How Not to Explain Success

Re:How Not to Explain Success by coldtea on Monday May 30, 2016 @07:55AM (#11800848)

>Coming from an Eastern European country, my parents were making less than $10000 a year combined in the '80s and '90s. Nowhere near "wealthy" by western standards. However, they gifted me with a strong STEM education, which translated in material affluence 25 years later on a different continent.

That's the very definition of anecdotal evidence and survivorship bias. Both things that a strong STEM education should help squash.

It's also based on a historical peculiarity. In the west, and in particular in the US, to get a good STEM education you statistically have to be middle class or wealthy in the first place. (It's not impossible to have one if you're not -- just more difficult and rare). That wasn't the case in Eastern Europe, where the state provided easier access to higher education.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Not to Explain Success by deadtofu on Monday May 30, 2016 @09:30AM (#11801206)

Define "good STEM education".

I had cable internet very early in it's history, and I used to for things other than playing Half Life.

I did not end up going to Stanford, but I went to a decent state school and while I'm not rich, I'm certainly much better of than friends who had other majors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Not to Explain Success by haukilup on Monday May 30, 2016 @10:36AM (#11801526)

I'm not sure I get what you're going for with this comment

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Not to Explain Success by Retra on Tuesday May 31, 2016 @12:45AM (#11804619)

A good STEM education is one that would (at the very least least) make one wary of committing such obvious mistakes when drawing up arguments.

[ Parent | on HN ]