Well they are in the media business. With the complete lack of journalistic integrity in the MSM today, we can only expect them to spin it for their own divisive purposes.
I read a few articles, none of which mentioned the anticompetitive concerns of throttling streaming video and VO/IP.
(submitting anonymously; the login is easily guessable and the account seems inactive)
I don't relate much to the article, but I might be atypical. I never understood what the big deal the Ivy was about. Some random points:
1. There are plenty of insanely smart people who don't take the "standard" career paths. They are the kind that take twice as many classes as everyone else and set the curves in all of them; the school got lucky to have them there. It's hard to not see them working on world-changing problems.
2. There are some people from truly underprivileged backgrounds, who are there by sheer hard work and ability. I met someone like this, who refused to play by the system's rules, and paid dearly because he didn't have the financial cushion. Unfortunately, after he recovered he no longer seems to want to take risks.
3. Classism exists before you enter the gates. There are a large number of students from prep-schools, who carry a whole subculture with them. I sense a kind of disdain from their eyes, and have never gone beyond small talk.
4. The "arrived" appears subtly. There are jokes about neighboring "safety" schools, and even the engineering school (which is easier to get into than the arts). The school of arts is always masturbating to its own name but the engineers don't ever seem to care.
5. I had some friends who were really proud to be there and embodied the school spirit. One time I said, "I find something lacking intellectually in the spirit of [the school]," which was taken with knee-jerk offense.
Without having other places to compare to, I'd say Ivy is some overrated and incomprehensible bullshit marketing. Oh, the computer labs and libraries were nice, but big deal.
(submitting anonymously; the login is easily guessable and the account seems inactive)
I don't relate much to the article, but I might be atypical. I never understood what the big deal the Ivy was about. Some random points:
1. There are plenty of insanely smart people who don't take the "standard" career paths. They are the kind that take twice as many classes as everyone else and set the curves in all of them; the school got lucky to have them there. It's hard to not see them working on world-changing problems.
2. There are some people from truly underprivileged backgrounds, who are there by sheer hard work and ability. I met someone like this, who refused to play by the system's rules, and paid dearly because he didn't have the financial cushion. Unfortunately, after he recovered he no longer seems to want to take risks.
3. Classism exists before you enter the gates. There are a large number of students from prep-schools, who carry a whole subculture with them. I sense a kind of disdain from their eyes, and have never gone beyond small talk.
4. The "arrived" appears subtly. There are jokes about neighboring "safety" schools, and even the engineering school (which is easier to get into than the arts). The school of arts is always masturbating to its own name but the engineers don't ever seem to care.
5. I had some friends who were really proud to be there and embodied the school spirit. One time I said, "I find something lacking intellectually in the spirit of [the school]," which was taken with knee-jerk offense.
Without having other places to compare to, I'd say Ivy is some overrated and incomprehensible bullshit marketing. Oh, the computer labs and libraries were nice, but big deal.
One of my issues with this person is that while I do like his company, and respect him in a lot of ways, we think differently about how to move things forward. I'm much more of a "below the radar, live cheap and get something working" guy, whereas he's more along the lines of "VC funding or bust", without even having much of a prototype. That just sounds bad to me. Though I recognize that funding at a later stage in the game would certainly help, I think we'll have a better bargaining position if we have something that sort of works in hand.
That's another thing... I believe more in having mostly technical people. Different skill sets can certainly be a good thing (the Paypal story in Founders at Work was a good example), but it's also a good way to start thinking "hrm... I'm building the code... what is that other guy actually doing?"
Juwo: I'm not planning on stealing the idea or anything like that. I have plenty of ideas of my own. The one he's hatched up is pretty good, but it's not going anywhere in terms of code or a web site or stuff like that. Just paperwork for investors...