Some of these colleges and institutions have been through multiple world-changing developments and managed to figure it out and survive. This one won't be any different.

Anonymous wrote:This is such a poorly written article I am surprised. The kid wants colleges to change their curriculum every time something is demanded in the tech market? Also, how does he expect to be anything but a less intelligent AI system if all you learn in a CS degree is the skills to do CS and none of the theory that goes into development. This reeks of mediocrity.

My thoughts exactly. Also there are plenty of applied courses to choose from, nobody is forcing a theoretical curriculum.

People have been jealous and bashing the top whatever since the beginning of time.

You're not special, OP. You're not a rebel with that "opinion".

This is such a poorly written article I am surprised. The kid wants colleges to change their curriculum every time something is demanded in the tech market? Also, how does he expect to be anything but a less intelligent AI system if all you learn in a CS degree is the skills to do CS and none of the theory that goes into development. This reeks of mediocrity.

It looks like Yale is going to beat Harvard in the Game

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, keep telling yourselves these things people. Keep putting down the liberal arts. You’ll see in the long run how that will work out.

The future of the world belongs to problem solvers and innovators and none of these applies to Harvard these days. They have drifted too far away from meritocracy.

Meritocracy is anything I say it is or isn't, and it'll never be reached so long as I don't choose the applicants myself!

Keep telling yourself that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, keep telling yourselves these things people. Keep putting down the liberal arts. You’ll see in the long run how that will work out.

The future of the world belongs to problem solvers and innovators and none of these applies to Harvard these days. They have drifted too far away from meritocracy.

Meritocracy is anything I say it is or isn't, and it'll never be reached so long as I don't choose the applicants myself!

Anonymous wrote:This reads like you want to steer the competition away from Harvard.

Also it shows you don't understand the point of a college education.

If you're all about the practicalities of learning a trade, you really shouldn't be in the business of bashing prestigious institutions.

Yep. Got the same reading from this.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, keep telling yourselves these things people. Keep putting down the liberal arts. You’ll see in the long run how that will work out.

The future of the world belongs to problem solvers and innovators and none of these applies to Harvard these days. They have drifted too far away from meritocracy.

This reads like you want to steer the competition away from Harvard.

Also it shows you don't understand the point of a college education.

If you're all about the practicalities of learning a trade, you really shouldn't be in the business of bashing prestigious institutions.

Isn’t MBA school where kids are supposed to hone the skills that the whiny author mentions?

If top universities lose sight of teaching kids foundational principles so they can churn out professional degrees, we are hosed as a society.

Between this and the other article about how kids aren’t going to class at Harvard - and can even double book classes - that place sounds awful. A Harvard degree still confers a ton of weight of course, but c’mon. There have to be brighter, more resilient kids out there.

Yes, keep telling yourselves these things people. Keep putting down the liberal arts. You’ll see in the long run how that will work out.

Because Harvard students don’t have the aptitude of leading a future world. That’ll be MIT.

Harvard isn’t training “us.” It’s training people who choose to attend.

This is a pointless thread. Take it to the Harvard fb groups.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/11/18/wyche-harvard-ai-education/

Cornell and Penn in comparison are much more pragmatic. Both have separate engineering schools that teach kids how to actually code. Both have separate undergraduate b-schools. In general Wharton and Dyson kids are very preprofessional, go getters.