it's wild how the problem people have with harvard is that the unaccountable committees who determine who rules and who is ruled, who's allowed to succeed in life and who isn't, is trying to do social engineering *in ways they don't like*
-
Show this thread
-
there's no possible way for harvard to *not* be engaged in social engineering! they have large pools of people who can't be ranked according to formalized "qualifications" - they have to decide *somehow*
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
and given the incredible importance of a decision in one's favor, their decision metrics will inevitably become known *to people of a certain class* - and not to others
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
i read the big short recently, and one of the things that stood out was that financial institutions were able to determine and manipulate the allegedly secret and unmanipulable metrics that rating agencies used to decide bond credit ratings
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @riyenakshi
This comparison is beyond worthless: Pools of debt were valued completely quantitatively (albeit incorrectly) on public info, while Harvards position is that their secret inhouse qualitative analysis can, and often should, override any numerical formula.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Their secret inhouse qualitative analysis can still be gamed, and there are a lot of people who are very invested in trying to game it. (If a professor assigns essays instead of objective tests, you can still suck up to him for a better grade.)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.