Actually it is ridiculous. Why were public funds spent on giving someone advanced education to drive around? Is there nothing better society can do with such skills?

It absolutely is not ridiculous on Google's part.

You're making some other point.

It absolutely is. If the best you can do with someone with an advanced degree is make them drive a car, you're wasting a valuable mind on a menial task.

If it was a valuable mind then surely the owner of it would opt to do a more valuable activity than drive a car around? Google is just providing an option. Should they be binning applications for the position that include degrees?

How pretentious of you to decide what's best for someone else. Your job shaming just reinforces the notion that everyone must get a higher education degree or GTFO. Maybe people doing the job enjoy it or are doing it part time or find that the resume benefits outweigh the pay?

Either way there's nothing inherently wrong with a job that requires you to drive around all day. Work is work regardless of if you look down your nose at it as "menial".

> Your job shaming just reinforces the notion that everyone must get a higher education degree or GTFO.

i think they were simply remarking that someone had an advanced degree and it wasn't being put to use.

this point is really about the system/world/situation and not so much about individuals.

> there's nothing inherently wrong with a job that requires you to drive around all day

seems like a red herring.

Re-read what I said, because you are responding to something that has nothing to do with any of my claim.

Restated: If you spend 8+ years and tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars to learn something, not putting it to use is a colossal waste of resources for everyone involved. It's not just you. It's the seat you took from another student who would have appreciated it more.

That's the same thing. It's not up to you to define "waste of resources" based on what someone chose to learn.

I have a different perspective. Education is resource-constrained, and learners do not exist in a vacuum. In my opinion, it is the height of ego to refuse to make use knowledge that so many others have spent time and effort to teach.

The education is paid for, so the "others" who are teaching are earning money, it's not wasted effort.

Knowledge itself doesn't contain any inherent value, it's free if you want to learn it all yourself without depriving anyone else of it. What you're paying for is the academic environment, resources and tutoring of a person. That's a business exchange like any other and everyone is free to spend their money on that, whether they do anything with the results or not.

All knowledge learned represents an opportunity cost paid, both in real capital and time consumed in acquisition, both for the students and the educational system as a whole. If nothing is done with it other than acquisition, we as a society lose.

I am not against the viewpoint you present for anything other than what I see as pragmatic reasons. If we lived in a post-scarcity economy, I would agree with you.

But we don't, and we aren't going to be there anytime soon, either. The system we have now loads crippling debt on to students, and one of the reasons it can do so is because of the constraints of supply and demand. Thus, in my opinion, to not do anything with an advanced degree is deeply selfish.

> It absolutely is

while i agree with your sentiment about not at all utilizing the potential of an advanced education, i'm not sure how google is "at fault" here...

assuming this resume requirement is real: is it google's fault there is a sufficient supply of master's holders willing to drive for minimum wage, such that they're content having the requirement?

No. But it very much is their fault for making such an asinine requirement. I have no doubt it actually hurts them, too. Turnover is expensive, and someone who has an advanced degree will bail for better prospects as soon as possible.

Why would they not ask for higher requirements as long as the jobs continue to be filled? You seem to have a problem with the wrong thing.

That very attitude (that higher degrees=better at everything) is what I have the problem with. Not only is it demonstrably not true, but it comes with real consequences. An entire generation is being saddled with crippling amounts of debt because of attitudes like this, and we all lose because of it. Our society becomes lopsided, with not enough jobs for college grads to enable most to pay off their student debt, and not enough tradesfolk to fill the ever-widening gap between our needs and who can do the work.

Please note that I am not talking about learning in general. Lifelong learning is fundamental. But there are other paths to knowledge beyond a 4-year college.

there was a candidate that wanted to address the "crippling amounts of debt" issue, but that movement was cut off at the knees.

No argument there.

While it is off topic, the other point is interesting