WTF, NYer.
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsolete
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsolete@jeffjarvis Just the headline is so obviously stupid. If ever there was a time for "I can't even," it's this type of AI bullshit.
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsolete@jeffjarvis The people who agree to this are those who didn't learn anything in college and are likely privileged gits to begin with, who have been able to trade on connections and access rather than what they know.
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsoleteJust when higher education demands defense against a fascist onslaught--and when AI provides new need and opportunity for the humanities--The NYer and its author (Bowdoin '02, Columbia '05) surrender ivy to careerism without making the case for education for its own sake.
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsolete@jeffjarvis New Yorker Favorites
-
@jeffjarvis The people who agree to this are those who didn't learn anything in college and are likely privileged gits to begin with, who have been able to trade on connections and access rather than what they know.
@femme_mal @jeffjarvis To be fair, if we treat college as simply a place that people learn job skills, a student could learn more and more relevant skills in a 2 year tech school rather than a 4+ year university. The reason 4 year degrees dominate job requirements is because it's a marker of privilege.
-
@Z_Zed_Zed Yes, "if we agree" reminds me of the old white guys at my former work who'd feel free to go on about their religion / racism / misogyny / politics (same thing) while at work because they just naturally assume everyone in earshot must certainly already agree with them. I mean, of course! In what world wouldn't they? @jeffjarvis
-
@femme_mal @jeffjarvis To be fair, if we treat college as simply a place that people learn job skills, a student could learn more and more relevant skills in a 2 year tech school rather than a 4+ year university. The reason 4 year degrees dominate job requirements is because it's a marker of privilege.
@JessTheUnstill @jeffjarvis Having attended both 2-year and 4-year institutions, I believe that depends heavily on what a student's desired career may be.
Perhaps part of the problem is rhe expectation of employers regarding credentialing. On the other hand, if requirements are narrowed substantially to fit 2-year programs, students may end up without classes like ethics, or exposure to humanities if they're in STEM fields.
I'd rather not have those folks leading tech companies.
-
WTF, NYer. "If we agree that college primarily serves a credentialling process that stamps select young people as worthy of work..." We do not. So much for The New Yorker as bastion of erudite journalism. This is sensationalism, damaging our most vital institution: education.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/will-ai-make-college-obsolete@jeffjarvis it’s been at least a decade since the NYT lost any credibility and integrity
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
