How to pro-actively address our internet problems

That is the topic of my latest Bloomberg column, here is one excerpt:

It is striking and sad that there is so much over-the-top criticism of social media yet so little faith in education as a possible remedy.

Public school is supposed to be good and effective, right?  The internet is supposed to be destroying our world, or at least democracy and sanity, right?  So why not teach people — in school — how to use the internet better?

As it stands, plenty of teachers give informal advice about how to use the internet, but there isn’t much in the way of formal institutions or curriculums. I am not saying this needs to be a full, semester-long class. But surely internet usage and understanding is worthy of a formal dedication of at least a few weeks of attention, maybe more.

Somehow America has moved very, very far away from a problem-solving mindset.

Addendum: As a side note:

Twitter search is one of the most underrated parts of the internet. If I am looking to learn more about a current event, I typically go to Twitter before Google and type in the relevant search term. The results seem more up-to-date, and I will probably be exposed to a wider range of opinions.


If education is signaling, teaching is not a solution. For lerning something, the first place I look is the comments section of MR. First!

But then MR becomes education!

All that money spent on MRU, wasted.

Vietnam had ended, the Space Shuttle Columbia had launched in April; in Cal Ripken Jr.’s first game on August tenth of nineteen eighty-one, he scored as a pinch runner from second base on a John Lowenstein liner down the right-field line in the twelfth inning. Forty seven days later, Nolan Ryan pitched his fifth no hitter, breaking Sandy Koufax’s record, against the Los Angeles Dodgers. Three days after our final on the twelfth of December Muhammed Ali retired from boxing. Three years later, in nineteen eighty-four, the Raiders beat the Redskins. The great wave had crashed and a new wave was cresting.

Yeah, my first thought too. Public school is awful and the internet is awful. Perhaps two negatives could cancel out, students might get bored during their internet class and read a book, but I’m not holding my breath.

Regarding current events, Instagram search + hashtags is underrated.

Public school is part of the insanity. Maybe even worse than the internet as a whole.

Actually, at university level, the big public colleges may be better than the private. See Oberlin as a recent example. Parents sending their kids there should be ashamed.

The only advantage of public universities is that they are legally bound (in theory) to follow the 1A, but that did nothing to stop, say, the University of Missouri from capitulating to the race hustlers.

Young people know how to navigate online and spot misinformation much better than older people do. Indeed, seniors are most likely to share fake news stories on social media:

Schooling won't hurt. But I don't think it will have much impact in the short term.

It seems like the lag time from a new technology causing a social problem until public school curricula can be changed and future generations educated about it is too long to be a very good solution to the problem.

What we want from schools is rapid fashionable solutions to the problems du jour.

+1. This was my immediate thought. Younger people seem to navigate it better, and I suspect they understand the internet better than their teachers.

Right - I can imagine a bunch of middle schoolers listening to their teacher as they try to explain how to use the internet........I would think it would be pretty funny.

Translation: Young people are well-indoctrinated by the Establishment and only visit "approved" websites.

Cowen's Addendum proves the fallacy of social media: what's most current is likely the most ill-informed. Being the most up to date likely means being the most ill-informed because once information enters the brain, removing it is harder than removing a brain tumor. Sure, Cowen can distinguish nonsense from fact, but few can.

Right, wading through a stream of recent posts is fine if I already have enough knowledge to pick out the signals from the noise.

But if it's a topic that I know very little about, wikipedia will give me on average better balance plus a reasonably coherent story and background.

I agree that we should aim to try and educate people, but I also fear that it could be a losing battle. I'm reminded of a quote by Derek Sivers: “If more info were the answer, we’d all be billionaires with perfect abs.”

We've been educating people to eat well and exercise for decades, but there's still an epidemic of obesity and NCDs...

Twitter : great got FT Alphaville and Formula1. Not much else =)

Alexandra Petri (@petridishes) is funny.

Kashana (@kashanacauley) also, but it helps to be Trump critical.

Follow Howard Luks MD (@hjluks) for your health! Excellent knee rant:

That people is too much focused on politics for my taste, but that's me. Twitter is still great ;)

I still go to that I think you (or another anonymous) suggested. Always a good read.

'there is so much over-the-top criticism of social media '

Don't worry, B-B is watching.

'The internet is supposed to be destroying our world, or at least democracy and sanity, right?'

Who possibly believes this, or even repeats it with an apparently straight face?

'Somehow America has moved very, very far away from a problem-solving mindset.'

And to think some people were noticing that in the 80s. Must be really obvious by now.

And from the actual column - 'If you have some symptoms, type them into Google and see what comes up.' What is funny is that often what comes up is NHS information. This link was number eight for 'cold symptoms treatment' -

Even more amusing is how the NHS is not serving any ads or tracking you or otherwise participating in surveillance capitalism. Just another obvious outcropping of evil socialism.

Great fisking, bro!

"Even more amusing is how the NHS is not serving any ads or tracking you or otherwise participating in surveillance capitalism. Just another obvious outcropping of evil socialism."

Typical government bureaucratic sloth, incompetence, and stagnation can have unintended benefits. If only more government regulatory agencies likewise took the initiative to just sit there and do nothing.

Every time Cowen tries to defend social media, I end up even more down on social media -- are these really the best defenses?

'are these really the best defenses'

It is the throw the spaghetti on the wall approach.

Tyler, like all talking heads, is clearly addicted to thrill of being a media personality.

He will of course make attempts to justify his addiction, much like a smoker who proclaims how wonderful it is to meet fellow addicts while standing outside of the local pub in the middle of winter.

Why would anyone think public school is effective?

Did you not learn that in school? Lesson one is that school is effective and all other means are defective.

*How To Argue On The Internet*

The root problem is that there are different classes of ideas, some true or not, some internet defensible or not.

Class 1: Things that you suspect are true, but for which there is no unambiguous data or unassailable logic, especially online.

Class 2: Things you are confident are true, and are backed by a wealth of online documentation, supporting logic, and expert opinion.

Class 3: Things you suspect are not true, but are nonetheless widely supported online with lots of conflicting arguments and data.

Class 4: Ideas you suspect to be false and have no coherent support.

You *can* argue any of these classes, but to have an easier time, and for your own mental health, you should only really *forcefully* argue Class 2 beliefs.

I mean, you can raise Class 1 beliefs as "here's an idea," but don't kill yourself trying to prove them.

Partisans and trolls are drawn to Class 3 because they make waves, true or not. But those are hard ideas to sell. They are built on a bad foundation.

Class 4 should be right out, the provence of trolls and the handicapped.

Stick to Class 2 my friends, and you'll have much less painful feedback.

Conventional wisdom should never be challenged? OK then.

Look at the state of the world today... based on that, what are the odds that the majority has gotten everything right?

Experts can be trusted if it's rocket science or brain surgery. But the soft sciences, psychology, sociology, anthropology, politics, economics and so much else? Not trustworthy anymore. It's a sad state of affairs, but it's the world we live in.

Are you talking about what I call Class 1, or what I call Class 3? It makes a difference.

A Class 1 argument is going to be impossible to prove.

And if you try to forcefully argue something in Class 3 you just get a pissing match with someone on the other side.

Professional pundits also love Class 3, but they are paid for it, and need steady material.

Your arguments are all second class.

The thing you have to understand, and I'm helping here, is that I'm never going to be bothered if you don't come back with a strong Class 2 answer.

Anything else is just noise.

Maybe third class.

Kudos anonymous! I look forward to you taking a fresh approach.

Great, Putin's rat responds by biting at my ankles. Again.

You're mistaking Putin's rat for the domestic rats overrunning the sh*thole that is Los Angeles:

(MAGA 2020!)

The weather is great and we grow a lot of fruit around Los Angeles. Of course they love it here. That and invasive red squirrels, getting in the avocados.

There are a number of native rodent species too. I think it's a crafty woodrat that steals branches off the orange tree.

This is the 2nd or 3rd time you've done posts like this. Full of smug moral superiority. And generally speaking you have violated your own standards within a few weeks and then denied it when confronted.

For reference:

However, I'm hopeful that this time you'll actually stick to your own standards. And not just as an excuse to claim you have some type of moral high ground.

lol, that page really doesn't mean what you think it means. If it was even me!

See what I mean about (from your perspective) Class 1 arguments? You've got this idea in your head about what happened, but that's all you've got.

Try focussing on the real world and not imaginary beefs with imaginary people.

And that's exactly what makes you such a poor debater. When confronted with actual evidence you:

a) cast a vague rebuttal
"that page really doesn't mean what you think it means. If it was even me!"

Sure, there's no way to prove that was you. But it was clearly in the style you routinely post in and it used your exact handle. Nor, of course, did you deny at the time it was you.

b) then go for a personal attack and move the goal posts

"You've got this idea in your head about what happened, but that's all you've got. Try focussing on the real world and not imaginary beefs with imaginary people."

I predict at some point in the future you'll try exactly the same denial and attack behavior. You're the one trying to set a high moral standard and so the burden of maintaining the standard is clearly higher on you than any other poster.

Furthermore, during that previous debate, where you claim it wasn't you, a poster named anonymous made this comment:

"You can't learn without guidance, sorry.

This is always a good place to start:

Where do you think "you can't notice racial disharmony, or *you* are bad" really lies?"

I'll let the readers check the link, see that I'm accurately reporting the text and then decide for themselves if that sounds remarkably like the posts you've already made above.

Why on Earth would you let what an "anonymous" poster said, back in March, occupy so much of your head? Get over it already.

(FWIW I think the dude at the top of the page, talking about high quality protein, had his head on straight.

And the guy at the bottom was right that the South African government did block education for blacks.)

that's the whole point. why did you ask the question, well, the hillbilly wisdom, says you wanted an answer. To go inside, psychologically speaking, you'd have to paint with blood. You'd have to put your money where your mouth is. So, FBAR, SAR, A currency transaction report (CTR)...There are heavy penalties for individuals and financial institutions that fail to file CTRs, MILs, or SARs....Structuring, as your laundry list of grocery items, is a way to find indiscernible patterns....“My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."
see don Quixote:
I have money, which is what matters, that I earned by my own labor, and with no harm to anybody.”…..and he told them that the most important part of the business had already been "taken care of", because he had given them names that would fit like a glove

The is the power of twitter. If you want immediate news on fast moving stories, that is your best bet. Now, because its so fast, it can get early reporting wrong but there is a balance there. Also, I like to use SnapChats map feature for Breaking News. Its great for Hurricanes, get local video as its unfolding. Highly recommend.

Education, or more truthfully, schooling is how the populace is broken. Now schooling is suppose to correct the damage they've done? The one thing the education system will not teach students is how to do their job, i.e., study. How to discipline their intellect and regulate their heart to break down a work and reveal its secrets. In place of the student learning how to self-study, they are hand-fed by the teacher, which inculcates passivity and dependence upon the opinions and thoughts of others. Student lose initiative and drive to seek their own opinion before accepting that of others. The Internet just speeds it all up so there is no time to even doubt whether it might be true, biased or emotional. Years of school indoctrination teaches blind acceptance. Worse in these days when there is no objective true, bias is simply cultural and emotion shows passion.

"How docile young people are, after all, in intellectual matters! They lack the courage to resent neglect in class, to acknowledge that they do not understand, and to ask questions; they lose their pression. initiative and even independent power to think, when in the presence of teachers; and they ignore their own experience in favor of print. They are so bent on satisfying others that they suppress their own inner promptings. In doing this they seem to confuse moral with intellectual qualities, acting as though the sacrifice of self in study was equally virtuous with its sacrifice in a moral way. Yet listen to Emerson's warning: —

"Books" (and he might have said teachers) "are the best of things well used; abused, among the worst. What is the right use? They are for nothing but to inspire. I had better never see a book than to be warped by its attraction clean out of my own orbit, and made a satellite instead of a system. The one' thing in the world, of value, is the active soul. This every man is entitled to; this every man contains within him, although in almost all men obstructed, and as yet unborn. . . . Undoubtedly there is a right way of reading, so it be sternly subordinated. Man Thinking must not be subdued by his instruments." 1

"The evil in a young student's being "subdued by his Instruments" is that he is made artificial and dependent, and thereby ceases to be a whole unit. The artificiality is often shown in the voice. Many schools, owing to the restraint that their pupils are allowed to feel, are guilty of establishing a special recitation voice, distinguished from that ordinarily used in conversation by its different pitch, and often amusingly distinguished, too, when some interruption during recitation causes a question about outside or home matters to be answered in the natural way. Many educated adults have suffered so much in this respect that they cannot read in natural tones.

"The dependence, further, is shown in any attempt to produce thought. When a student has formed the habit of collecting and valuing the ideas of others, rather than his own, the self becomes dwarfed from neglect and buried under the mass of borrowed thought. He may then pass good examinations, but he cannot think. Distrust of self has become so deep-rooted that he instinctively looks away from himself to books and friends for ideas; and anything that he produces cannot be good, because it is not a true expression of self. This is the class of people that Mill describes in the words, "They like in crowds; they exercise choice only among things commonly done; peculiarity of taste, eccentricity of conduct, are shunned equally with crimes; until, by dint of not following their own nature, they have no nature to follow; their human capacities are withered and starved; they become incapable of any strong wishes or native pleasures, and are generally without either opinions or feelings of home growth, or properly their own." 1 Such people cannot perform the hard tasks required in study, because they have lost their native power to react on the ideas presented.

"The evil is most serious with young children because of their youth. Many of them, while making good progress in the three R's, outgrow their tendency to ask questions and to raise objections, in other words lose their mental boldness or originality, by the time they have attended school four years. But all along, from the kindergarten to the college, there is almost a likelihood that the self will be undermined while acquiring knowledge, and that, in consequence, one will become permanently weakened while supposedly being educated. In this respect it is dangerous to attend a school of any grade."

--How to Study and Teaching How to Study (1909) by F. M. McMurry, Professor of Elementary Education, Teachers College, Columbia University

Promote literacy and numeracy, diversity and multi-culturalism: abolish public education.

Good Twitter rule of thumb: promote good tweets from those with low follower counts and highlight bad tweets from those with high follower counts.

Most people seem to do the opposite: love for banal high follower tweets and condemnation for low-follower bad takes.

"Somehow America has moved very, very far away from a problem-solving mindset."

Tangentially related but yes we have. Government often seems to avoid actually solving a problem if there is any kind of partisan advantage.

The latest example: a reporter being physically assaulted in the middle of the day by masked thugs just for trying to cover a protest.

At this point the Portland police just stand aside and let the masked criminals threaten anyone who disagrees with them.

The quintessential Class 3 argument. People, evidence, outrage on both sides. And the trick is, you introduce it while pretending to oppose those very things.

I think it's what Putin would want you to do!

You pretend to hate that people "avoid actually solving a problem if there is any kind of partisan advantage" while doing exactly that!

I notice that you fail to actually deny any of the facts as stated.

No, I agreed. There are bad actors on both sides. But I don't see any of the policy discussion you say you want.

You revel in the literal food fight.

"No, I agreed."

That's a lie. Worst it's a transparent lie. Indeed you said it was a "quintessential Class 3 argument" which you have defined as:

"Things you suspect are not true, but are nonetheless widely supported online with lots of conflicting arguments and data."

There's no policy debate to be had here. The bastard who ran over the woman in Charlottesville is in prison, as he should be. The thugs in Portland should be arrested and should serve time for assault. No one seriously believes that if a bunch of hooded clansmen were walking down the street assaulting journalists (or even bystanders) in that manner, they could just get away with it time after time.

It's not debatable. There are 3 or 4 different videos which all show the assault. Andy Ngo was hospitalized with a brain hemorrhage.

Once again you try and move the goal posts. And of course, as is typical, you include a personal insult. Instead of lecturing other people on the deficiencies of their debating tactics, you should look to your own standards first.

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" Matthew 7:5

Right now Rat is winning this exchange. anonymous has a chance to have a good faith discussion with him if he chooses to take it and not do his usual dance.

The weird thing is that the rat kinda gets what I'm saying now, by angrily telling me that there is violence on both sides and "There's no policy debate to be had here."

Wasn't that my point?

Why angrily rehash violence on both sides, when you say you love policy?

And too, why get so hung up on such a minor internet personality, little old anonymous me, when you say you love policy?

You could be out there making Class 2 arguments about policy. Nobody's stopping you.

Of course it is worth noting that the rat did not start with both sides. He started by calling out one side for violence, implying guilt on one side, inviting a pissing match with someone who wants to name violence on the other side.

The Class 3 argument is "the left is bad," inviting the reciprocal Class 3 argument "no, the right is bad."

And you indulged him like the moron you pretend you aren't. Sad!

'At this point the Portland police just stand aside and let the masked criminals threaten anyone who disagrees with them.'

Don't worry, the Portland police are very even handed when it comes to ignoring criminals - 'Niiya is the commanding officer for the Portland Police Bureau rapid response team that patrols protests. That makes him one of the primary officers collecting intelligence about protest groups in Portland.

Niiya and the Portland Police Bureau have good reason to collect intelligence from right-wing organizers. Yet some of Niiya's texts raise questions about whether Portland Police help Patriot Prayer supporters to evade arrest during events.

Several texts involve Gibson's longtime adjunct, Tusitala "Tiny" Toese, who often brawls with antifascist protesters, has allegedly assaulted people who were not protesting, and has been arrested multiple times in Portland.

On Dec. 8, 2017, Niiya asks Gibson if Toese had "his court stuff taken care of," referring to an active warrant for Toese's arrest. Niiya goes on to say officers ignored the warrant at a past protest and tells Gibson that he doesn't see a need to arrest Toese even if he has a warrant, unless Toese commits a new crime.

"Just make sure he doesn't do anything which may draw our attention," Niiya texted on Dec. 9. "If he still has the warrant in the system (I don't run you guys so I don't personally know) the officers could arrest him. I don't see a need to arrest on the warrant unless there is a reason."'

Though a German would simply point out that justice can be as blind in its right eye in America as it is in Germany.

This is satire, right, Tyler?

I assume that the public school system my ids attend is not exceptional. Starting in kindergarten they have some computer instruction and learn not to share private information on the internet. Each year, they have age appropriate instruction about the internet and social media. My eighth grader brought home a packet on “netiquette”. There is anti bullying stuff, stuff on malware, best security practices, etc... in their classes (mainly science and English), they had material on evaluating online sources.

All this to say schools are teaching how to engage online space. They also teach writing, math, history, civics, etc.. yet I have students who can’t write an intelligible response to an essay question on an exam or use basic trig. Teaching is a necessary but insufficient condition for learning.

When I was in public high school, my Id was definitely exceptional.

We recently attended the Digital Public Library Association annual meeting where the keynote speaker--a computer scientist-- discussed how language and language of search was being used to separate communities, polarize or spread disinformation.

So, for example, if you are a college student who is taking a course in sociology and you hear the term “social justice”, you might, like MOST under 24 year olds, do an online search for a YouTube video explaining the term “social justice.”

Well, if you do a YouTube search of the term “social justice” the FIRST video you will see a $30,000 video by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) explaining that the term social justice is phony, and that it is a way for big government to steal your money.

Another example: If you search: “illegal aliens” v. “Undocumented” you get different search results: one hostile, the other less so, and enter different communities. If you search health effects of vaccines, the search algorithm pushes up on the list the anti-vax videos and websites.

The algorithms of search, in short, are not the algorithms of truth.

The speaker mentioned above, Danah Boyd, is now a Prof at NYU, having served as a lead Microsoft researcher.

Here is her recent speech at South by Southwest is similar to her DPLA presentation: Highly recommended.

Danah Boyd also has a blog worth reading as well: The blog is a very good source of information on such subjects as gaslighting, disinformation, RT’s weaponizing critical thinking to seed doubt about climate change, Ukraine etc.

She is also founder and President of Data & Society, which has some very cool research on media issues: It is funded by several major foundations. As good as MIT Media Lab or Harvard’s Berkman Institute on the Internet and Society.

“The algorithms of truth”? What would those be?

Sounds like they are working perfectly. If I search up “theory of gravity” I get a great result, if I search up “semiconductors” I get great results. If I search up stupidity like “social justice” I get conflicting results since there is real conflict over the “meaning” of the term and the “movement”.

How strange that a Microsoft researcher would say that there is a problem with search.

Incorrect. The proper analogy would be to Google the Jurassic period, and find that a creationist outfit had purchased the top result.

I get exactly the correct results for the “jurassic period” Wikipedia 1st result.

You need to calm yourself.

You need to do some research. He was using an example that illustrated more clearly the point.

You need to read irony and humor. In addressing the obtuse, you need to illustrate in magic marker.

Do the searches I mentioned: social justice on Youtube, and illegal alien v. undocumented, and then listen to the lecture by Danah Boyd.

I don't think you are that obtuse, so what you are really saying is that "I don't like what I hear."

I got a Ted talk. In fact, several Ted talks showed up in my results:

+1, Bill isn't particularly internet savvy.

He's probably been clicking on a lot of links on "social justice". His search results are influenced by his previous search history and Youtube is owned by Google.

Also, for the same reason, different people will get different results if they run your query.

Three of the top four in my results were TED talks, the third was a video gaming site. That's because I've searched for video game reviews on Youtube.

This does bring up an interesting point. I wonder how many clueless partisans spend their days following links from sites they visit that show how awful the other bastards are. Then when they go to search something "unrelated" they see the top results are full of links from the "other side".

They've essentially tuned their personal search algorithms to display the things they "like". They just don't realize that what they "like" is getting outraged at what bastards the "other" guys are. Instead, they mistakenly believe the entire internet is being overrun by the other partisans.

Neither of you searched the term social justice And YouTube but tmc successfully did not did you look at Boyd material. Sad

Well, now that you clarified the terms, I searched "social justice YouTube" on Google and did get a video from Prager (which, by the way, is different for AEI) as the first result, The next four were all pro-SJ. Not sure what was below that since I didn't scroll down. Still not sure "a college student" would type in that specific term or only click on the first video. But if Bill and Boyd say so, it must be true.

By all means, Bill, tell us which results of a search on Google for "social justice" is truth.

Yancey, you can start with the term "social justice" as used by the Catholic Church and its teachings since 1891, You might not want to follow the history, but it is interesting, all the way up to the current day.

Yancey, given the holidays, I might quote you a document that some describe as a statement of social justice:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Enjoy the military parade.

I think that document might have a little more detail than that, Bill. It actually defines what those unalienable rights are. The founders didn't use squishy feel good terms that can be interpreted to mean whatever the author felt that day.

Headline: Founders Use Squishy Feelgood Terms.

Happy 4th of July.

That was a good video from AEI. Thanks.

Slick propaganda, wasn't it.

Say you are a kid taking a sociology class, and hear the word social justice.

You go to YouTube, and the first item is a $30k piece from AEI. You don't go further, because you assume that is what social justice means.

AEI didn't pay enough for that commercial, because it cut off all discussion, and left the student with only one view and no context or history.

Search algorithms and promoted sites are not the source of truth unless you go beyond the first hit.

"You don't go further, because you assume that is what social justice means."
Do you? Really? Or do you even click on the first result that comes up? I seriously question how you are presenting the way people use search.

Read Boyd research re way under 30 search

Bill, you sound like the type of person that attends a TED talk, listens attentively and internalizes everything you hear, simply because the speaker is authoritatively credentialed and charismatic on the stage. Your preferred YouTube example is stupid and downright patronizing. "Algorithms" are not a magick that binds souls

Ha. Listen to the guy who calls himself bona Fide expert. Evidently you didn’t follow the links to Harvard’s Berkman insitute. Or to the NYU site where Boyd is a prof. Maybe RT or Breitbart is more to your anti-intellectual liking.

The solution is staring us right in the face.
Philosophy for Children -
Philosophy for Everyone -

What possible reason is there to delay on this no-brainer?

> "The internet is supposed to be destroying our world, or at least democracy and sanity, right?"

No? The Internet has made the world much better. right?

> "Public school is supposed to be good and effective, right?"

As a parent with kids in public school, I both appreciate a lot of amazing teachers for my kids, and see lots of changes I'd like to make... that I really don't have any say on.

> ""Somehow America has moved very, very far away from a problem-solving mindset."

Has it? I work with tech companies that solve new problems every day.

On political issues, like education, it's harder for regular citizens to make changes and try new ideas.

Elon Musk didn't like the school options for his five children, so he poached his favorite teachers and started his own "Ad Astra" schooling system. I'd sent my kids there if I had the chance. I do appreciate some of my kids' current teachers, but I'd like to try the Ad Astra option or something similar if I could.

It's nothing more (or less) than a very rich man hiring private tutors for his children (and maybe the children of his courtiers). This happened all the time and obviously is making a comeback.

Renowned Austrian economist and proponent of marginal utility Carl Menger was the personal tutor of Emperor Franz Joseph I's son and heir Prince Rudolph. Oddly, fabulously wealthy moderns send their offspring to famous and expensive but pedestrian institutions whose educational contributions are unlikely to be an improvement over a community college. These parents could easily afford to employ adepts in science, industry, etc. but apparently value a sheepskin decorated with the calligraphy of a coastal diploma mill more than real knowledge for their children. Or maybe they want them making life-long friendships including marriages, with other rich kids.

Community colleges in VA are a spectacular deal. A full load of 12-15 units per semester costs about $600-$750 or $1200-$1500 per year. For that you get small classes, very good often overqualified teachers, free tutoring, and 50% of the university education and credential at a fraction of the price.

Working students often pay for this with their own hard earned cash, which ought to signal something to the economists out there.

One disadvantage for community college to university transfer students is the two year head start the the university kids have building relationships with their peers in the first two years of university, especially relationships built in the summer camp vibe of 18 year olds in dorms.

In CA at least, the community college to public university path is an excellent deal, except for the one complication of the major cost of the university itself. It has gone way up, even adjusted for inflation - not news to anyone here.

Community colleges in CALIFORNIA, not VA.

Autocorrect can be immensely frustrating sometimes.

"Community colleges in VA are a spectacular deal."

Community colleges are generally a good deal across the US. More students should stay home and commute to the local community college for their first two years.

Too many guidance counselors are telling 17 year olds to follow their dreams. Which is how you get $40K in debt for a degree with career pay prospects on the level of a mid-tier factory worker.

Which is not bad mind you. However when you add up the $40K in debt and 4 years of lost wages and job experience, it's put the student far behind the teenager that just found a job straight out of high school.

>"More students should stay home and commute to the local community college for their first two years."
The keyword is on SHOULD.

Wouldn't place too much impact on the guidance counselors, or even the parents, for why kids pursue immediate entrance into a 4-yr. I am a recent-ish college graduate and still clearly remember my motivations and expectations (and those of my AP cohort) from high school. The reason kids put themselves into debt for university is to have F-U-N. Simple as that.

When you are a 17-year old kid who has lived the hunger-free life of a modern Westerner, you are, generally, happy-go-lucky that life will simply work out as long as you get some degree.

On an intellectual level, we all understood the benefits of community college. We just did not care. At that age, debt is an abstraction. It simply doesn't feel "real" and therefore isn't taken seriously. The only AP kid that voluntarily went to CC first instead of a 4-yr was because she got waitlisted from Brown, the rest who go willingly are the regular/"honors" kids who were not expected to get into any decent college.

You are approaching the problem with a matured, adult mentality when a teen just wants to get drunk and laid. You might as well tell a contemporary 14-yr old to optimize their future by shunning social media usage.

I have long felt that policy fails because wonks have forgotten what it was like to be a teenager (or perhaps were exceptionally driven, disciplined, and intelligent teens themselves). It's not all about aligning economic incentives when teens run on emotions.

Community college isn't cool, bruh.

Education is overrated as a solution to most problems, but people who have benefited from education, like Tyler, usually believe it is. Markets, however, would go a long way toward solving these problems. Pay for the use of these products with money, not data. I wonder if Libra isn't a sign Zuckerberg sees this as the ultimate solution as well.

"Twitter search is one of the most underrated parts of the internet."
The other thing vastly overrated by people like Tyler is Twitter. Underrated: Youtube.

"The other thing vastly overrated by people like Tyler is Twitter. Underrated: Youtube."


Youtube is a vast supply of information, including wonderful educational and how to videos. Twitter is a wasteland of 2 bit cheap shots.

Agreed. Twitter is a cesspool of ugly, mean spirited trolls.

Otoh, as you said, YouTube is dense with useful how to videos. Anyone trying to share useful knowledge is going to use YouTube and not Twitter. The exception being pundits that link dozens of tweets together just to write a few paragraphs. Very low value.

Hard to search Twitter when you've been banned for having the wrong opinions. Stay obedient!

Lots of "media literacy" curricula is already avail.


Comments for this post are closed