jaksdhkj

> If every single one of your competitors is systematically undervaluing entire classes of potential workers, dontcha think that just maybe there's an opportunity to be had there?

This is a common line of thought that I find myself having. I suspect it's a common fallacy, although I've never heard a name for it.

I call it "being too clever again by half". The idea that when others zig, I should zag. Or that any status quo structure has inefficiencies.

My reality is that zig/zag concept only works in certain situations. It'd be interesting to think more about the conditions for those situations, because then I could readily identify them.

In this situation, it's possible that your competitors are undervaluing an entire class of workers simply because that class of workers does not have value to them. If there are no technical, talented, black female engineers in the Valley, maybe the market isn't intentionally ignoring them -- it's just unable to find them.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but sometimes the status quo is an efficiency shortcut as well as being efficient.

It is the ultimate responsibility of the person taking out these unsecured loans to figure it out. The school (UConn) may made it available, and can certainly be better about educating their students for success, but the author is the one who took out the loans.

The problem, as I see it, is they cannot "give back" their degree, because they've already gotten the learning out of it. Should the lenders eat the money because the lendee didn't pay enough attention?

Ultimately, this is a structural issue. However, the colleges are indeed catering to people's money and desires. We all only have ourselves to blame for this, because we buy into and develop the "American dream" of college and a picked fence in front of a house we own.

It's a quotation, taken out of context, without any additional side channel information. Might be a good idea to not form a strong opinion of a very smart man from this.

Glacier is about storing a large amount of data in a cost-efficient manner, when you do not anticipate needing it 1) cheaply and 2) quickly.

Legal issues, at least in the US, do not have those requirements.

I have had situations in the past 12 months where recovering past data would be worth >$1k for the right 100k of data.

Victor Frankl's, "Man's Search for Meaning". Title says it all. An incredible book that shares an incredible perspective. Helps me get perspective while providing insight so that it doesn't all seem pointless.