FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
100% Positive
Analyzed from 182 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#mit#public#decades#impact#cared#prior#followed#predictably#become#cesspool

Discussion (2 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
The problems are:
1) Ambitious people are drawn to such institutions
2) There are $40B swishing around
3) Incentives align for fame and impact, but not for honesty or positive impact
Maintaining alignment would require checks-and-balances and transparency measures, which no one cared to put in. MIT -- much more so than competing schools -- relied on NDAs and non-disparage agreements to cover up scandals.
Incentive structures and market dynamics played out, as no one cared to act.
As a curiosity, MIT was not well-known to the public prior to Good Will Hunting, and did its best work while it was still a fairly niche institution, prior to 2000.
It was exceptionally well-know in specific communities (computer science, physics, electronics, etc.), and was at or near the top in most hard fields, but that didn't translate to public recognition. If you asked a random waitress or sales-person, they'd typically confuse MIT for ITT (which had ads running all the time).
For public opinion, the undisputed #1 university in the US was Harvard, followed by Yale, Stanford, and Princeton, followed by the rest of the Ivy League
For universities, public reputation follows performance by several decades.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49031321
Because I remember commenting on it. Angrily.