a month into their fellowship. Reporting on decisions that fellows from a couple years back actually made would be more enlightening.
Another spoiler: Only 6 of this year's 20 fellows were mentioned in the article. The fellows are a very diverse group of people.
I felt the same way about the series Wired did/is doing on the Thiel Fellowship. I wish they'd cover more of the fellows rather than focusing on the few that they do.
I am one of the guys that lives in the house mentioned in the article. One of the problems with press like this is that it tends to focus on the philosophy behind the fellowship instead of the program itself. It's consistently what reporters find most interesting.
Exactly. The title of the article feels like a link bait. It's only been two months!
It's also full of shit. I know many of the new fellows and they're saying that they were misquoted in the article and some of them said that they're not planning on going back, despite Techcrunch writing otherwise.
And the point is?
Did anyone else go to college with that person that seemed a little older, seemed to know how to better apply what they were learning, and asked the questions that suggested they had an advanced understanding?
I did. These were guys/gals who got jobs right out of high school and were now getting their degrees. And they spanked the typical undergrads.
So, is article this telling me that this is the worst case from the Thiel Fellows? OK. Great. Next.
Did anyone else go to college with that person that seemed a little older, seemed to know how to better apply what they were learning, and asked the questions that suggested they had an advanced understanding?
I did. These were guys/gals who got jobs right out of high school and were now getting their degrees. And they spanked the typical undergrads.
So, is article this telling me that this is the worst case from the Thiel Fellows? OK. Great. Next.
Couldn't agree more, I'm thinking about going back for my degree, but mostly for how easy it makes it to cross borders.
[quote]He views the Fellows program as a two year education of sorts. “If and when I return to college I can have a new perspective.”[/quote]
I think this is the important bit.
You get the experience of doing something uncommon, the benefit of being with like-minded individuals pursuing their own ideas and dreams... with the benefit of going back to school if you wish, a couple of years older if you want, but with much more real-world experience (to a degree) than those same 2 years spent only at college.
I think the real difference will be made by those that go back to school actually. Not by virtue of spending those 2 years at the Mission house, but by virtue of going back to school, learning whatever skills are necessary to then go produce something taking advantage of both worlds.
I think this is the important bit.
You get the experience of doing something uncommon, the benefit of being with like-minded individuals pursuing their own ideas and dreams... with the benefit of going back to school if you wish, a couple of years older if you want, but with much more real-world experience (to a degree) than those same 2 years spent only at college.
I think the real difference will be made by those that go back to school actually. Not by virtue of spending those 2 years at the Mission house, but by virtue of going back to school, learning whatever skills are necessary to then go produce something taking advantage of both worlds.
The Thiel Fellowship still needs a success story. It is in its early stages. All it will take is a single fellow that accomplishes something revolutionary and cool to completely change public perception of this program.
> The Thiel Fellowship still needs a success story. It is in its early stages. All it will take is a single fellow that accomplishes something revolutionary and cool to completely change public perception of this program.
Perhaps that will change the public perception, but it says absolutely nothing about the actual value of the program. It's a selective group of high-achieving teens, of course some small subset will go on to experience amazing success.
Harvard could lay off its entire faculty and sell its campus, but as long as admissions stayed the same Harvard acceptees would continue to accomplish amazing things.
Perhaps that will change the public perception, but it says absolutely nothing about the actual value of the program. It's a selective group of high-achieving teens, of course some small subset will go on to experience amazing success.
Harvard could lay off its entire faculty and sell its campus, but as long as admissions stayed the same Harvard acceptees would continue to accomplish amazing things.
I agree that a major success story would chance public perception of the Fellowship, but I want to add that many of the Fellows who have had success have decided not to publicize it.
I thought the relevant success metric would be whether the median student does better, in order for it to be a case against going to college.
Thiel is accountable to nobody for the results of this program. It's more of an experiment. It becomes a more powerful tool for the members if the media likes the program, and a single shining success is what the media requires.
It's not an experiment, it's a bizarre political propaganda effort in service of some chip Thiel has on his shoulder.
If anything, a big success will make the problem worse by further fooling kids into thinking it's easy to become a big tech success.
Nothing to see here, these aren't the droids you're looking for..
Seriously how does this prove the program is a failure? Because some people want to go to school and others want to do stuff right out of the gate.
This is link bait, pure and simple and it looks like it's working almost as well as declaring some random computer language dead or another one the winner.
Seriously how does this prove the program is a failure? Because some people want to go to school and others want to do stuff right out of the gate.
This is link bait, pure and simple and it looks like it's working almost as well as declaring some random computer language dead or another one the winner.
Very weird one-sided article containing no details of substance, like how the actual projects are going and what has been implemented.
It's important to keep in mind that it is quite likely that for most of the Thiel Fellows, there is not much "cost" associated with college. Give the high-achieving student, immigrant family skew of the fellows, it's quite likely that most of the fellows would get scholarships or would have parents who would pay for college if they attend.
If each fellow had to pay $150-250k for college, I bet not a single Fellow would entertain the idea of going to college.
Personally, I took a gap year before college but eventually decided to return to college afterwards, knowing that I would be able to get a $100+k dev salary in the Bay Area if I chose to forgo college. Part of that decision was driven by the fact that my parents would pay for college (and then some).
On a broader note, taking just one year off gave me a ton of perspective on what I wanted to do in life, my priorities, and on the value of college. Everyone should take time off.
If each fellow had to pay $150-250k for college, I bet not a single Fellow would entertain the idea of going to college.
Personally, I took a gap year before college but eventually decided to return to college afterwards, knowing that I would be able to get a $100+k dev salary in the Bay Area if I chose to forgo college. Part of that decision was driven by the fact that my parents would pay for college (and then some).
On a broader note, taking just one year off gave me a ton of perspective on what I wanted to do in life, my priorities, and on the value of college. Everyone should take time off.
The students seem to be keeping their options open, but most of the statements don't sound like a "plan" to return to school.
The only hard numbers are that 40 completed the program, 40 are enrolled now, and 6 total went back to school. Doesn't sound like half to me, though of course it could work out that way eventually.
The only hard numbers are that 40 completed the program, 40 are enrolled now, and 6 total went back to school. Doesn't sound like half to me, though of course it could work out that way eventually.
Bottom line
Ask anyone what they plan on doing after X which is 2+ years down the road and you are likely to get a BS answer.
They have shown they are willing to a) make a plan and b) take a detour when an opportunity pops up.
They will follow opportunity until all that's left is the plan. They can't predict what they will do. Admitting they will return to school means nothing.
Personally, I'm guessing once they get on this path they will embark on one opportunity after another. Returning to school will likely never appear as an "opportunity" and they won't go back.
Though some of these teens have already had entrepreneurial experiences, they have yet to break the cycle of school.
Ask anyone what they plan on doing after X which is 2+ years down the road and you are likely to get a BS answer.
They have shown they are willing to a) make a plan and b) take a detour when an opportunity pops up.
They will follow opportunity until all that's left is the plan. They can't predict what they will do. Admitting they will return to school means nothing.
Personally, I'm guessing once they get on this path they will embark on one opportunity after another. Returning to school will likely never appear as an "opportunity" and they won't go back.
Though some of these teens have already had entrepreneurial experiences, they have yet to break the cycle of school.
The article actually says: "8 of the 20 kids I spoke to in this year’s program said at one point or another in our conversation that they’d consider going back to college after they are done."
Which TechCrunch turned into the headline: "Is The Thiel Fellowship Program Really Just A Sabbatical From College?"
Which the HN submission turned into: "More than half the Thiel Fellows plan on returning to school"
Which looks flagrantly untruthful to me, both because "would consider"!="plan on" and "8 of the 20"!="more than half". So, flagged. Could a moderator please edit this headline to be more honest?
Which TechCrunch turned into the headline: "Is The Thiel Fellowship Program Really Just A Sabbatical From College?"
Which the HN submission turned into: "More than half the Thiel Fellows plan on returning to school"
Which looks flagrantly untruthful to me, both because "would consider"!="plan on" and "8 of the 20"!="more than half". So, flagged. Could a moderator please edit this headline to be more honest?
Don't know much about Thiel Fellows program. But I think just dropping out of college flat out to start a startup may not be a good idea. Unless you have been associated with something like a hackerspace where you've collaborated on projects with other like-minded hackers.
I feel colleges are where it is a great likelihood to meet your potential co-founders, prospective employees, etc. To give more clarity, I don't think there is any question that Facebook's early success was due to all these Harvard grads/dropouts filling in the recruiting pipeline.
It will be interesting to see how those that return to college feel about that choice after they complete college. They'll have both experiences under their belt and be in the best position to see the relative value of each, at least in their atypical order.
Many instructors say more experienced students are more focused than those that enter college right away. That will factor in as well. There are no simple answers to this question, except that pushing everybody to do things one particular way is probably unjustified.
Many instructors say more experienced students are more focused than those that enter college right away. That will factor in as well. There are no simple answers to this question, except that pushing everybody to do things one particular way is probably unjustified.
I think almost everyone who can should go to college. But I also think that a lot of people go to college before they really have any significant life experiences to inform their academic decisions. Consequently, college for many is just deferred adulthood, instead of something that actually facilitates ones' career goals. I'm all for alternative experiences that might help focus young people, whether they be fellowships like this, service programs, apprenticeships, or otherwise.
"The acrid smell of fresh paint"
If the paint is smelling acrid, they should get out ;)
If the paint is smelling acrid, they should get out ;)
"Would consider returning to school after the program is not exactly same as "plan on returning to school". Why not write honest headlines?
Only half?
Exactly. 50% - compared to what? Weren't all these people accepted to prestigious colleges and ~100% likely to go to college? Or, was there some reason to think in advance that 50% shows the program is a failure while if 40% would vindicate it?
The more interesting question is, what are the 50% who don't want to go back doing now? Those are the ones whose circumstances would tell us something meaningful about how well the Thiel thing is working.
The more interesting question is, what are the 50% who don't want to go back doing now? Those are the ones whose circumstances would tell us something meaningful about how well the Thiel thing is working.
[deleted]
That message, should an average American (not a Thiel fellow) take it to heart, is demonstrably and empirically not in their self interest. Period.
Thiel Fellows are some of the brightest of the bright; of course not attending college won't hurt them in the long run. And accepting a prestigious fellowship will certainly help, at the very least in the short run. So the fellowship makes a lot of sense, and no one claims fellows were hurt just because they return to academia.
However, the fact that 1/2 of recipients of a very prestigious award (and the associated money/opportunity) decided it was in their best interest to return to university is important. It's important because it cast a pretty serious shadow on Thiel's view of college as unnecessary (or over-rated or not in most people's interest... however you want to hedge his claim.)
So while Thiel fellows aren't hurt per se, anyone else listening to the "don't go to college" advice can consider this a rude wake-up call.
So. That's why it matters.
BTW: recently talked with a HS student who got into Harvard (low income, so full ride), but some startup guy was pressuring him to not go to college and instead take a dev job paying $40k. I consider these sort of people scum. I don't know if they are assuaging their insecurities or what, but I don't know how you can look a youth in the eye and tell them to get a day job making web apps (for someone else) instead of going to Harvard for free for four years. Especially when the free tuition alone costs more than the offered salary. Scum.