Yeah, don't know. Agree w/ you that journalists/ reporters do not need to have moral obligations, though [unless they make moral statements, and are not electing to do so in certain cases] - but even that's a slightly different issue.
I think journalists have opinions - and sharing those opinions is a big part of 'news' - whether you like it or not, that's constantly done, either through direct words, or through more subtle means. That's why you have 'conservative' and 'liberal' entities of the news.
Moreover, the media also decides what's important - think about how they've covered Trump vs. Sanders - Trump is selling ratings, they are promoting his message in a way that's unequal to other candidates, and then saying 'oh, we're being neutral.'
In any case, I thought the final paragraph was the most important: "So by all means: unleash the contempt and the righteous indignation for Trump. It’s well-deserved. But that should not obscure everything that led to this moment, nor exonerate those who for years have been spewing unadorned anti-Muslim animus from multiple corners and under various banners. They’re more subtle and diplomatic (and thus more insidious) than Trump, but they’re reading from the same script."
'What is this low level journalism doing on HN?' is a bizarre way to phrase a question that's really saying 'I disagree with the assertion/characterization' - which is one that is made routinely, over the course of many years, both through news outlets and in various forums of more substantive debate.
Popular as it is [most popular Atlantic article of all time], the essay is deeply flawed - both in form [singular academic source, confirmation bias throughout, conceptual inconsistency] and function [dangerous fear-mongering, promoting racist undertones, serving as fodder for the far-right].
It has been criticized far and wide by other publications [besides The New Yorker, also in the New Republic, Salon, etc] as well as a number of academics in the U.S. including Princeton professor used as the main source in the article.
Israeli universities are known for having great programs, I would imagine this program at the Technion is going to be very good.
That said, a huge part of business school is networking, so unless you're planning on being in Israel for your career, which, given it's policies is actually quite difficult for most demographics, it may not be the most practical move.
Finally, I think one needs to carefully decide for themselves where they land on the boycott debate. In the U.S., the shift is beginning, especially in academia. And academic boycotts have been supported internally in Israel. The Technion's connection to Israel's military complex is strong in absolute terms, and to come from abroad to attend such an institution is a very deliberate decision that probably implies where one lands on an intense political debate. A recent Israeli documentary expands on the broader issue: http://www.gumfilms.com/projects/lab
Here is the full quote, "When I say 'hero' do not picture someone with the strength to fight and conquer Evil -because Evil is not something that can ever be conquered or defeated, Evil is natural. It is innate in all humans. But while it can't be defeated, it can be controlled. In order to control it, and live the life of a true hero, you must learn to see with eyes unclouded by hate. See the good in that which is evil, and the evil in that which is good. Pledge yourself to neither side, but vow instead to preserve the balance that exists between the two."
Source: "The Whisper Within: Zen and Self" (p. 150)
In his own words, “You must see with eyes unclouded by hate. See the good in that which is evil, and the evil in that which is good. Pledge yourself to neither side, but vow instead to preserve the balance that exists between the two.”
I was looking for general commentary. My specific situation would be someone who was always interested in technology in a meaningful way since childhood but did not pursue computer science/engineering in any serious capacity.
Maybe a more specific question would be how to get engineers to take you seriously [and subsequently ideas one may have around marketing, design, etc]?
This: When internet adoption began to take off in the 1990s, it came with skeptics and an endless series of questions. In 1995, Newsweek published an article titled “Why the Web Won’t be Nirvana,” stating:
“Visionaries see a future of telecommuting workers, interactive libraries and multimedia classrooms. They speak of electronic town meetings and virtual communities. Commerce and business will shift from offices and malls to networks and modems. And the freedom of digital networks will make government more democratic. Baloney. Do our computer pundits lack all common sense? The truth is no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works.”