https://www.facebook.

com/groups/TGID19/permalink/912545022130130/

● >>​ ​you​ ​are​ ​the​ ​icse/​ ​isc​ ​marks​ ​guy?

Yes,​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​talking​ ​about​ ​the​ ​Quora​ ​post​ ​I​ ​wrote​ ​a​ ​long​ ​time​ ​ago.

● >>​ ​UC​ ​Berkeley​ ​EECS​ ​with​ ​200k+​ ​debt,​ ​Emory​ ​at​ ​55k​ ​aid​ ​(they​ ​don't​ ​even​ ​have​ ​an
engineering​ ​department,​ ​sadly)​ ​and​ ​Georgia​ ​Tech​ ​at​ ​a​ ​price​ ​of​ ​24LPA.​ ​Which​ ​one'd​ ​be​ ​a
better​ ​choice?

​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​think​ ​there's​ ​an​ ​objective​ ​better​ ​choice​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​really​ ​a​ ​question​ ​of​ ​personal​ ​situation.
Particularly,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​take​ ​into​ ​account:
○ 1.​ ​How​ ​rich​ ​are​ ​you?​ ​If​ ​you​ ​are​ ​infinitely​ ​rich,​ ​money​ ​is​ ​of​ ​no​ ​concern,​ ​and​ ​UC​ ​Berkeley
edges​ ​out​ ​if​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​study​ ​Computer​ ​Science.
○ 2.​ ​What​ ​is​ ​your​ ​risk​ ​tolerance?​ ​If​ ​you're​ ​not​ ​infinitely​ ​rich,​ ​but​ ​you're​ ​okay​ ​with​ ​taking​ ​on
heavy​ ​loan​ ​at​ ​huge​ ​risk,​ ​Berkeley​ ​may​ ​still​ ​be​ ​a​ ​great​ ​choice.​ ​With​ ​a​ ​decent​ ​technology
job​ ​in​ ​today's​ ​market,​ ​it​ ​won't​ ​shouldn't​ ​take​ ​too​ ​long​ ​to​ ​pay​ ​off.
○ 3.​ ​What​ ​is​ ​your​ ​major?​ ​If​ ​you're​ ​not​ ​an​ ​engineering​ ​or​ ​Computer​ ​Science​ ​major,​ ​I​ ​don't
really​ ​know​ ​how​ ​to​ ​compare​ ​the​ ​three​ ​colleges.
○ 4.​ ​What​ ​is​ ​your​ ​end​ ​goal?​ ​If​ ​you​ ​are​ ​coming​ ​to​ ​America​ ​for​ ​a​ ​cultural​ ​experience​ ​and
want​ ​to​ ​do​ ​something​ ​back​ ​in​ ​India,​ ​or​ ​work​ ​at​ ​your​ ​family​ ​business,​ ​it​ ​blurs​ ​the​ ​lines
between​ ​all​ ​three,​ ​and​ ​Emory​ ​might​ ​win​ ​out​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​the​ ​cheapest.
○ If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do​ ​a​ ​PhD​ ​in​ ​CS​ ​or​ ​get​ ​a​ ​technology​ ​job,​ ​GTech​ ​and​ ​Berkeley​ ​are​ ​much
better​ ​options.
○
○ It's​ ​really​ ​not​ ​a​ ​clear​ ​cut​ ​answer.​ ​If​ ​I​ ​was​ ​in​ ​this​ ​situation,​ ​I'd​ ​be​ ​hypocritical​ ​if​ ​I​ ​didn't​ ​say
I'd​ ​take​ ​on​ ​the​ ​debt,​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​what​ ​I​ ​did​ ​in​ ​my​ ​time.​ ​I'd​ ​go​ ​with​ ​Berkeley.
○
○ For​ ​Computer​ ​Science,​ ​Emory​ ​lags​ ​behind,​ ​but​ ​as​ ​far​ ​as​ ​my​ ​knowledge​ ​goes,​ ​Berkeley
and​ ​GTech​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​the​ ​strength​ ​of​ ​the​ ​program​ ​and​ ​opportunities​ ​are​ ​very​ ​similar.

>>​ ​he's​ ​a​ ​US​ ​citizen.​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​think​ ​he's​ ​coming​ ​back​ ​to​ ​India.

Either​ ​way,​ ​to​ ​me​ ​it​ ​seems​ ​like​ ​his​ ​decision​ ​would​ ​be​ ​governed​ ​on​ ​his​ ​personal​ ​assessment​ ​of
those​ ​factors.

● >>​ ​You​ ​work​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​right?​ ​How​ ​is​ ​the​ ​general​ ​hiring​ ​from​ ​other​ ​universities​ ​like​ ​UIUC
and​ ​UCLA​ ​and​ ​Michigan​ ​at​ ​Facebook?

Yes,​ ​I​ ​work​ ​at​ ​Facebook.​ ​The​ ​overarching​ ​theme​ ​of​ ​hiring​ ​at​ ​Facebook,​ ​like​ ​most​ ​technology
 companies,​ ​is​ ​that​ ​we​ ​will​ ​hire​ ​talent​ ​regardless​ ​of​ ​which​ ​college​ ​they​ ​went​ ​to,​ ​and​ ​in​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of
Google​ ​now,​ ​their​ ​GPA.
That​ ​being​ ​said,​ ​in​ ​practice,​ ​this​ ​doesn't​ ​prevent​ ​bias.​ ​Many​ ​initial​ ​screening​ ​decisions​ ​(at​ ​all
these​ ​companies)​ ​are​ ​made​ ​by​ ​recruiters​ ​who​ ​are​ ​not​ ​technically​ ​trained​ ​at​ ​all.​ ​They​ ​look​ ​at​ ​equally​ ​bright
resumes,​ ​and​ ​much​ ​like​ ​college​ ​apps,​ ​are​ ​forced​ ​to​ ​make​ ​an​ ​impromptu​ ​decision.​ ​In​ ​this​ ​decision
process,​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​from​ ​Iowa​ ​State,​ ​it's​ ​much​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​seem​ ​like​ ​an​ ​attractive​ ​hire,​ ​as​ ​opposed​ ​to​ ​Harvard.
Once​ ​you​ ​get​ ​past​ ​this​ ​screening​ ​stage,​ ​by​ ​virtue​ ​of​ ​your​ ​college​ ​name,​ ​GPA​ ​still​ ​counts,​ ​past
internships,​ ​open​ ​source​ ​projects,​ ​typically​ ​the​ ​interview​ ​process​ ​is​ ​simple​ ​algorithmic​ ​style​ ​questions,​ ​so
it's​ ​all​ ​based​ ​on​ ​your​ ​skill​ ​in​ ​that​ ​area.
I'm​ ​sure​ ​UIUC,​ ​UCLA​ ​and​ ​Mich​ ​people​ ​are​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​(and​ ​other​ ​tech​ ​companies),​ ​but​ ​amongst
these​ ​three​ ​I've​ ​personally​ ​seen​ ​most​ ​from​ ​UIUC​ ​by​ ​a​ ​margin,​ ​some​ ​from​ ​Mich,​ ​and​ ​not​ ​many​ ​from
UCLA.

​>>​ ​But​ ​is​ ​that​ ​only​ ​in​ ​New​ ​York?​ ​Seeing​ ​how​ ​UCLA​ ​is​ ​in​ ​California​ ​and​ ​naturally​ ​most
grads​ ​would​ ​prefer​ ​to​ ​work​ ​at​ ​Menlo​ ​Park

​ ​I​ ​interned​ ​in​ ​the​ ​California​ ​twice​ ​and​ ​spent​ ​the​ ​first​ ​2​ ​months​ ​on​ ​the​ ​job​ ​there​ ​-​ ​I​ ​was​ ​speaking​ ​for
California​ ​as​ ​well!

​>>​ ​So​ ​for​ ​CS​ ​would​ ​you​ ​say​ ​UIUC​ ​or​ ​UCLA?

All​ ​other​ ​factors​ ​(location,​ ​weather)​ ​aside,​ ​on​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​pure​ ​academic​ ​merit,​ ​for​ ​CS,​ ​I'd​ ​pick
UIUC.

Purely​ ​because​ ​someone​ ​asked​ ​me​ ​this​ ​last​ ​year,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​said​ ​UIUC,​ ​and​ ​he​ ​turned​ ​out​ ​fine.

● >>Have​ ​you​ ​heard​ ​anything​ ​about​ ​UT​ ​Austin's​ ​Turing​ ​Scholars​ ​program?​ ​I'm​ ​trying​ ​to
choose​ ​between​ ​that​ ​and​ ​CMU​ ​SCS​ ​(wait​ ​listed​ ​at​ ​CMU)...​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​see​ ​people​ ​from​ ​UT
around​ ​you?

I've​ ​met​ ​several​ ​people​ ​from​ ​the​ ​UT​ ​Austin​ ​Turing​ ​Scholars​ ​program,​ ​and​ ​they're​ ​very​ ​talented!
Many​ ​of​ ​them​ ​are​ ​in​ ​all​ ​the​ ​prominent​ ​places​ ​in​ ​the​ ​valley.
However,​ ​if​ ​you​ ​really​ ​want​ ​to​ ​butt​ ​heads​ ​with​ ​CMU,​ ​you're​ ​gonna​ ​have​ ​a​ ​hard​ ​time.​ ​I'm​ ​uncertain
if​ ​it's​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​size​ ​of​ ​CMU​ ​or​ ​something​ ​else,​ ​but​ ​CMU​ ​has​ ​massive​ ​representation​ ​in​ ​technology
as​ ​being​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​best​ ​engineers.​ ​When​ ​I​ ​was​ ​at​ ​Google​ ​one​ ​summer,​ ​people​ ​from​ ​other​ ​colleges
kinda​ ​had​ ​to​ ​make​ ​their​ ​own​ ​friends​ ​but​ ​CMU​ ​had​ ​their​ ​own​ ​cult​ ​of​ ​people.

>>​ ​Thank​ ​you​ ​for​ ​that​ ​answer!​ ​So​ ​which​ ​would​ ​you​ ​choose​ ​between​ ​UIUC​ ​and​ ​UT​ ​Turing?
 That's​ ​a​ ​hard​ ​one​ ​because​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​enough​ ​about​ ​the​ ​UT​ ​Turing​ ​program.​ ​Based​ ​solely​ ​on
the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​I​ ​know​ ​more​ ​talented​ ​people​ ​from​ ​UIUC​ ​than​ ​UT​ ​(regardless​ ​of​ ​Turing),​ ​I​ ​would​ ​choose
UIUC,​ ​but​ ​you​ ​really​ ​can't​ ​go​ ​wrong​ ​with​ ​either.

​>>​ ​Well,​ ​out​ ​of​ ​a​ ​class​ ​of​ ​30-50​ ​Turing​ ​Scholars,​ ​only​ ​5-10​ ​actually​ ​graduate​ ​with​ ​the
Turing​ ​tag​ ​still​ ​on​ ​them,​ ​so​ ​that​ ​may​ ​have​ ​something​ ​to​ ​do​ ​with​ ​that!​ ​I​ ​really​ ​appreciate​ ​you​ ​taking
out​ ​your​ ​time​ ​to​ ​answer​ ​our​ ​questions​ ​though.

​ ​Thanks!​ ​It's​ ​my​ ​pleasure.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​unaware​ ​of​ ​the​ ​exclusivity​ ​of​ ​the​ ​program.​ ​If​ ​it's​ ​indeed​ ​that​ ​hard,
I'm​ ​sure​ ​I​ ​may​ ​have​ ​been​ ​wrong​ ​earlier.

● >>​ ​Also,​ ​anything​ ​you​ ​wish​ ​you​ ​knew​ ​as​ ​a​ ​freshman?

There's​ ​too​ ​many​ ​things​ ​I​ ​wish​ ​I​ ​knew​ ​as​ ​a​ ​freshman.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​the​ ​most​ ​important​ ​one​ ​is​ ​this​ ​-​ ​I
came​ ​into​ ​college​ ​with​ ​a​ ​fiercely​ ​competitive​ ​spirit,​ ​which​ ​was​ ​only​ ​natural​ ​given​ ​school​ ​in​ ​India.
It's​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​cliche,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​wish​ ​I'd​ ​known​ ​that​ ​in​ ​the​ ​long​ ​run,​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​a​ ​competition​ ​with​ ​anybody​ ​else
for​ ​some​ ​abstract​ ​prize,​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​competition​ ​with​ ​yourself​ ​so​ ​you​ ​can​ ​be​ ​better​ ​at​ ​doing​ ​something
you​ ​love.

● >>​ ​can​ ​you​ ​give​ ​me​ ​your​ ​email?

If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​me​ ​personal​ ​questions,​ ​FB​ ​works​ ​best

● >>​ ​Have​ ​you​ ​been​ ​contacted​ ​by​ ​CBSE,​ ​ICSE​ ​etc​ ​after​ ​your​ ​talk/quora​ ​post?

No,​ ​nobody​ ​contacted​ ​me​ ​besides​ ​the​ ​media.​ ​The​ ​CISCE​ ​released​ ​a​ ​public​ ​statement​ ​that​ ​was​ ​a
fairly​ ​pathetic​ ​excuse​ ​for​ ​the​ ​flaw,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​never​ ​followed​ ​up​ ​on​ ​it​ ​merely​ ​for​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​interest.

● >>​ ​What​ ​were​ ​your​ ​stats?​ ​What​ ​stood​ ​out​ ​in​ ​your​ ​application?

My​ ​stats​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​been​ ​almost​ ​4​ ​years​ ​since​ ​I've​ ​been​ ​asked​ ​that.​ ​I​ ​had​ ​a​ ​2280​ ​(680​ ​CR),​ ​a​ ​5​ ​in​ ​4
APs,​ ​800​ ​in​ ​4​ ​SAT​ ​IIs.​ ​I​ ​got​ ​in​ ​ED.​ ​Besides​ ​Cornell,​ ​I'd​ ​applied​ ​to​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​UCs​ ​before​ ​I
withdrew​ ​my​ ​apps.

I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​what​ ​stood​ ​out​ ​to​ ​the​ ​adcoms.​ ​I​ ​personally​ ​liked​ ​my​ ​essay,​ ​after​ ​about​ ​30​ ​revisions.
I'd​ ​qualified​ ​RMO​ ​and​ ​done​ ​decently​ ​in​ ​some​ ​other​ ​lesser​ ​known​ ​competitive​ ​exams.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​a​ ​pretty​ ​run​ ​of
the​ ​mill​ ​academic​ ​application.​ ​Nothing​ ​too​ ​fancy.

​>>​ ​Could​ ​you​ ​please​ ​tell​ ​me​ ​a​ ​few​ ​lesser​ ​known​ ​Maths​ ​competitive​ ​exams?

Oh,​ ​I​ ​really​ ​don't​ ​remember.​ ​There​ ​were​ ​a​ ​bunch​ ​of​ ​local​ ​competitive​ ​ones.​ ​Some​ ​even​ ​national.​ ​I
wouldn't​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​name​ ​any

● >>How​ ​was​ ​your​ ​first​ ​job​ ​-​ ​pay,​ ​hours,​ ​etc.?

My​ ​first​ ​job​ ​was​ ​actually​ ​a​ ​very​ ​lucky​ ​find.​ ​I​ ​worked​ ​as​ ​a​ ​research​ ​assistant​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Linguistics​ ​lab
in​ ​the​ ​spring​ ​of​ ​my​ ​Freshman​ ​year​ ​because​ ​I'd​ ​coincidentally​ ​learnt​ ​a​ ​little​ ​bit​ ​about​ ​quaternions.​ ​I
got​ ​paid​ ​$13/hr,​ ​and​ ​since​ ​my​ ​Professor​ ​was​ ​super​ ​lenient​ ​on​ ​"hours",​ ​I​ ​could​ ​come​ ​in​ ​and​ ​go
when​ ​I​ ​wanted.​ ​The​ ​emphasis​ ​was​ ​on​ ​getting​ ​my​ ​work​ ​done,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​could​ ​log​ ​up​ ​to​ ​20​ ​hours​ ​a
week,​ ​because​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​you​ ​can't​ ​work​ ​any​ ​more​ ​in​ ​a​ ​part​ ​time​ ​job​ ​while​ ​being​ ​a​ ​student.

In​ ​the​ ​end,​ ​I​ ​even​ ​got​ ​a​ ​publication​ ​out​ ​of​ ​it,​ ​so​ ​it​ ​was​ ​a​ ​double​ ​win.

● >>What​ ​skills/traits​ ​helped​ ​you​ ​a​ ​great​ ​deal​ ​through​ ​college?

​ ​Off​ ​the​ ​top​ ​of​ ​my​ ​head:

One,​ ​I​ ​already​ ​mentioned​ ​above​ ​about​ ​not​ ​being​ ​fiercely​ ​competitive​ ​with​ ​others,​ ​but​ ​competing
with​ ​myself​ ​to​ ​be​ ​better​ ​at​ ​doing​ ​something​ ​I​ ​like​ ​to​ ​do.

Two,​ ​externalizing​ ​peer​ ​pressure.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​many​ ​people​ ​lose​ ​the​ ​plot​ ​here.​ ​It's​ ​not​ ​easy​ ​growing​ ​out
of​ ​the​ ​childish​ ​rebel​ ​inside​ ​you​ ​from​ ​high​ ​school.​ ​When​ ​you​ ​suddenly​ ​have​ ​freedom​ ​all​ ​the​ ​time,​ ​you​ ​want
to​ ​party​ ​all​ ​the​ ​time​ ​and​ ​do​ ​what​ ​your​ ​friends​ ​are​ ​doing.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​it's​ ​important​ ​to​ ​prioritize​ ​what​ ​your​ ​end​ ​of
college​ ​goals​ ​and​ ​keep​ ​working​ ​to​ ​them.​ ​If​ ​that​ ​involves​ ​a​ ​couple​ ​of​ ​weekends​ ​when​ ​your​ ​friends​ ​get
hammered​ ​and​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​sit​ ​at​ ​home​ ​all​ ​day​ ​all​ ​night​ ​in​ ​solitude​ ​working,​ ​so​ ​be​ ​it.​ ​You​ ​should​ ​obviously
have​ ​a​ ​great​ ​time​ ​and​ ​try​ ​all​ ​sorts​ ​of​ ​new​ ​experiences​ ​in​ ​college,​ ​but​ ​not​ ​at​ ​the​ ​cost​ ​of​ ​your​ ​own​ ​priorities.
You​ ​do​ ​things​ ​because​ ​YOU​ ​want​ ​to.
There​ ​was​ ​one​ ​semester​ ​where​ ​I​ ​took​ ​28​ ​credits​ ​at​ ​the​ ​cost​ ​of​ ​a​ ​sane​ ​life,​ ​merely​ ​to​ ​push​ ​myself,
and​ ​it​ ​went​ ​well.

Three,​ ​try​ ​new​ ​things.​ ​Many​ ​of​ ​us​ ​come​ ​from​ ​very​ ​orthodox​ ​households,​ ​and​ ​some​ ​from​ ​lesser
so.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​many​ ​things​ ​we're​ ​not​ ​naturally​ ​comfortable​ ​with​ ​or​ ​we've​ ​been​ ​told​ ​is​ ​"bad"​ ​for​ ​so​ ​long​ ​that
we're​ ​mentally​ ​averse​ ​to.​ ​Despite​ ​all​ ​of​ ​that,​ ​college​ ​is​ ​the​ ​one​ ​time​ ​you​ ​can​ ​have​ ​these​ ​experiences​ ​and
you​ ​should​ ​make​ ​use​ ​of​ ​that.​ ​Instead​ ​of​ ​wasting​ ​your​ ​Saturday​ ​binge​ ​watching​ ​some​ ​TV​ ​show,​ ​spend
your​ ​free​ ​time​ ​accumulating​ ​fond​ ​memories​ ​of​ ​things,​ ​especially​ ​those​ ​outside​ ​your​ ​comfort​ ​zone.
 ● >>​ ​could​ ​you​ ​please​ ​tell​ ​us​ ​a​ ​little​ ​bit​ ​about​ ​taking​ ​a​ ​course​ ​overload,​ ​given​ ​you​ ​have​ ​tried
it?

The​ ​formal​ ​process:

I​ ​can​ ​tell​ ​you​ ​about​ ​Cornell​ ​specifically,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​imagine​ ​it​ ​works​ ​quite​ ​similarly​ ​elsewhere.​ ​Typically
colleges​ ​have​ ​a​ ​minimum,​ ​an​ ​average​ ​and​ ​a​ ​maximum​ ​number​ ​of​ ​credits​ ​you​ ​can​ ​take​ ​in​ ​a​ ​semester.
Different​ ​colleges​ ​have​ ​different​ ​credit​ ​systems.​ ​The​ ​most​ ​common​ ​ones​ ​use​ ​either​ ​the​ ​3-4​ ​credits​ ​is​ ​one
full​ ​class​ ​or​ ​1​ ​credit​ ​is​ ​one​ ​full​ ​class.​ ​Cornell​ ​uses​ ​the​ ​former.​ ​The​ ​minimum​ ​per​ ​semester​ ​was​ ​12,​ ​the
median​ ​was​ ​16/17​ ​and​ ​the​ ​maximum​ ​for​ ​Engineering​ ​was​ ​21​ ​(​ ​I​ ​think​ ​it​ ​was​ ​18​ ​for​ ​Arts,​ ​which​ ​always
amused​ ​me).​ ​However,​ ​in​ ​America,​ ​most​ ​rules​ ​are​ ​bendable​ ​with​ ​something​ ​written​ ​on​ ​a​ ​piece​ ​of​ ​paper.​ ​If
you​ ​petition​ ​to​ ​take​ ​more​ ​and​ ​you're​ ​in​ ​good​ ​academic​ ​standing,​ ​it's​ ​really​ ​not​ ​troublesome​ ​at​ ​all.​ ​I​ ​had
more​ ​trouble​ ​in​ ​high​ ​school​ ​getting​ ​teachers​ ​to​ ​write​ ​me​ ​a​ ​recommendation.

The​ ​experience:
My​ ​maximum​ ​was​ ​28.​ ​There​ ​was​ ​a​ ​big​ ​rumor​ ​of​ ​somebody​ ​taking​ ​60​ ​one​ ​time,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​like​ ​to
believe​ ​that​ ​was​ ​just​ ​a​ ​rumor.​ ​The​ ​most​ ​I've​ ​known​ ​a​ ​friend​ ​to​ ​take​ ​was​ ​34​ ​I​ ​believe,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​friend​ ​had
entered​ ​a​ ​super​ ​human​ ​level​ ​of​ ​insomnia.​ ​He's​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​smartest​ ​guys​ ​I​ ​know.
To​ ​me,​ ​there​ ​were​ ​two​ ​takeaways​ ​-​ ​your​ ​work​ ​expands​ ​to​ ​fill​ ​the​ ​time​ ​you​ ​have.​ ​I​ ​remember​ ​my
last​ ​semester​ ​having​ ​some​ ​16​ ​credits​ ​which​ ​felt​ ​harder​ ​than​ ​the​ ​28.​ ​Mental​ ​preparation​ ​is​ ​a​ ​big​ ​deal.
The​ ​second​ ​thing​ ​is​ ​that​ ​all​ ​classes​ ​aren't​ ​made​ ​equal.​ ​There​ ​were​ ​4​ ​credit​ ​classes​ ​which​ ​took
less​ ​than​ ​5​ ​hours​ ​a​ ​week​ ​and​ ​3​ ​credit​ ​classes​ ​which​ ​would​ ​take​ ​40​ ​hours​ ​a​ ​week,​ ​every​ ​single​ ​darn​ ​week
[The​ ​legendary​ ​Compilers​ ​class].​ ​It's​ ​wise​ ​to​ ​go​ ​into​ ​a​ ​hard​ ​semester​ ​with​ ​a​ ​thorough​ ​understanding​ ​from
peers​ ​as​ ​to​ ​the​ ​actual​ ​difficulty​ ​of​ ​your​ ​courseload.

● >>​ ​if​ ​one​ ​is​ ​ahead​ ​of​ ​his​ ​schedule​ ​(like​ ​you​ ​were),​ ​would​ ​you​ ​recommend​ ​taking​ ​up​ ​an
internship​ ​or​ ​finishing​ ​the​ ​degree​ ​first​ ​?

​ ​I​ ​would​ ​recommend​ ​finishing​ ​your​ ​degree,​ ​unless​ ​there​ ​is​ ​an​ ​added​ ​value​ ​from​ ​your​ ​internship.
Finishing​ ​your​ ​degree​ ​gets​ ​you​ ​in​ ​the​ ​industry​ ​(or​ ​in​ ​grad​ ​school,​ ​whatever​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do)​ ​earlier,​ ​which
is​ ​preferable.
The​ ​only​ ​exception​ ​that​ ​comes​ ​to​ ​mind​ ​is​ ​getting​ ​a​ ​Masters​ ​quickly​ ​if​ ​you​ ​can​ ​to​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​your​ ​H1B.​ ​If​ ​your
goal​ ​is​ ​to​ ​work​ ​full​ ​time​ ​in​ ​America​ ​for​ ​at​ ​least​ ​some​ ​time,​ ​you​ ​need​ ​an​ ​H1B.​ ​This​ ​year,​ ​the​ ​chances​ ​of
you​ ​getting​ ​that​ ​as​ ​a​ ​Bachelors​ ​is​ ​30%,​ ​and​ ​as​ ​a​ ​Masters​ ​it​ ​could​ ​be​ ​around​ ​36-60%.​ ​You​ ​also​ ​get​ ​a​ ​slight
industry​ ​advantage​ ​compensation-wise.​ ​I​ ​did​ ​an​ ​extra​ ​sem​ ​to​ ​do​ ​my​ ​Masters​ ​primarily​ ​for​ ​this​ ​reason,​ ​and
to​ ​finish​ ​up​ ​on​ ​some​ ​research.

This​ ​view​ ​is​ ​controversial​ ​-​ ​many​ ​prefer​ ​to​ ​get​ ​the​ ​"4​ ​full​ ​fledged​ ​years​ ​of​ ​college​ ​you'll​ ​never​ ​get​ ​back".
It's​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​choice,​ ​really.

[Again,​ ​it's​ ​also​ ​a​ ​question​ ​of​ ​your​ ​constraints.​ ​If​ ​you're​ ​on​ ​full​ ​aid,​ ​you​ ​might​ ​as​ ​well​ ​do​ ​an​ ​internship​ ​and
stay​ ​in​ ​school.​ ​]

● >>​ ​I​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​ask,​ ​realistically​ ​speaking,​ ​how​ ​much​ ​time​ ​does​ ​one​ ​get​ ​to​ ​work​ ​on​ ​one's
personal​ ​projects,​ ​or​ ​perhaps​ ​bringing​ ​a​ ​cool​ ​idea​ ​to​ ​reality?​ ​How​ ​overwhelming​ ​would
you​ ​say​ ​is​ ​working​ ​on​ ​a​ ​project​ ​and​ ​handling​ ​coursework​ ​at​ ​the​ ​same​ ​time?

Firstly,​ ​I​ ​feel​ ​like​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​people​ ​work​ ​on​ ​personal​ ​projects​ ​almost​ ​by​ ​peer​ ​pressure,​ ​or​ ​purely​ ​in
hope​ ​of​ ​increasing​ ​their​ ​employment​ ​prospects.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​a​ ​really​ ​slippery​ ​slope​ ​and​ ​probably
indication​ ​that​ ​CS​ ​may​ ​not​ ​be​ ​right​ ​for​ ​you.

The​ ​real​ ​reason​ ​to​ ​do​ ​side​ ​projects​ ​that's​ ​sustainable​ ​is​ ​because​ ​you​ ​actually​ ​enjoy​ ​them.​ ​As
nerdy​ ​as​ ​this​ ​sounds,​ ​I​ ​genuinely​ ​like​ ​doing​ ​side​ ​projects​ ​on​ ​my​ ​free​ ​time.​ ​It's​ ​like​ ​asking​ ​"will​ ​I​ ​have​ ​time
to​ ​party​ ​if​ ​I​ ​take​ ​all​ ​these​ ​classes?".​ ​If​ ​yes,​ ​than​ ​you'll​ ​probably​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​find​ ​time​ ​to​ ​do​ ​side​ ​projects.

Another​ ​thing​ ​is​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​a​ ​college​ ​hack.​ ​A​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​classes​ ​will​ ​give​ ​you​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​freedom,​ ​especially
higher​ ​level​ ​ones.​ ​Use​ ​this​ ​freedom​ ​to​ ​explore​ ​your​ ​interests.​ ​Many​ ​of​ ​my​ ​side​ ​projects​ ​came​ ​from
classes​ ​where​ ​the​ ​professor​ ​let​ ​us​ ​optionally​ ​do​ ​any​ ​project​ ​we​ ​wanted.​ ​Take​ ​advantage​ ​of​ ​this​ ​to​ ​hit​ ​two
birds​ ​with​ ​one​ ​stone.

All​ ​that​ ​being​ ​said,​ ​typically​ ​being​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major​ ​is​ ​more​ ​overwhelming​ ​than​ ​most​ ​other​ ​majors
purely​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​the​ ​work.​ ​In​ ​English,​ ​you​ ​get​ ​an​ ​assignment,​ ​you​ ​can​ ​bang​ ​your​ ​head​ ​on
it​ ​for​ ​a​ ​few​ ​hours,​ ​and​ ​it'll​ ​be​ ​done.​ ​In​ ​CS,​ ​it​ ​takes​ ​as​ ​long​ ​as​ ​it​ ​takes​ ​to​ ​be​ ​right,​ ​which​ ​for​ ​many​ ​classes
can​ ​be​ ​very​ ​long.​ ​Something​ ​to​ ​keep​ ​in​ ​mind.​ ​Jobs​ ​are​ ​super​ ​fun​ ​after​ ​if​ ​you​ ​like​ ​what​ ​you​ ​do
 ● >>​ ​ ​I​ ​have​ ​no​ ​prior​ ​experience​ ​in​ ​graphic​ ​design​ ​but​ ​I'm​ ​planning​ ​on​ ​registering​ ​for​ ​online
training​ ​sessions.​ ​Is​ ​I​ ​advisable​ ​to​ ​double​ ​major​ ​in​ ​UC​ ​Berkeley​ ​in​ ​graphic​ ​design​ ​and
business?​ ​You​ ​should​ ​also​ ​know​ ​that​ ​I'm​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​Varsity​ ​Swimming​ ​and​ ​I​ ​plan​ ​on
pursuing​ ​that​ ​along​ ​with​ ​studies​ ​and​ ​EC​ ​'s​ ​at​ ​Berkeley.​ ​Will​ ​all​ ​this​ ​be​ ​manageable?

​ ​I​ ​dunno​ ​about​ ​Berkeley,​ ​but​ ​Varsity​ ​sports​ ​is​ ​extremely​ ​time​ ​consuming.​ ​Varsity​ ​athletes​ ​are
typically​ ​very​ ​tired​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​and​ ​find​ ​it​ ​much​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​do​ ​other​ ​things.

Can​ ​you​ ​still​ ​do​ ​a​ ​double​ ​major?​ ​You​ ​could,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​wouldn't​ ​bet​ ​on​ ​it.​ ​Peoplestruggle​ ​with​ ​two
majors​ ​even​ ​without​ ​ECs.​ ​It's​ ​worth​ ​asking​ ​if​ ​the​ ​second​ ​major​ ​is​ ​worth​ ​it​ ​though.​ ​I​ ​would​ ​guess​ ​that​ ​90%
of​ ​people​ ​who​ ​go​ ​in​ ​to​ ​college​ ​wanting​ ​to​ ​double​ ​major​ ​end​ ​up​ ​hardly​ ​finishing​ ​one.​ ​And​ ​the​ ​other​ ​major
means​ ​nothing​ ​to​ ​anybody​ ​but​ ​yourself.​ ​Take​ ​classes​ ​in​ ​graphic​ ​design​ ​if​ ​it​ ​interests​ ​you​ ​-​ ​but​ ​think​ ​about
whether​ ​you​ ​can​ ​handle​ ​and​ ​how​ ​valuable​ ​a​ ​whole​ ​additional​ ​major​ ​would​ ​be​ ​for​ ​you.

● >>​ ​what​ ​is​ ​the​ ​start-up​ ​scene​ ​like​ ​in​ ​US.​ ​All​ ​of​ ​us​ ​have​ ​that​ ​glorious​ ​picture​ ​in​ ​mind.​ ​Please
can​ ​you​ ​tell​ ​us​ ​the​ ​insider​ ​info?

​ ​I​ ​know​ ​some​ ​of​ ​you​ ​may​ ​have​ ​misconceptions​ ​that​ ​startups​ ​will​ ​make​ ​you​ ​rich.​ ​In​ ​reality,​ ​if​ ​you're
past​ ​the​ ​10th​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​a​ ​startup,​ ​odds​ ​are​ ​your​ ​equity​ ​will​ ​be​ ​low,​ ​and​ ​severely​ ​diluted​ ​by
venture​ ​capital​ ​and​ ​even​ ​more​ ​so​ ​in​ ​case​ ​of​ ​a​ ​buyout.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​case​ ​that​ ​you​ ​are​ ​a​ ​founder,
conversely,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​dole​ ​out​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​equity​ ​to​ ​VCs​ ​for​ ​funding,​ ​and​ ​to​ ​your​ ​employees​ ​if​ ​you
want​ ​to​ ​attract​ ​talent.​ ​Starting​ ​a​ ​startup​ ​as​ ​an​ ​alien​ ​in​ ​the​ ​country​ ​is​ ​doubly​ ​hard.​ ​Most​ ​startups,
despite​ ​getting​ ​funding​ ​fail.​ ​You​ ​only​ ​hear​ ​about​ ​the​ ​success​ ​stories.​ ​To​ ​get​ ​a​ ​good​ ​idea,​ ​go​ ​to
angel​ ​list.​ ​You'll​ ​see​ ​plenty​ ​of​ ​successful,​ ​well​ ​funded​ ​startups​ ​but​ ​you've​ ​probably​ ​not​ ​heard​ ​of
most​ ​of​ ​them.
Money​ ​is​ ​not​ ​ever​ ​the​ ​correct​ ​driving​ ​goal​ ​in​ ​working​ ​for​ ​or​ ​starting​ ​a​ ​startup​ ​(or​ ​for​ ​being​ ​in
technology​ ​for​ ​that​ ​matter),​ ​it's​ ​about​ ​having​ ​a​ ​vision​ ​that​ ​you​ ​believe​ ​in.

● >>​ ​ ​is​ ​Cornell​ ​Engineering​ ​worth​ ​a​ ​200k(+)​ ​debt?

I​ ​took​ ​on​ ​the​ ​risk​ ​of​ ​a​ ​200k+​ ​debt,​ ​but​ ​with​ ​the​ ​help​ ​of​ ​internships,​ ​graduating​ ​early,​ ​research
salary,​ ​TA​ ​pay,​ ​an​ ​external​ ​scholarship​ ​for​ ​half​ ​of​ ​my​ ​Masters​ ​program,​ ​and​ ​my​ ​full​ ​time​ ​job,​ ​I
managed​ ​to​ ​pay​ ​off​ ​my​ ​debt​ ​last​ ​month.
 It's​ ​a​ ​matter​ ​of​ ​risk.​ ​I​ ​took​ ​on​ ​the​ ​risk,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​broke​ ​even,​ ​so​ ​to​ ​me​ ​it​ ​was​ ​worth​ ​it.​ ​I​ ​could've​ ​easily
not​ ​have​ ​been​ ​as​ ​lucky.

● >>​ ​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​really​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major,​ ​more​ ​of​ ​an​ ​EE​ ​one.​ ​I've​ ​always​ ​loved​ ​making​ ​(and​ ​taking
apart)​ ​things,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​never​ ​quite​ ​got​ ​the​ ​opportunity​ ​and​ ​resources​ ​(and​ ​of​ ​course,​ ​proper
prerequisite​ ​knowledge​ ​in​ ​EE)​ ​to​ ​work​ ​on​ ​some​ ​cool,​ ​and​ ​comparatively
complex-to-implement​ ​ideas​ ​in​ ​school.​ ​So​ ​I​ ​was​ ​just​ ​wondering​ ​about​ ​how​ ​different​ ​would
college​ ​in​ ​the​ ​US​ ​be​ ​as​ ​compared​ ​to​ ​that​ ​in​ ​India​ ​in​ ​this​ ​aspect.

It's​ ​super​ ​cliche,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​say​ ​this​ ​again​ ​and​ ​again​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​as​ ​different​ ​as​ ​you​ ​want​ ​it​ ​to​ ​be.​ ​Opportunities
are​ ​waiting​ ​to​ ​be​ ​exploited.​ ​One​ ​of​ ​the​ ​biggest​ ​opportunities​ ​are​ ​simply​ ​talking​ ​to​ ​your​ ​professor.
Professors​ ​at​ ​places​ ​like​ ​Berkeley​ ​are​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​smartest​ ​people​ ​alive.​ ​All​ ​the​ ​famous​ ​Steve​ ​Jobs​ ​and
Bill​ ​Gates​ ​people​ ​are​ ​fine​ ​and​ ​dandy,​ ​but​ ​the​ ​smartest​ ​people​ ​in​ ​any​ ​given​ ​field​ ​on​ ​the​ ​planet​ ​are
professors​ ​at​ ​these​ ​institutions.​ ​And​ ​so​ ​many​ ​people​ ​don't​ ​use​ ​this​ ​resource.​ ​I​ ​can​ ​tell​ ​you​ ​that​ ​a​ ​few
lunches​ ​with​ ​some​ ​of​ ​these​ ​professors​ ​has​ ​taught​ ​me​ ​more​ ​about​ ​life​ ​than​ ​entire​ ​classes.​ ​That's​ ​just​ ​one
example.
Of​ ​course​ ​you​ ​could​ ​be​ ​that​ ​person​ ​who​ ​goes​ ​to​ ​class​ ​and​ ​does​ ​their​ ​homework​ ​and​ ​even​ ​being​ ​that
normal​ ​person​ ​will​ ​teach​ ​you​ ​more​ ​than​ ​in​ ​India​ ​because​ ​the​ ​culture​ ​emphasizes​ ​less​ ​"getting​ ​good
grades"​ ​and​ ​more​ ​"learning".​ ​There​ ​is​ ​seldom​ ​people​ ​haggling​ ​for​ ​answers​ ​before​ ​something​ ​is​ ​due,​ ​but
trying​ ​to​ ​finish​ ​their​ ​own​ ​project.
Take​ ​advantage​ ​of​ ​interacting​ ​with​ ​your​ ​professors,​ ​interacting​ ​intellectually​ ​with​ ​your​ ​peers​ ​and​ ​doing
your​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​doing​ ​research​ ​in​ ​something​ ​that​ ​interests​ ​you,​ ​and​ ​those​ ​are​ ​all​ ​opportunities​ ​that​ ​are
missing​ ​from​ ​Indian​ ​colleges.

● >>​ ​you​ ​said​ ​chances​ ​of​ ​getting​ ​H1B​ ​as​ ​a​ ​bachelors​ ​are​ ​30%.​ ​Would​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​graduate​ ​from
UIUC​ ​easily​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​get​ ​one​ ​or​ ​would​ ​there​ ​still​ ​be​ ​some​ ​risk?

The​ ​chances​ ​are​ ​bound​ ​to​ ​go​ ​down​ ​even​ ​more​ ​as​ ​the​ ​years​ ​go​ ​on​ ​unless​ ​a​ ​severe​ ​financial​ ​crisis
happens.​ ​Here's​ ​how​ ​it​ ​works:

Your​ ​chances​ ​of​ ​getting​ ​a​ ​job​ ​do​ ​not​ ​go​ ​down.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​independent​ ​of​ ​your​ ​chances​ ​of​ ​getting​ ​an
H1B.

You​ ​have​ ​29​ ​months​ ​(12​ ​+​ ​17​ ​extra​ ​if​ ​you​ ​work​ ​in​ ​STEM)​ ​of​ ​OPT​ ​to​ ​work​ ​without​ ​an​ ​H1B.
 If​ ​you​ ​time​ ​it​ ​right,​ ​that's​ ​3​ ​attempts​ ​to​ ​apply​ ​for​ ​a​ ​H1B​ ​(if​ ​you​ ​graduate​ ​in​ ​December)​ ​and​ ​2
otherwise.​ ​With​ ​2​ ​chances​ ​and​ ​a​ ​30%​ ​chance,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​a​ ​(1​ ​-​ ​(1-0.3)^0.2)​ ​=​ ​0.51​ ​or​ ​a​ ​51%​ ​chance​ ​of
getting​ ​it​ ​in​ ​2​ ​years.​ ​For​ ​3​ ​attempts,​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​66%​ ​chance.

In​ ​case​ ​that​ ​doesn't​ ​work​ ​out,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​several​ ​options.​ ​Some​ ​companies​ ​will​ ​send​ ​you​ ​to​ ​other
offices​ ​abroad​ ​while​ ​you​ ​bide​ ​time​ ​to​ ​try​ ​for​ ​an​ ​H1B​ ​in​ ​the​ ​future.​ ​Typically,​ ​for​ ​Facebook,​ ​they​ ​send​ ​you
to​ ​Vancouver​ ​or​ ​London​ ​I​ ​believe.

If​ ​your​ ​company​ ​doesn't​ ​do​ ​that,​ ​some​ ​companies​ ​will​ ​pay​ ​you​ ​as​ ​much​ ​as​ ​they​ ​were​ ​before​ ​but
call​ ​you​ ​an​ ​intern,​ ​for​ ​legal​ ​purposes​ ​until​ ​you​ ​can​ ​apply​ ​again.

If​ ​your​ ​company​ ​does​ ​neither​ ​of​ ​those,​ ​you​ ​can​ ​go​ ​back​ ​and​ ​do​ ​a​ ​Masters​ ​in​ ​one​ ​year​ ​or​ ​any
other​ ​degree​ ​and​ ​come​ ​back​ ​with​ ​29​ ​more​ ​months​ ​to​ ​spend​ ​(​ ​I​ ​believe).​ ​In​ ​the​ ​previous​ ​29​ ​months,
hopefully​ ​you'll​ ​have​ ​saved​ ​enough​ ​to​ ​make​ ​this​ ​financially​ ​feasible.

That's​ ​the​ ​full​ ​scenario

● >>​ ​I​ ​remember​ ​seeing​ ​that​ ​you​ ​worked​ ​at​ ​Coursera.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​very​ ​broad,​ ​but​ ​how​ ​do​ ​you​ ​see
education​ ​changing​ ​at​ ​the​ ​grassroots,​ ​worldwide?

The​ ​internet​ ​is​ ​the​ ​cheapeast,​ ​easiest,​ ​most​ ​scalable​ ​way​ ​to​ ​connect​ ​people​ ​and​ ​share
information​ ​today.​ ​In​ ​order​ ​to​ ​educate​ ​the​ ​grassroots,​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​you'd​ ​have​ ​to​ ​hit​ ​middle​ ​ground
from​ ​two​ ​ways​ ​-​ ​make​ ​internet​ ​more​ ​available​ ​to​ ​everybody,​ ​and​ ​make​ ​education​ ​on​ ​the​ ​internet
as​ ​good​ ​as​ ​education​ ​in​ ​college.​ ​Coursera​ ​is​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​companies​ ​trying​ ​to​ ​tackle​ ​the​ ​second
problem,​ ​and​ ​there's​ ​still​ ​a​ ​long​ ​way​ ​to​ ​go.​ ​Challenges​ ​in​ ​online​ ​education​ ​extend​ ​to​ ​keeping
people​ ​motivated,​ ​human​ ​feedback,​ ​grading,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​more.​ ​Companies​ ​like​ ​Facebook​ ​and
Google​ ​are​ ​working​ ​on​ ​the​ ​first​ ​-​ ​unfortunately,​ ​sometimes​ ​at​ ​the​ ​cost​ ​of​ ​net​ ​neutrality,​ ​which​ ​is
unacceptable.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​future,​ ​these​ ​two​ ​things​ ​meeting​ ​is​ ​the​ ​most​ ​foreseeable​ ​way​ ​that​ ​education
can​ ​reach​ ​the​ ​grassroots.​ ​[That​ ​being​ ​said​ ​Coursera​ ​focusses​ ​on​ ​university​ ​level​ ​classes-​ ​there​ ​is
a​ ​need​ ​for​ ​a​ ​much​ ​more​ ​basic​ ​platform​ ​for​ ​grassroot​ ​level​ ​education]

>>​ ​in​ ​how​ ​many​ ​years​ ​from​ ​now​ ​to​ ​you​ ​think​ ​high​ ​school​ ​seniors​ ​will​ ​be​ ​deciding​ ​between
a​ ​traditional​ ​college​ ​and​ ​a​ ​charted​ ​package​ ​over​ ​the​ ​internet.​ ​I​ ​mean​ ​GTech​ ​started​ ​their
online​ ​MSc​ ​program.​ ​How​ ​long​ ​before​ ​this​ ​becomes​ ​a​ ​viable​ ​option?

It's​ ​a​ ​chicken​ ​and​ ​the​ ​egg​ ​problem​ ​we​ ​were​ ​quite​ ​familiar​ ​with​ ​at​ ​Coursera​ ​-​ ​to​ ​make​ ​a​ ​course
seem​ ​reputable,​ ​you​ ​need​ ​reputable​ ​alumni​ ​to​ ​take​ ​the​ ​course.​ ​In​ ​a​ ​concept​ ​called​ ​bootstrapping,​ ​you
spend​ ​some​ ​time​ ​building​ ​up​ ​that​ ​repute​ ​by​ ​building​ ​up​ ​successful​ ​alumni​ ​from​ ​scratch​ ​until​ ​the​ ​cycle
maintains​ ​itself.​ ​That's​ ​how​ ​it'll​ ​become​ ​valuable​ ​-​ ​when​ ​employers​ ​see​ ​it​ ​that​ ​way.​ ​That's​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the
thinks​ ​linkedin​ ​is​ ​trying​ ​to​ ​strive​ ​for,​ ​and​ ​was​ ​apparently​ ​their​ ​motivation​ ​for​ ​being​ ​Lynda​ ​-​ ​giving​ ​classes
and​ ​certified​ ​skills​ ​to​ ​people​ ​and​ ​connecting​ ​those​ ​skills​ ​to​ ​jobs.
 ● >>​ ​On​ ​a​ ​lighter​ ​note,​ ​your​ ​pick:​ ​Android​ ​or​ ​iOS?

I'm​ ​an​ ​Apple​ ​fan​ ​boy.​ ​I​ ​prefer​ ​iOS,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​use​ ​a​ ​Mac.

● >>​ ​Jobs​ ​or​ ​Gates?

It's​ ​strange​ ​to​ ​pick​ ​between​ ​Jobs​ ​and​ ​Gates.​ ​I'm​ ​unsure​ ​of​ ​what​ ​dimension​ ​I'm​ ​supposed​ ​to​ ​rate
them​ ​on.​ ​Jobs​ ​is​ ​an​ ​excellent​ ​marketer​ ​and​ ​a​ ​great​ ​visionary​ ​but​ ​a​ ​first​ ​rate​ ​asshole.​ ​Gates​ ​was
known​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​genius,​ ​and​ ​much​ ​more​ ​technical.​ ​I​ ​respect​ ​them​ ​both,​ ​obviously,​ ​but​ ​neither​ ​are
my​ ​foremost​ ​idols.​ ​Most​ ​of​ ​their​ ​success,​ ​as​ ​it​ ​is​ ​with​ ​any​ ​company,​ ​is​ ​luck​ ​based,​ ​and​ ​the
sensationalism​ ​is​ ​media​ ​driven.
Someone​ ​I​ ​truly​ ​respect,​ ​and​ ​one​ ​of​ ​my​ ​biggest​ ​idols,​ ​is​ ​Noam​ ​Chomsky.

● >>​ ​How​ ​do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​is​ ​the​ ​Start-Up​ ​scene​ ​abroad?​ ​Do​ ​Undergraduate​ ​students​ ​prefer​ ​to
work​ ​for​ ​some​ ​company​ ​after​ ​graduation​ ​and​ ​go​ ​and​ ​start​ ​their​ ​own​ ​thing?

The​ ​scene​ ​is​ ​good,​ ​haha.​ ​Startups​ ​started​ ​in​ ​the​ ​US,​ ​so​ ​that's​ ​unsurprising.

TL;DR:​ ​some​ ​people​ ​do​ ​it.​ ​Most​ ​people​ ​fail.​ ​Most​ ​people​ ​stick​ ​to​ ​working​ ​in​ ​tech.

Again,​ ​it​ ​depends​ ​on​ ​your​ ​taste​ ​for​ ​risk.​ ​Ideally,​ ​everybody​ ​wants​ ​to​ ​start​ ​a​ ​successful​ ​startup.
Do​ ​you​ ​know​ ​enough​ ​to​ ​start​ ​one?
Do​ ​you​ ​not​ ​have​ ​debt?
Do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​a​ ​convincing​ ​idea​ ​and​ ​a​ ​vision​ ​for​ ​something?
Do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​the​ ​technical​ ​expertise​ ​to​ ​create​ ​it?
Do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​the​ ​legitimacy​ ​to​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​build​ ​a​ ​team​ ​around​ ​you?
Do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​funding?
Are​ ​you​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​risk​ ​the​ ​opportunity​ ​cost​ ​of​ ​a​ ​$150k​ ​-​ ​$250k​ ​pay​ ​per​ ​year,​ ​for​ ​maybe​ ​5-6​ ​years,
in​ ​hope​ ​of​ ​your​ ​own​ ​successful​ ​venture?
Are​ ​you​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​live​ ​poorly,​ ​and​ ​miserly,​ ​without​ ​an​ ​ounce​ ​of​ ​free​ ​time​ ​or​ ​vacations,​ ​sleeping,
working​ ​and​ ​eating​ ​ramen,​ ​trying​ ​to​ ​get​ ​your​ ​idea​ ​off​ ​the​ ​ground?
Would​ ​you​ ​rather​ ​live​ ​happily​ ​with​ ​a​ ​nice​ ​convertible​ ​sports​ ​car​ ​in​ ​a​ ​nice​ ​house​ ​hopefully​ ​with​ ​a
family​ ​in​ ​Sunnyvale​ ​and​ ​get​ ​free​ ​food​ ​at​ ​work​ ​for​ ​breakfast​ ​lunch​ ​and​ ​dinner​ ​and​ ​have​ ​super​ ​chill​ ​flexible
work​ ​hours​ ​and​ ​little​ ​stress​ ​[at​ ​a​ ​big​ ​tech​ ​company]?
 If​ ​all​ ​the​ ​above​ ​fit​ ​you,​ ​then​ ​you​ ​fit​ ​the​ ​category​ ​of​ ​somebody​ ​who​ ​wants​ ​to​ ​start​ ​their​ ​company.
Even​ ​if​ ​you​ ​say​ ​"umm"​ ​to​ ​one​ ​of​ ​those​ ​questions,​ ​you​ ​probably​ ​don't​ ​have​ ​it.​ ​Some​ ​students​ ​start​ ​their
own​ ​thing​ ​purely​ ​because​ ​they​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​that​ ​guy​ ​who​ ​started​ ​their​ ​own​ ​thing.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​a​ ​poor​ ​reason,​ ​and
typically​ ​ends​ ​badly.

Most​ ​startups​ ​fail.

Many​ ​students​ ​start​ ​their​ ​own​ ​startup,​ ​but​ ​only​ ​a​ ​handful​ ​are​ ​successful.​ ​Also​ ​realize​ ​that​ ​when
you​ ​start​ ​your​ ​own​ ​company​ ​you're​ ​not​ ​in​ ​college​ ​anymore​ ​-​ ​youre​ ​competing​ ​with​ ​Xooglers​ ​who​ ​have
5-10​ ​years​ ​experience​ ​who​ ​also​ ​quit​ ​to​ ​start​ ​a​ ​company,​ ​you're​ ​competing​ ​with​ ​people​ ​who​ ​simply​ ​have
more​ ​employees.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​severely​ ​uphill​ ​challenge,​ ​and​ ​extremely​ ​dependent​ ​on​ ​being​ ​at​ ​the​ ​right​ ​place​ ​at
the​ ​right​ ​time.

● >>​ ​have​ ​you​ ​heard​ ​of​ ​Rensselaer​ ​polytechnic?

yes,​ ​I've​ ​heard​ ​of​ ​RPI

>>​ ​opinions​ ​on​ ​it?

​ ​I​ ​know​ ​one​ ​really​ ​smart​ ​PhD​ ​student​ ​at​ ​Cornell​ ​that​ ​went​ ​to​ ​RPI.​ ​Don't​ ​know​ ​much​ ​else.

>>​ ​No​ ​one​ ​from​ ​RPI​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​New​ ​York?

Haven't​ ​met​ ​any​ ​yet.

​>>​ ​UIUC​ ​CS​ ​with​ ​about​ ​80K​ ​in​ ​don't

Or​ ​RPI​ ​CS​ ​with​ ​~32K​ ​in​ ​debt.
What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​suggest?

I'd​ ​pick​ ​UIUC,​ ​but​ ​that's​ ​a​ ​much​ ​easier​ ​decision​ ​to​ ​make​ ​sitting​ ​on​ ​this​ ​side​ ​of​ ​debt.

● >>​ ​I​ ​just​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​if​ ​there​ ​are​ ​any​ ​particular​ ​disadvantages​ ​of​ ​going​ ​for​ ​the​ ​5​ ​year
BS+MS​ ​program.​ ​I​ ​will​ ​most​ ​probably​ ​be​ ​attending​ ​UIUC​ ​as​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major​ ​and​ ​plan​ ​on
pursuing​ ​the​ ​BS+MS​ ​program.​ ​So,​ ​should​ ​I​ ​stick​ ​to​ ​UIUC​ ​for​ ​MS​ ​or​ ​as​ ​other​ ​people​ ​have
advised​ ​try​ ​for​ ​a​ ​better​ ​place​ ​for​ ​MS​ ​or​ ​should​ ​I​ ​just​ ​wait​ ​to​ ​see​ ​how​ ​I​ ​like​ ​UIUC​ ​and​ ​take
my​ ​decision​ ​based​ ​on​ ​that?
 I​ ​would​ ​say​ ​it​ ​depends​ ​mostly​ ​on​ ​your​ ​desire​ ​for​ ​stability​ ​and​ ​whether​ ​UIUC​ ​can​ ​somehow​ ​let​ ​you
do​ ​it​ ​quicker​ ​than​ ​elsewhere.

For​ ​me,​ ​I​ ​didn't​ ​have​ ​to​ ​give​ ​the​ ​GRE​ ​for​ ​my​ ​Masters​ ​admission​ ​for​ ​Cornell​ ​,because​ ​I​ ​was​ ​an
undergrad,​ ​and​ ​recommendations​ ​were​ ​automatic,​ ​and​ ​admission​ ​was​ ​nearly​ ​guaranteed​ ​and​ ​I​ ​didn't
have​ ​to​ ​pack​ ​up​ ​and​ ​move.​ ​It​ ​also​ ​let​ ​me​ ​do​ ​it​ ​one​ ​semester​ ​earlier.​ ​Does​ ​UIUC​ ​give​ ​you​ ​(at​ ​least​ ​some
of)​ ​these​ ​advantages?

If​ ​not,​ ​then​ ​I'd​ ​advice​ ​you​ ​to​ ​gun​ ​for​ ​somewhere​ ​else.​ ​Find​ ​a​ ​new​ ​college,​ ​explore​ ​and​ ​learn​ ​about
a​ ​new​ ​place.

Also,​ ​what's​ ​your​ ​reason​ ​for​ ​wanting​ ​to​ ​do​ ​an​ ​MS?

● >>​ ​ ​I'd​ ​like​ ​your​ ​opinion​ ​on​ ​Imperial​ ​College​ ​London​ ​vs​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Toronto​ ​vs​ ​UIUC,​ ​for
CS.

I​ ​would​ ​pick​ ​UIUC​ ​if​ ​your​ ​eventual​ ​goal​ ​is​ ​industry.​ ​I'm​ ​more​ ​familiar​ ​with​ ​things​ ​in​ ​the​ ​US,​ ​and
getting​ ​a​ ​job​ ​works​ ​out​ ​so​ ​much​ ​easier​ ​straight​ ​out​ ​of​ ​college.​ ​I​ ​hear​ ​London​ ​is​ ​not​ ​ripe​ ​for​ ​jobs
right​ ​now,​ ​and​ ​I'm​ ​unsure​ ​about​ ​what​ ​hurdles​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​jump​ ​through​ ​from​ ​Canada.​ ​Simply
because​ ​of​ ​that.

In​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​research,​ ​ICL​ ​is​ ​a​ ​great​ ​option​ ​too​ ​but​ ​I​ ​personally​ ​would​ ​pick​ ​U​ ​of​ ​Toronto​ ​and​ ​beg
and​ ​plead​ ​to​ ​work​ ​with​ ​Geoffrey​ ​Hinton.​ ​His​ ​research​ ​in​ ​deep​ ​nets,​ ​along​ ​with​ ​Bengio​ ​(Montreal),​ ​Andrew
Ng​ ​(Baidu),​ ​Yan​ ​Lecun​ ​(Facebook)​ ​and​ ​Feifei​ ​Li​ ​(Stanford)​ ​have​ ​been​ ​making​ ​waves​ ​in​ ​the​ ​CS​ ​scene​ ​for
a​ ​while

>>​ ​Yeah,​ ​Toronto​ ​has​ ​some​ ​amazing​ ​professors.​ ​1​ ​Turing​ ​awardee​ ​and​ ​another​ ​Godel
award​ ​winner.​ ​Lol​ ​I'm​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​Machine​ ​Learning​ ​but​ ​somehow​ ​only​ ​knew​ ​of​ ​Andrew​ ​Ng(took
his​ ​course​ ​on​ ​Coursera)​ ​and​ ​Sebastian​ ​Thrun.

It's​ ​unfair​ ​to​ ​reduce​ ​the​ ​quality​ ​of​ ​faculty​ ​to​ ​an​ ​award​ ​count.​ ​Before​ ​Kailash​ ​Satyarthi​ ​was​ ​a
nobody,​ ​but​ ​now​ ​he's​ ​a​ ​somebody​ ​simply​ ​because​ ​someone​ ​decided​ ​to​ ​give​ ​a​ ​him​ ​a​ ​prize.​ ​It​ ​really
undermines​ ​the​ ​hard​ ​work​ ​they've​ ​done​ ​their​ ​entire​ ​lives.​ ​One​ ​should​ ​judge​ ​a​ ​professor​ ​by​ ​his/her​ ​own
research's​ ​merit​ ​or​ ​not​ ​at​ ​all,​ ​not​ ​simply​ ​by​ ​an​ ​award​ ​count.

​>>I​ ​partially​ ​agree​ ​to​ ​the​ ​point​ ​you​ ​made​ ​above.​ ​I​ ​agree​ ​that​ ​there​ ​will​ ​be​ ​countless​ ​other
brilliant​ ​people​ ​who've​ ​done​ ​and​ ​are​ ​doing​ ​path​ ​breaking​ ​work,​ ​but​ ​if​ ​someone​ ​wins​ ​a​ ​Fields,​ ​you
can​ ​fairly​ ​assume​ ​that​ ​*he*​ ​did​ ​some​ ​nice​ ​work.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​only​ ​for​ ​academic​ ​awards​ ​though.​ ​And
frankly,​ ​I've​ ​not​ ​read​ ​enough​ ​to​ ​know​ ​how​ ​to​ ​judge​ ​a​ ​professor's​ ​research​ ​merit,​ ​in​ ​such​ ​an
academic​ ​award​ ​evaluated​ ​by​ ​much​ ​more​ ​capable​ ​people​ ​gives​ ​me​ ​a​ ​easy​ ​way.​ ​ ​Completely​ ​agree
that​ ​not​ ​having​ ​an​ ​award​ ​doesn't​ ​take​ ​anything​ ​from​ ​a​ ​professors​ ​merit.

​ ​I​ ​agree,​ ​I​ ​wouldn't​ ​argue​ ​that​ ​someone​ ​who's​ ​won​ ​the​ ​award​ ​isn't​ ​extremely​ ​good,​ ​but​ ​given​ ​that
typically​ ​it's​ ​so​ ​neck​ ​and​ ​neck​ ​between​ ​the​ ​top​ ​researchers,​ ​when​ ​you​ ​compare​ ​someone​ ​who's​ ​won​ ​an
award​ ​to​ ​someone​ ​who​ ​hasn't​ ​and​ ​say​ ​"A​ ​is​ ​better​ ​than​ ​B​ ​because​ ​he's​ ​won​ ​this​ ​award",​ ​you're​ ​implying
that​ ​B​ ​did​ ​not​ ​deserve​ ​the​ ​award,​ ​which​ ​may​ ​be​ ​inaccurate​ ​-​ ​B​ ​may​ ​have​ ​deserved​ ​it​ ​but​ ​an​ ​awarding
committee​ ​may​ ​have​ ​thought​ ​A​ ​deserved​ ​it​ ​a​ ​little​ ​more.

Thats​ ​not​ ​the​ ​only​ ​issue.​ ​It's​ ​not​ ​unlike​ ​saying​ ​Federer​ ​is​ ​better​ ​than​ ​Nadal​ ​because​ ​he's​ ​won
more​ ​grand​ ​slams​ ​or​ ​Australia​ ​better​ ​than​ ​India​ ​because​ ​they've​ ​won​ ​more​ ​world​ ​cups.​ ​One​ ​could​ ​easily
imagine​ ​a​ ​situation​ ​where​ ​this​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​comparison​ ​breaks​ ​down

​>>​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​using​ ​an​ ​award​ ​to​ ​compare.​ ​My​ ​argument​ ​is​ ​that,​ ​if​ ​'A'​ ​has​ ​won​ ​an​ ​award,​ ​it​ ​tells
me​ ​that​ ​he's​ ​good.​ ​'A'​ ​winning​ ​an​ ​award​ ​doesn't​ ​tell​ ​me​ ​anything​ ​about​ ​'B'​ ​or​ ​if​ ​'A'​ ​is​ ​better​ ​than
'B'.​ ​It​ ​*only*​ ​tells​ ​me​ ​the​ ​A​ ​is​ ​good.​ ​I'm​ ​suggesting​ ​that​ ​India​ ​winning​ ​a​ ​recent​ ​worldcup​ ​is​ ​simply​ ​a
testament​ ​to​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​India​ ​is​ ​*good*.​ ​It​ ​doesn't​ ​tell​ ​you​ ​anything​ ​about​ ​India​ ​being​ ​*better*​ ​than
any​ ​other​ ​country.

Oh,​ ​makes​ ​sense​ ​ ​fully​ ​agree

● >>​ ​which​ ​are​ ​the​ ​best​ ​CS​ ​courses​ ​that​ ​you've​ ​taken,​ ​during​ ​your​ ​stint​ ​at​ ​Cornell?

Great​ ​question.​ ​My​ ​favorite​ ​classes​ ​were:

CS​ ​3110​ ​-​ ​functional​ ​programming​ ​-​ ​this​ ​was​ ​the​ ​third​ ​course​ ​in​ ​core​ ​CS​ ​but​ ​the​ ​first​ ​one​ ​that
really​ ​starts​ ​to​ ​make​ ​you​ ​rethink​ ​your​ ​major.​ ​Some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​assignments​ ​include​ ​solving​ ​a​ ​rubix​ ​cube
optimally​ ​in​ ​ocaml,​ ​and​ ​writing​ ​an​ ​ocaml​ ​program​ ​to​ ​play​ ​Pokemon​ ​(with​ ​a​ ​dynamic​ ​set​ ​of​ ​Pokemon​ ​and
their​ ​stats).​ ​We​ ​had​ ​a​ ​competition​ ​at​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​the​ ​class,​ ​and​ ​me​ ​and​ ​my​ ​teammates​ ​bot​ ​came​ ​in
second,​ ​so​ ​it​ ​was​ ​very​ ​memorable.

CS​ ​5120​ ​-​ ​compilers​ ​-​ ​hands​ ​down​ ​the​ ​most​ ​dreaded​ ​class​ ​offered​ ​at​ ​cornell.​ ​Every​ ​assignment
meant​ ​at​ ​least​ ​a​ ​40​ ​hour​ ​week​ ​and​ ​it​ ​was​ ​even​ ​rougher​ ​because​ ​each​ ​assignment​ ​depending​ ​on
successfully​ ​completing​ ​the​ ​last.​ ​As​ ​a​ ​result,​ ​on​ ​assignment​ ​5​ ​-​ ​compiler​ ​optimizations,​ ​the​ ​median​ ​was​ ​a
10​ ​out​ ​of​ ​a​ ​100.​ ​There​ ​was​ ​no​ ​guide​ ​on​ ​what​ ​language​ ​to​ ​use​ ​or​ ​framework​ ​to​ ​use​ ​-​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​class​ ​was
about​ ​building​ ​a​ ​compiler​ ​to​ ​a​ ​certain​ ​specification​ ​with​ ​whatever​ ​means​ ​you​ ​could​ ​find.​ ​Deadly.

ORIE​ ​5370​ ​-​ ​optimization​ ​modeling​ ​in​ ​finance

This​ ​wasn't​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​class​ ​at​ ​all,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​liked​ ​this​ ​class​ ​more​ ​because​ ​of​ ​what​ ​I​ ​had​ ​made​ ​out​ ​of​ ​it​ ​over
the​ ​actual​ ​content.​ ​A​ ​bulk​ ​of​ ​the​ ​class​ ​was​ ​two​ ​projects.​ ​On​ ​one​ ​of​ ​them​ ​I​ ​wrote​ ​a​ ​algorithmic​ ​trader​ ​that
made​ ​around​ ​6-7%​ ​year​ ​over​ ​year​ ​while​ ​halving​ ​the​ ​risk​ ​of​ ​the​ ​market​ ​from​ ​1990,​ ​not​ ​losing​ ​money​ ​even
during​ ​the​ ​financial​ ​recession​ ​of​ ​2008​ ​during​ ​the​ ​backtest.​ ​For​ ​my​ ​second​ ​project,​ ​I​ ​applied​ ​optimization
techniques​ ​to​ ​trade​ ​players​ ​in​ ​fantasy​ ​IPL.​ ​I'm​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​cricket​ ​buff​ ​so​ ​I​ ​was​ ​understandably​ ​very​ ​drawn​ ​to
this​ ​project.
http://debarghyadas.com/files/IPLpaper.pdf

And​ ​the​ ​other​ ​paper:​http://debarghyadas.com/files/TradingModelPaper.pdf

If​ ​you're​ ​interested.

● >>​ ​could​ ​you​ ​tell​ ​us​ ​about​ ​transferring?​ ​I​ ​mean,​ ​how​ ​hard​ ​would​ ​it​ ​be​ ​to​ ​say​ ​transfer​ ​from
UIUC​ ​to​ ​UCB?

I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​too​ ​much​ ​about​ ​transferring​ ​except​ ​that​ ​it's​ ​super​ ​hard​ ​without​ ​a​ ​good​ ​reason.​ ​UIUC
to​ ​Berkeley​ ​simply​ ​to​ ​get​ ​to​ ​a​ ​supposedly​ ​better​ ​CS​ ​school​ ​isn't​ ​a​ ​good​ ​reason.​ ​Also,​ ​transferring
in​ ​CS​ ​is​ ​next​ ​to​ ​impossible​ ​because​ ​transferring​ ​happens​ ​on​ ​the​ ​assumption​ ​that​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​free
spot​ ​for​ ​you.​ ​The​ ​odds​ ​of​ ​there​ ​being​ ​a​ ​free​ ​spot​ ​in​ ​CS​ ​at​ ​Berkeley​ ​are​ ​next​ ​to​ ​none.​ ​I​ ​would
focus​ ​less​ ​on​ ​getting​ ​out​ ​and​ ​focus​ ​more​ ​on​ ​making​ ​use​ ​of​ ​your​ ​time​ ​there.

● >>​ ​How​ ​is​ ​the​ ​job​ ​scene​ ​for​ ​CS​ ​majors​ ​graduating​ ​from​ ​/comparatively/​ ​less​ ​prestigious
schools,​ ​i.e.​ ​Perdue​ ​etc?

Depends​ ​on​ ​which​ ​schools​ ​you​ ​mean.​ ​As​ ​for​ ​Purdue,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​significantly​ ​worse.​ ​However​ ​one
must​ ​realize​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​strong​ ​correlation​ ​with​ ​how​ ​smart​ ​the​ ​students​ ​of​ ​a​ ​college​ ​are​ ​and​ ​its
repute.​ ​Typically​ ​students​ ​from​ ​Purdueare​ ​less​ ​skilled​ ​than​ ​from​ ​Stanford,​ ​so​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the
opportunity​ ​gaps​ ​are​ ​because​ ​of​ ​a​ ​difference​ ​in​ ​skill.​ ​It's​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​separate​ ​the​ ​two.​ ​I​ ​haven't​ ​seen
the​ ​data​ ​for​ ​Purdue​ ​specifically,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​tends​ ​to​ ​become​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​get​ ​jobs​ ​at​ ​the​ ​more​ ​popular
places​ ​-​ ​not​ ​impossible,​ ​but​ ​significantly​ ​harder.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​people​ ​who​ ​didn't​ ​go​ ​to​ ​college​ ​in​ ​tech
companies,​ ​so​ ​nothing's​ ​impossible.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​work​ ​super​ ​hard​ ​at​ ​Purdue,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​a​ ​hard​ ​college​ ​to
do​ ​well​ ​in,​ ​and​ ​you're​ ​still​ ​left​ ​high​ ​and​ ​dry,​ ​typically​ ​people​ ​will​ ​go​ ​to​ ​a​ ​more​ ​reputable​ ​university
for​ ​their​ ​masters​ ​(admissions​ ​for​ ​which​ ​are​ ​much​ ​much​ ​easier​ ​than​ ​undergrad),​ ​and​ ​use​ ​the
brand​ ​value​ ​to​ ​find​ ​better​ ​employment.
 ● >>​ ​ ​between​ ​Math​ ​1​ ​and​ ​2​ ​which​ ​one​ ​looks​ ​better​ ​for​ ​colleges​ ​?

Math​ ​2,​ ​because​ ​Math​ ​1​ ​is​ ​not​ ​very​ ​different​ ​from​ ​SAT​ ​1​ ​Math.

● >>​ ​I​ ​have​ ​to​ ​decide​ ​between​ ​usc​ ​and​ ​purdue​ ​for​ ​cs.​ ​any​ ​suggestions??

​ ​If​ ​by​ ​USC​ ​you​ ​mean​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Southern​ ​California,​ ​then​ ​yes,​ ​I'd​ ​pick​ ​that​ ​over​ ​Purdue.

>>​ ​ ​But​ ​if​ ​you​ ​could​ ​please​ ​give​ ​some​ ​reason

​ ​I've​ ​personally​ ​seen​ ​more​ ​talent​ ​come​ ​from​ ​USC​ ​in​ ​technology​ ​than​ ​Purdue.

● >>​ ​ ​is​ ​there​ ​any​ ​bias​ ​against​ ​a​ ​BA​ ​in​ ​computer​ ​science​ ​(or​ ​a​ ​disadvantage)​ ​as​ ​compared​ ​to
a​ ​BSE?

No,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​no​ ​bias​ ​between​ ​a​ ​BA​ ​and​ ​a​ ​BSE,​ ​certainly​ ​not​ ​in​ ​recruiting.

● >>​ ​have​ ​you​ ​come​ ​across​ ​princeton​ ​grads​ ​in​ ​the​ ​valley?​ ​I​ ​really​ ​want​ ​to​ ​end​ ​up​ ​working​ ​in
the​ ​valley​ ​(and​ ​not​ ​Wall​ ​street)​ ​so​ ​any​ ​advice​ ​would​ ​be​ ​appreciated.
>>​ ​how​ ​well​ ​are​ ​Princeton​ ​grads​ ​doing​ ​in​ ​CS,​ ​w.r.t​ ​tech​ ​jobs​ ​and​ ​Silicon​ ​Valley
presence/prestige/desirability.​ ​It​ ​would​ ​be​ ​great​ ​if​ ​you​ ​could​ ​compare​ ​Princeton​ ​CS​ ​kids's
perceived​ ​prestige/desirebility​ ​with​ ​more​ ​traditional​ ​CS​ ​schools​ ​like​ ​CMU/​ ​UIUC/​ ​Cornell/
Stanford​ ​/​ ​MIT

Yes,​ ​I've​ ​certainly​ ​come​ ​across​ ​Princeton​ ​grads​ ​in​ ​the​ ​valley​ ​(and​ ​in​ ​New​ ​York).​ ​One​ ​of​ ​my
colleagues​ ​on​ ​my​ ​team​ ​at​ ​work​ ​is​ ​from​ ​Princeton.​ ​It's​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​compare​ ​because​ ​Princeton​ ​is​ ​a​ ​smaller
school​ ​than,​ ​say,​ ​CMU​ ​or​ ​UIUC,​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​one​ ​of​ ​those​ ​schools​ ​known​ ​for​ ​only​ ​CS,​ ​so​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​surprising
that​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​raw​ ​numbers​ ​you​ ​see​ ​fewer​ ​of​ ​them.

In​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​desirability​ ​and​ ​respect,​ ​Princeton's​ ​clearly​ ​a​ ​super​ ​selective​ ​and​ ​very​ ​well​ ​respected
institute,​ ​so​ ​on​ ​paper​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​perceived​ ​any​ ​differently​ ​than​ ​a​ ​CMU​ ​or​ ​a​ ​Stanford​ ​or​ ​an​ ​MIT​ ​or​ ​any​ ​of​ ​the
colleges​ ​you​ ​named.​ ​Broadly,​ ​they're​ ​all​ ​tier​ ​one​ ​colleges.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​tech​ ​industry,​ ​there's​ ​not​ ​really​ ​a​ ​culture
of​ ​flaunting​ ​your​ ​alma​ ​mater.​ ​It's​ ​quite​ ​the​ ​opposite​ ​-​ ​many​ ​people​ ​play​ ​it​ ​down.​ ​The​ ​number​ ​of​ ​people
who​ ​"went​ ​to​ ​school​ ​I'm​ ​Boston"​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​ridiculous.

The​ ​real​ ​industry​ ​where​ ​the​ ​prestige​ ​and​ ​desirability​ ​of​ ​Princeton,​ ​and​ ​Yale​ ​and​ ​MIT​ ​are​ ​felt​ ​is
particularly​ ​and​ ​to​ ​a​ ​smaller​ ​extent​ ​investment​ ​banking.​ ​Whereas​ ​in​ ​tech,​ ​your​ ​respect​ ​for​ ​a​ ​person​ ​is
born​ ​purely​ ​out​ ​of​ ​how​ ​intelligent​ ​and​ ​innovative​ ​he​ ​is,​ ​in​ ​consulting,​ ​people​ ​care​ ​where​ ​you​ ​went​ ​to
college,​ ​what​ ​your​ ​gpa​ ​was,​ ​how​ ​polished​ ​your​ ​shoes​ ​are​ ​-​ ​that​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​thing.​ ​Investment​ ​banking​ ​carries
those​ ​traits​ ​over​ ​too.
I'll​ ​tell​ ​you​ ​an​ ​illustrative​ ​story.​ ​I'm​ ​consulting,​ ​it's​ ​all​ ​about​ ​hierarchies,​ ​and​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​very​ ​set​ ​in
stone​ ​hierarchy​ ​of​ ​consulting​ ​companies.​ ​Tier​ ​1​ ​is​ ​Bain​ ​McKinsey​ ​and​ ​Booz.​ ​Tier​ ​2​ ​is​ ​EY,​ ​Pwc​ ​and
Deloitte.​ ​Now,​ ​Cornell​ ​happens​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​full​ ​on​ ​tier​ ​2​ ​school​ ​for​ ​consulting​ ​firms.​ ​So​ ​much​ ​so​ ​that,​ ​at​ ​MIT,
offers​ ​at​ ​McKinsey​ ​are​ ​almost​ ​safety​ ​jobs.​ ​At​ ​Cornell,​ ​very​ ​few​ ​people​ ​get​ ​interviewed​ ​by​ ​McKinsey
anyway​ ​(they​ ​don't​ ​come​ ​to​ ​recruit​ ​on​ ​campus),​ ​and​ ​one​ ​of​ ​my​ ​friends​ ​who​ ​did​ ​interview​ ​was​ ​told​ ​"look,
you​ ​did​ ​very​ ​well.​ ​You​ ​passed​ ​all​ ​the​ ​interviews.​ ​But​ ​we​ ​had​ ​a​ ​guy​ ​from​ ​MIT​ ​also​ ​competing​ ​for​ ​the​ ​spot​ ​".
It's​ ​partially​ ​why​ ​I​ ​resent​ ​industries​ ​like​ ​this.​ ​Something​ ​as​ ​shallow​ ​as​ ​that​ ​would​ ​never​ ​happen​ ​in​ ​a​ ​tech
firm.​ ​At​ ​Coursera,​ ​as​ ​an​ ​intern,​ ​we​ ​had​ ​several​ ​interns​ ​from​ ​MIT​ ​and​ ​Stanford​ ​but​ ​there​ ​were​ ​also​ ​a​ ​guy
from​ ​Iowa​ ​state.

To​ ​answer​ ​your​ ​question,​ ​given​ ​two​ ​identical​ ​people​ ​on​ ​paper,​ ​a​ ​Princeton​ ​grad​ ​would​ ​be​ ​treated
the​ ​same​ ​way​ ​as​ ​any​ ​other​ ​tier​ ​1​ ​school.​ ​However,​ ​most​ ​of​ ​what​ ​you​ ​bring​ ​to​ ​the​ ​table​ ​are​ ​not​ ​which
college​ ​you​ ​went​ ​to​ ​but​ ​your​ ​projects,​ ​your​ ​experience​ ​and​ ​your​ ​grades.
One​ ​sad​ ​truth​ ​is​ ​that​ ​not​ ​everyone​ ​is​ ​aware​ ​of​ ​how​ ​hard​ ​Princeton​ ​is,​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​grade​ ​deflation,
and​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​surprising​ ​if,​ ​at​ ​a​ ​startup​ ​with​ ​no​ ​Princeton​ ​grads,​ ​a​ ​lower​ ​gpa​ ​from​ ​Princeton​ ​is​ ​judged.​ ​This​ ​is
unlikely​ ​to​ ​happen​ ​in​ ​bigger​ ​firms​ ​(who​ ​are​ ​moving​ ​away​ ​from​ ​grade​ ​judgment​ ​anyway).

● >>​ ​ ​is​ ​it​ ​worth​ ​it​ ​to​ ​do​ ​Berkeley​ ​'s​ ​Freshman​ ​Edge​ ​programme​ ​before​ ​term​ ​starts?​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​6
week​ ​programme​ ​before​ ​the​ ​fall​ ​semester​ ​begins​ ​and​ ​it​ ​allows​ ​me​ ​to​ ​take​ ​credit​ ​courses​ ​I
need​ ​to​ ​qualify​ ​for​ ​Haas​ ​Business​ ​School.

​ ​Yeah,​ ​I​ ​definitely​ ​think​ ​you​ ​should.​ ​Not​ ​so​ ​much​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​courses​ ​itself​ ​but​ ​because​ ​you'll
meet​ ​people​ ​at​ ​Berkeley​ ​for​ ​the​ ​first​ ​time​ ​who​ ​you'll​ ​bond​ ​with​ ​and​ ​remember​ ​for​ ​the​ ​rest​ ​of​ ​your
time​ ​there.​ ​The​ ​first​ ​people​ ​you​ ​meet​ ​in​ ​college​ ​are​ ​always​ ​special.​ ​It​ ​gives​ ​you​ ​a​ ​nice​ ​long​ ​time
to​ ​get​ ​acclimating​ ​to​ ​everything​ ​too.

● >>​ ​Unfortunately,​ ​all​ ​Med​ ​School​ ​aspirants/bio​ ​majors​ ​be​ ​like​ ​*eating​ ​popcorn*

For​ ​med​ ​school​ ​students,​ ​all​ ​I​ ​know,​ ​from​ ​having​ ​lived​ ​with​ ​a​ ​pre-med,​ ​is​ ​that​ ​the​ ​doctor​ ​-engineer
duality​ ​has​ ​carried​ ​on​ ​well​ ​to​ ​second​ ​and​ ​third​ ​generation​ ​American​ ​Indians.​ ​Also,​ ​a​ ​fuck​ ​ton​ ​of
people​ ​are​ ​pre-Med.​ ​Unlike​ ​CS,​ ​there's​ ​no​ ​major​ ​for​ ​it,​ ​and​ ​I'm​ ​unsure​ ​how​ ​it​ ​works​ ​in​ ​detail,​ ​but
you​ ​can​ ​be​ ​an​ ​English​ ​major,​ ​but​ ​"pre-med".​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​strange​ ​system.​ ​And​ ​med​ ​school​ ​is​ ​a​ ​whole
new​ ​level​ ​of​ ​competitiveness.​ ​I​ ​had​ ​a​ ​friend​ ​apply​ ​to​ ​30​ ​med​ ​schools​ ​when​ ​he​ ​graduated​ ​-​ ​that's
insane.​ ​Acceptance​ ​rates​ ​are​ ​like​ ​1-2%​ ​I​ ​think,​ ​and​ ​pre-meds​ ​also​ ​tend​ ​to​ ​take​ ​much​ ​fewer​ ​risks
in​ ​college​ ​because​ ​so​ ​much​ ​of​ ​their​ ​med​ ​school​ ​apps​ ​blindly​ ​depends​ ​on​ ​their​ ​Gpa.​ ​It's​ ​very
cultish,​ ​where​ ​people​ ​will​ ​do​ ​things​ ​just​ ​"to​ ​get​ ​into​ ​med​ ​school",​ ​just​ ​like​ ​people​ ​do​ ​in​ ​high​ ​school
in​ ​India.​ ​They​ ​will​ ​do​ ​research​ ​just​ ​for​ ​the​ ​sake​ ​of​ ​it,​ ​and​ ​intern​ ​at​ ​a​ ​hospital,​ ​and​ ​there's​ ​a​ ​list​ ​of
things​ ​they​ ​do.​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​judging​ ​though​ ​-​ ​at​ ​a​ ​1%​ ​acceptance​ ​rate,​ ​what​ ​can​ ​you​ ​expect?

● >>​ ​How​ ​does​ ​one​ ​deal​ ​with​ ​the​ ​cold?

About​ ​the​ ​basic​ ​stuff.​ ​The​ ​cold​ ​at​ ​Cornell​ ​is​ ​brutal,​ ​but​ ​there's​ ​the​ ​magic​ ​of​ ​indoor​ ​heating​ ​which
isn't​ ​ubiquitous​ ​in​ ​India.​ ​You're​ ​essentially​ ​oblivious​ ​of​ ​the​ ​weather​ ​until​ ​you​ ​step​ ​out​ ​to​ ​go​ ​to
class,​ ​you​ ​freeze​ ​on​ ​your​ ​10-12​ ​minute​ ​walk​ ​to​ ​campus,​ ​thaw​ ​inside​ ​class,​ ​and​ ​freeze​ ​while
walking​ ​to​ ​your​ ​next​ ​class.​ ​When​ ​you​ ​layer​ ​on​ ​your​ ​North​ ​Face​ ​gear,​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​so​ ​bad.
 ● >>​ ​Does​ ​a​ ​sleep-wake​ ​cycle​ ​exist?

Sleep-wake​ ​cycles​ ​exist​ ​for​ ​some.​ ​Not​ ​me.​ ​Classes​ ​are​ ​largely​ ​optional​ ​and​ ​not​ ​attendance
based,​ ​and​ ​for​ ​most​ ​of​ ​college,​ ​I​ ​didn't​ ​go​ ​to​ ​my​ ​classes​ ​that​ ​were​ ​too​ ​big​ ​in​ ​size​ ​or​ ​too​ ​boring​ ​for
me.​ ​You​ ​can​ ​always​ ​go​ ​to​ ​office​ ​hours​ ​or​ ​ask​ ​your​ ​peers​ ​if​ ​you​ ​have​ ​questions.​ ​In​ ​many​ ​other
majors,​ ​they​ ​have​ ​annoying​ ​things​ ​like​ ​in​ ​class​ ​quizzes​ ​and​ ​clicker​ ​questions,​ ​and​ ​some​ ​classes
in​ ​CS​ ​do​ ​too,​ ​to​ ​encourage​ ​people​ ​to​ ​come-​ ​most​ ​don't.
Not​ ​going​ ​to​ ​most​ ​of​ ​my​ ​classes​ ​enabled​ ​me​ ​to​ ​work​ ​as​ ​late​ ​into​ ​the​ ​night​ ​as​ ​need​ ​be​ ​and​ ​wake
up​ ​whenever​ ​I​ ​wanted.​ ​All​ ​nighters​ ​are​ ​common​ ​place,​ ​with​ ​anywhere​ ​between​ ​10-20​ ​in​ ​a​ ​semester.
Almost​ ​every​ ​student​ ​pulls​ ​at​ ​least​ ​one.​ ​It​ ​doesn't​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​this​ ​way​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​thing.​ ​Some​ ​people
are​ ​super​ ​discipline​ ​and​ ​like​ ​going​ ​to​ ​all​ ​their​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​sleeping​ ​by​ ​1-2am.

● >>​ ​Did​ ​you​ ​have​ ​time,​ ​to,​ ​say,​ ​hit​ ​the​ ​gym?

The​ ​gym​ ​for​ ​me​ ​was​ ​always​ ​in​ ​phases​ ​and​ ​was​ ​largely​ ​peer​ ​driven.​ ​Going​ ​to​ ​the​ ​gym​ ​alone
sucks.​ ​I've​ ​had​ ​semesters​ ​where​ ​I​ ​hit​ ​the​ ​gym​ ​3-4​ ​times​ ​a​ ​week​ ​-​ ​about​ ​3​ ​of​ ​them.​ ​Other
semesters​ ​were​ ​lazier.​ ​In​ ​general,​ ​there​ ​were​ ​times​ ​we'd​ ​play​ ​squash,​ ​cricket,​ ​football​ ​or​ ​go​ ​for​ ​a
run​ ​in​ ​our​ ​free​ ​time.

● >>​ ​And​ ​between​ ​USC​ ​and​ ​UIUC?​ ​Some​ ​people​ ​say​ ​that​ ​USC​ ​has​ ​a​ ​very​ ​party​ ​school
reputation​ ​and​ ​hence,​ ​employers​ ​dont​ ​look​ ​favourably​ ​at​ ​USC​ ​grads.​ ​Is​ ​that​ ​true?

​ ​If​ ​an​ ​employer​ ​makes​ ​sweeping​ ​judgements​ ​about​ ​entire​ ​schools​ ​simply​ ​because​ ​of​ ​some
stereotype,​ ​they're​ ​probably​ ​not​ ​employers​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​working​ ​for.

I​ ​don't​ ​think​ ​anybody​ ​judges​ ​USC,​ ​or​ ​any​ ​school​ ​on​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​how​ ​much​ ​they​ ​party.​ ​That​ ​being
said,​ ​I​ ​think​ ​UIUC​ ​has​ ​a​ ​stronger​ ​CS​ ​program​ ​and​ ​reputation​ ​than​ ​USC,​ ​but​ ​USC​ ​isn't​ ​bad​ ​at​ ​all.

● >>​ ​Thoughts​ ​on​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education​ ​in​ ​a​ ​small​ ​college?

I​ ​have​ ​controversial​ ​views​ ​on​ ​the​ ​matter,​ ​but​ ​I'll​ ​try​ ​to​ ​be​ ​as​ ​elaborate​ ​as​ ​I​ ​can,​ ​for​ ​fear​ ​of​ ​being
misunderstood.

First​ ​off,​ ​it's​ ​very​ ​unclear​ ​what​ ​exactly​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education​ ​even​ ​means.​ ​Education​ ​from​ ​a
small​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college​ ​is​ ​as​ ​much​ ​of​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education​ ​as​ ​graduating​ ​from​ ​Jaypee​ ​Institute​ ​of
Information​ ​Technology​ ​is​ ​a​ ​technology​ ​education​ ​[no​ ​offense​ ​to​ ​JIIT​ ​folks,​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​much​ ​about​ ​it
tbh].​ ​To​ ​me,​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education​ ​is​ ​one​ ​wherein​ ​you​ ​learn​ ​certain​ ​fundamental​ ​basics​ ​of​ ​the​ ​world
which​ ​are​ ​orthogonal​ ​to​ ​your​ ​employment​ ​or​ ​your​ ​degree,​ ​purely​ ​because​ ​you​ ​are​ ​human.​ ​You​ ​learn
about​ ​things​ ​like​ ​philosophy,​ ​economics,​ ​how​ ​finances​ ​work,​ ​you​ ​read​ ​some​ ​literature,​ ​you​ ​learn​ ​about
political​ ​ideologies​ ​and​ ​their​ ​failures​ ​and​ ​successes​ ​over​ ​the​ ​years.​ ​That's​ ​what​ ​I​ ​talk​ ​about​ ​when​ ​I​ ​say
"liberal​ ​arts​ ​education".
 Secondly,​ ​like​ ​I​ ​said,​ ​you​ ​don't​ ​just​ ​get​ ​a​ ​"liberal​ ​arts​ ​education"​ ​by​ ​going​ ​to​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college.​ ​I
learnt​ ​very​ ​little​ ​from​ ​all​ ​the​ ​"liberal​ ​arts​ ​electives"​ ​that​ ​we​ ​were​ ​required​ ​to​ ​graduate.​ ​However,​ ​I'm​ ​still
very​ ​fond​ ​of​ ​the​ ​liberal​ ​arts.​ ​I​ ​love​ ​reading​ ​about​ ​philosophy​ ​and​ ​political​ ​ideology.​ ​I'm​ ​super​ ​interested​ ​in
economics​ ​and​ ​learning​ ​more​ ​about​ ​the​ ​world​ ​on​ ​my​ ​own​ ​time.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​this​ ​is​ ​super​ ​important​ ​to​ ​make​ ​a
well-rounded​ ​human​ ​being,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​also​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​interest.​ ​If​ ​someone​ ​doesn't​ ​have​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​interest​ ​in
painting,​ ​or​ ​thinks​ ​Pollock​ ​is​ ​paint​ ​splatter,​ ​he​ ​has​ ​every​ ​right​ ​to​ ​think​ ​that​ ​and​ ​judging​ ​him​ ​for​ ​being​ ​that
way​ ​is​ ​wrong.

Thirdly,​ ​I​ ​think​ ​the​ ​most​ ​important​ ​takeaways​ ​from​ ​college,​ ​and​ ​I'll​ ​be​ ​brutally​ ​honest:
1.​ ​An​ ​diverse,​ ​intellectually​ ​curious​ ​body​ ​of​ ​peers
2.​ ​Being​ ​mentored​ ​by​ ​and​ ​working​ ​with​ ​incredibly​ ​accomplished​ ​Professors
3.​ ​Great​ ​class​ ​assignments.
4.​ ​Brand​ ​name​ ​and​ ​alumni​ ​base.​ ​It​ ​doesn't​ ​just​ ​feel​ ​good​ ​when​ ​someone​ ​knows​ ​what​ ​your
college​ ​is,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​super​ ​impactful​ ​in​ ​both​ ​employment​ ​and​ ​graduate​ ​school.

Fourthly,​ ​and​ ​this​ ​is​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​observation.​ ​I​ ​find​ ​that​ ​there​ ​are​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​"liberal​ ​arts"​ ​people​ ​who
don't​ ​embody​ ​what​ ​it​ ​means​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​"liberal​ ​arts"​ ​person.​ ​Many​ ​of​ ​the​ ​them​ ​have​ ​elementary​ ​reasoning
skills.​ ​When​ ​presented​ ​with​ ​a​ ​controversial​ ​opinion​ ​about​ ​something​ ​extremely​ ​liberal,​ ​they're​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​flail
and​ ​say​ ​you're​ ​wrong​ ​than​ ​debate​ ​hard​ ​numbers​ ​and​ ​stats.​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​you​ ​need​ ​a​ ​solid​ ​technical
foundation​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to​ ​analytically​ ​reason​ ​about​ ​things,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​majors​ ​don't​ ​have​ ​it.​ ​It's​ ​no
coincidence​ ​that​ ​some​ ​of​ ​our​ ​most​ ​famous​ ​economists​ ​for​ ​example​ ​are​ ​from​ ​highly​ ​technical​ ​fields.​ ​My
Professor​ ​once​ ​joked​ ​-​ ​"Physics​ ​students​ ​always​ ​have​ ​two​ ​career​ ​paths​ ​-​ ​Physics​ ​and​ ​Economics".
Raghuram​ ​Rajan,​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​best​ ​economics​ ​we've​ ​ever​ ​produced,​ ​is​ ​highly​ ​technically​ ​grounded.
Amartya​ ​Sen​ ​is​ ​firmly​ ​grounded​ ​in​ ​Mathematics.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​obviously​ ​a​ ​generalization,​ ​but​ ​many​ ​people​ ​use
the​ ​veil​ ​of​ ​"liberal​ ​arts"​ ​to​ ​escape​ ​being​ ​bad​ ​at​ ​technical​ ​subjects.​ ​I​ ​firmly​ ​believe​ ​you​ ​need​ ​math,​ ​statistics
and​ ​analytical​ ​skills​ ​to​ ​be​ ​good​ ​at​ ​the​ ​liberal​ ​arts.

All​ ​that​ ​being​ ​said,​ ​I​ ​wouldn't​ ​go​ ​to​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college,​ ​particularly​ ​a​ ​small​ ​one.​ ​You​ ​can​ ​go,​ ​and
turn​ ​out​ ​okay,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​reasonable​ ​to​ ​debate​ ​in​ ​hindsight.​ ​To​ ​conclude:
1.​ ​What​ ​I​ ​meant​ ​by​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education.
2.​ ​Let​ ​each​ ​person​ ​choose​ ​his​ ​own​ ​interests.​ ​You​ ​can​ ​get​ ​the​ ​same​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​education​ ​at​ ​any
college​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​really​ ​a​ ​function​ ​of​ ​your​ ​mindset.
3.​ ​Liberal​ ​arts​ ​colleges​ ​are​ ​less​ ​known​ ​by​ ​brand,​ ​have​ ​less​ ​technical​ ​assignments,​ ​less​ ​renown
professors​ ​on​ ​average,​ ​and​ ​often​ ​a​ ​blindly​ ​liberal​ ​(not​ ​diverse)​ ​body​ ​of​ ​peers.​ ​Many​ ​CS​ ​grads​ ​from​ ​liberal
arts​ ​colleges​ ​get​ ​a​ ​super​ ​theory​ ​based​ ​CS​ ​education​ ​and​ ​struggle​ ​with​ ​practical​ ​work.
 4.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​a​ ​true​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​education​ ​requires​ ​technical​ ​grounding,​ ​which​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​colleges​ ​will
struggle​ ​to​ ​give​ ​you.

● >>​ ​How​ ​is​ ​the​ ​job​ ​scene​ ​for​ ​Math​ ​grads​ ​from​ ​highly​ ​reputed​ ​schools?

Math​ ​is​ ​definitely​ ​not​ ​something​ ​one​ ​studies​ ​with​ ​the​ ​objective​ ​of​ ​getting​ ​a​ ​job.​ ​Most​ ​Math
majors​ ​go​ ​to​ ​graduate​ ​school​ ​(not​ ​just​ ​in​ ​Math,​ ​but​ ​in​ ​CS,​ ​Economics,​ ​Physics,​ ​etc​ ​-​ ​Math
majors​ ​have​ ​a​ ​ton​ ​of​ ​options​ ​to​ ​choose​ ​from​ ​when​ ​it​ ​comes​ ​to​ ​a​ ​PhD).

That​ ​being​ ​said,​ ​Math​ ​and​ ​Physics​ ​majors​ ​are​ ​almost​ ​undoubtedly​ ​by​ ​most​ ​intelligence​ ​measures
the​ ​smartest​ ​majors,​ ​and​ ​employers​ ​recognize​ ​that.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​pick​ ​up​ ​a​ ​minor​ ​in​ ​CS,​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​get​ ​into
Technology.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​know​ ​math,​ ​people​ ​assume​ ​you're​ ​good​ ​at​ ​reasoning.​ ​Consulting​ ​is​ ​an​ ​industry​ ​that
opens​ ​up​ ​to​ ​you.​ ​Investment​ ​Banking​ ​would​ ​hire​ ​you,​ ​but​ ​you​ ​might​ ​need​ ​some​ ​Economics​ ​knowledge.​ ​If
you're​ ​super​ ​bright,​ ​Putnam/IMO​ ​level,​ ​there​ ​are​ ​Algorithmic​ ​trading​ ​companies​ ​and​ ​Hedge​ ​funds​ ​that​ ​will
snap​ ​you​ ​up,​ ​and​ ​compensate​ ​handsomely.

● >>​ ​ ​Is​ ​a​ ​minor​ ​in​ ​economics​ ​manageable​ ​with​ ​Computer​ ​Science​ ​Engineering?

Yes,​ ​an​ ​Econ​ ​minor​ ​is​ ​manageable.​ ​People​ ​have​ ​graduated​ ​with​ ​triple​ ​majors​ ​before,​ ​so
manageable​ ​is​ ​purely​ ​a​ ​function​ ​of​ ​how​ ​much​ ​course​ ​load​ ​you​ ​can​ ​handle.

● >>​ ​Did​ ​you​ ​take​ ​many​ ​writing​ ​heavy​ ​classes​ ​as​ ​an​ ​undergrad?​ ​That​ ​is​ ​one​ ​advice​ ​I​ ​come
across​ ​quite​ ​often,​ ​to​ ​take​ ​writing​ ​heavy​ ​classes.

​ ​Wait,​ ​really?​ ​Who​ ​gave​ ​you​ ​that​ ​advice.​ ​I've​ ​never​ ​heard​ ​that​ ​before.​ ​I've​ ​heard​ ​"Dude,​ ​place​ ​out
of​ ​all​ ​your​ ​freshman​ ​writing​ ​seminars​ ​-​ ​they're​ ​taught​ ​by​ ​strange​ ​bipolar​ ​English​ ​graduate
students".

I've​ ​heard​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​"underclassmen​ ​advice"​ ​when​ ​I​ ​was​ ​an​ ​underclassmen​ ​which​ ​is​ ​basically​ ​bossy
people​ ​who,​ ​like​ ​Jon​ ​Snow,​ ​know​ ​nothing,​ ​imparting​ ​their​ ​advice​ ​onto​ ​naive​ ​people​ ​who,​ ​also​ ​like​ ​Jon
Snow,​ ​know​ ​nothing,​ ​but​ ​are​ ​quick​ ​to​ ​listen.​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​saying​ ​this​ ​is​ ​definitely​ ​in​ ​that​ ​category,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​may​ ​well
be.
I​ ​remember,​ ​as​ ​an​ ​underclassmen,​ ​many​ ​people​ ​said​ ​"Don't​ ​use​ ​your​ ​APs​ ​to​ ​place​ ​out​ ​of​ ​Physics
and​ ​Chemistry.​ ​The​ ​Physics​ ​and​ ​Chemistry​ ​experience​ ​at​ ​Cornell​ ​will​ ​redefine​ ​the​ ​way​ ​you​ ​learnt
it,​ ​and​ ​you​ ​shouldn't​ ​miss​ ​out."​ ​End​ ​result​ ​-​ ​they​ ​spend​ ​5​ ​hours​ ​a​ ​week​ ​in​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​labs,​ ​ended
up​ ​getting​ ​a​ ​sour​ ​grade,​ ​hating​ ​their​ ​lives,​ ​and​ ​going​ ​"fuck​ ​Physics",​ ​and​ ​they​ ​took​ ​an​ ​extra
course​ ​they​ ​didn't​ ​need​ ​to.
Another​ ​common​ ​one​ ​amongst​ ​Indians​ ​was​ ​this​ ​obsession​ ​to​ ​get​ ​the​ ​"business​ ​minor",​ ​which​ ​later​ ​people
realized,​ ​meant​ ​nothing.
Another​ ​common​ ​one​ ​is​ ​"Don't​ ​take​ ​above​ ​20​ ​credits,​ ​you'll​ ​die.​ ​And​ ​you​ ​won't​ ​learn​ ​from​ ​your
classes."
 Another​ ​common​ ​one​ ​"Take​ ​<X>​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​class​ ​because​ ​it​ ​will​ ​redefine​ ​the​ ​person​ ​you​ ​are."
These​ ​are​ ​common​ ​underclassman​ ​tropes​ ​which​ ​disappear​ ​by​ ​the​ ​time​ ​they're​ ​in​ ​junior/senior
year.

In​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​classes,​ ​from​ ​my​ ​experience,​ ​the​ ​philosophy​ ​is​ ​simple​ ​-​ ​get​ ​rid​ ​of​ ​your​ ​requirements
and​ ​your​ ​introductory​ ​classes​ ​early​ ​to​ ​maximize​ ​the​ ​number​ ​of​ ​super​ ​advanced​ ​graduate​ ​classes​ ​you​ ​can
take​ ​in​ ​your​ ​field,​ ​and​ ​balance​ ​that​ ​out​ ​with​ ​taking​ ​other​ ​classes​ ​in​ ​other​ ​fields​ ​because​ ​it​ ​interests​ ​you.
Do​ ​research​ ​and​ ​research​ ​based​ ​PhD​ ​classes.
Don't​ ​focus​ ​on​ ​additional​ ​majors​ ​and​ ​minors​ ​-​ ​more​ ​often​ ​than​ ​not,​ ​the​ ​only​ ​person​ ​who​ ​cares​ ​is
you.

P.S.​ ​If​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​good​ ​writing​ ​class,​ ​and​ ​more​ ​importantly,​ ​a​ ​good​ ​prof,​ ​it's​ ​definitely​ ​worth​ ​it.​ ​Don't
blindly​ ​take​ ​writing​ ​classes​ ​just​ ​cuz,​ ​though

​>>​ ​ ​This​ ​one​ ​was​ ​not​ ​from​ ​any​ ​college​ ​grads.​ ​The​ ​reasoning​ ​went​ ​that​ ​it​ ​helps​ ​in​ ​writing
papers,​ ​and​ ​in​ ​writing​ ​documentation,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​do​ ​see​ ​your​ ​point​ ​and​ ​that​ ​comes​ ​as​ ​a​ ​relief.

​ ​They​ ​make​ ​us​ ​take​ ​a​ ​technical​ ​writing​ ​elective​ ​for​ ​Engineering​ ​at​ ​Cornell,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​such​ ​a​ ​pain​ ​that
I​ ​waived​ ​it​ ​by​ ​writing​ ​an​ ​actual​ ​paper​ ​instead.
If​ ​you​ ​mean​ ​documentation,​ ​I​ ​hope​ ​you​ ​don't​ ​mean​ ​code​ ​documentation.​ ​Although,​ ​come​ ​to​ ​think
of​ ​it,​ ​some​ ​people​ ​could​ ​use​ ​a​ ​class​ ​in​ ​that.

>>​ ​Can​ ​you​ ​elaborate​ ​on​ ​the​ ​business​ ​minor​ ​thing?

Nobody​ ​really​ ​cares​ ​about​ ​minors,​ ​with​ ​the​ ​sole​ ​exception​ ​of​ ​CS,​ ​maybe​ ​(and​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​even​ ​sure
about​ ​that).​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​think​ ​any​ ​hiring​ ​decisions​ ​have​ ​been​ ​turned​ ​because​ ​a​ ​guy​ ​had​ ​a​ ​minor​ ​in​ ​something.
It's​ ​one​ ​word​ ​on​ ​your​ ​transcript​ ​and​ ​resume​ ​that​ ​typically​ ​only​ ​has​ ​value​ ​to​ ​you.​ ​In​ ​that​ ​sense,​ ​get​ ​a​ ​minor
if​ ​you​ ​genuinely​ ​enjoy​ ​all​ ​the​ ​classes​ ​you​ ​need​ ​to​ ​take​ ​to​ ​get​ ​it.​ ​Otherwise,​ ​just​ ​take​ ​classes​ ​you​ ​enjoy,
and​ ​don't​ ​worry​ ​about​ ​the​ ​minor.

● >>​ ​Would​ ​it​ ​be​ ​the​ ​other​ ​way​ ​around​ ​for​ ​Premed​ ​students?​ ​I've​ ​heard​ ​that​ ​they​ ​try​ ​the
easiest​ ​classes​ ​(introductories)​ ​to​ ​keep​ ​their​ ​GPAs​ ​up.​ ​I​ ​want​ ​to​ ​try​ ​the​ ​hardest​ ​classes,
though.​ ​Would​ ​it​ ​be​ ​advisable?

Med​ ​school​ ​is​ ​like​ ​a​ ​obstacle​ ​course,​ ​but​ ​people​ ​generally​ ​qualify​ ​on​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​how​ ​fast​ ​they
can​ ​sprint.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​choose​ ​to​ ​do​ ​hurdles​ ​while​ ​others​ ​sprint,​ ​you​ ​might​ ​be​ ​better​ ​prepares,​ ​but​ ​you'll
be​ ​slower.

This​ ​is​ ​all​ ​hearsay,​ ​because​ ​I'm​ ​obviously​ ​not​ ​a​ ​pre-med,​ ​but​ ​people​ ​who​ ​take​ ​the​ ​harder​ ​route
put​ ​themselves​ ​at​ ​greater​ ​risk.​ ​Often​ ​if​ ​you​ ​dip​ ​below​ ​a​ ​certain​ ​GPA,​ ​I​ ​hear​ ​they​ ​don't​ ​even​ ​consider​ ​you.
If​ ​you​ ​can​ ​hurdle​ ​at​ ​the​ ​same​ ​time​ ​that​ ​somebody​ ​sprints,​ ​you'll​ ​probably​ ​edge​ ​out.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​have​ ​a​ ​slightly
slower​ ​time,​ ​he​ ​may​ ​edge​ ​out.​ ​Trivia:​ ​Med​ ​students​ ​weep​ ​over​ ​Organic​ ​Chemistry​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​the​ ​single
hardest​ ​class​ ​and​ ​worst​ ​grade​ ​hit​ ​they​ ​usually​ ​have

In​ ​utopia.​ ​I​ ​would​ ​encourage​ ​everyone​ ​to​ ​take​ ​the​ ​hardest​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​push​ ​yourself,​ ​but​ ​if​ ​the
system​ ​disincentivizes​ ​it,​ ​it's​ ​hard.

● >>​ ​is​ ​grade​ ​deflation​ ​a​ ​serious​ ​issue​ ​?

I've​ ​never​ ​heard​ ​of​ ​grade​ ​deflation​ ​at​ ​Berkeley.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​bad​ ​grades.

And​ ​there's​ ​grade​ ​deflation.

I​ ​know​ ​at​ ​least​ ​3​ ​people​ ​at​ ​Berkeley​ ​in​ ​EECS​ ​with​ ​4.0s.
Sorry​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​party​ ​pooper
The​ ​only​ ​well​ ​documented​ ​case​ ​of​ ​grade​ ​deflation​ ​that​ ​comes​ ​to​ ​mind,​ ​I​ ​believe,​ ​is​ ​Princeton.
Cornell​ ​was​ ​bad,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​gotten​ ​better​ ​in​ ​the​ ​last​ ​couple​ ​of​ ​years.

Some​ ​colleges​ ​like​ ​Harvard​ ​have​ ​serious​ ​grade​ ​inflation​ ​issues.​ ​If​ ​the​ ​average​ ​GPA​ ​of​ ​your
college​ ​is​ ​below​ ​3.3,​ ​I​ ​think​ ​you​ ​have​ ​grade​ ​deflation​ ​issues.​ ​In​ ​general,​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​engineer​ ​GPA​ ​averages
around​ ​3.3

In​ ​arts,​ ​to​ ​encourage​ ​more​ ​people​ ​to​ ​take​ ​it,​ ​they've​ ​recently​ ​been​ ​boosting​ ​grades​ ​artificially.
You're​ ​much​ ​more​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​see​ ​a​ ​Psych​ ​major​ ​with​ ​a​ ​4.0​ ​than​ ​an​ ​engineer.

There's​ ​a​ ​distinction​ ​between​ ​grade​ ​deflation​ ​and​ ​hard​ ​majors.​ ​Engineering,​ ​Math,​ ​and​ ​Physics,
are​ ​hard.​ ​Therefore,​ ​it's​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​do​ ​well.​ ​Deflation​ ​means,​ ​giving​ ​the​ ​the​ ​same​ ​standard​ ​of​ ​students​ ​in
the​ ​same​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​class​ ​a​ ​lower​ ​grade​ ​with​ ​respect​ ​to​ ​other​ ​colleges.

At​ ​Cornell,​ ​most​ ​big​ ​classes​ ​have​ ​median​ ​grades​ ​around​ ​the​ ​B/B+​ ​region,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​a​ ​3.0/3.3.​ ​This
is​ ​low/normal.​ ​Median​ ​of​ ​grades​ ​of​ ​A-​ ​is​ ​normal/high.​ ​Median​ ​grade​ ​of​ ​A​ ​is​ ​high/Harvard.

Also,​ ​people​ ​make​ ​horrible​ ​statistical​ ​biases​ ​when​ ​assessing​ ​this.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​did​ ​poorly​ ​and​ ​some​ ​of
your​ ​friends​ ​did​ ​poorly​ ​in​ ​a​ ​class,​ ​it's​ ​common​ ​to​ ​say​ ​"grade​ ​deflation".​ ​If​ ​you​ ​know​ ​somebody​ ​at​ ​Penn
and​ ​they​ ​tell​ ​you​ ​"man,​ ​classes​ ​are​ ​super​ ​hard​ ​here.​ ​There's​ ​grade​ ​deflation",​ ​then​ ​you​ ​will​ ​echo​ ​that
sentiment.​ ​Statistically,​ ​the​ ​only​ ​correct​ ​way​ ​is​ ​to​ ​compare​ ​median​ ​grades​ ​of​ ​similar​ ​classes​ ​at​ ​similar​ ​tier
schools.​ ​If​ ​your​ ​median​ ​grade​ ​for​ ​a​ ​common,​ ​large​ ​class​ ​is​ ​a​ ​C+,​ ​it​ ​may​ ​be​ ​a​ ​one​ ​of​ ​case​ ​that​ ​year,​ ​but
you're​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​have​ ​grade​ ​deflation.

Grade​ ​deflation​ ​affects​ ​job​ ​opportunities​ ​in​ ​industries/fields​ ​where​ ​grades​ ​are​ ​given​ ​a​ ​high
premium.​ ​Off​ ​the​ ​top​ ​of​ ​my​ ​head,​ ​med​ ​school​ ​and​ ​consulting​ ​come​ ​to​ ​mind.

In​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​graduate​ ​school,​ ​typically​ ​good​ ​graduate​ ​schools​ ​assess​ ​your​ ​entire​ ​transcript
(which​ ​has​ ​median​ ​grades​ ​on​ ​it),​ ​which​ ​gives​ ​them​ ​a​ ​better​ ​picture.​ ​This​ ​may​ ​happen​ ​in​ ​med​ ​school​ ​too,
but​ ​my​ ​understanding​ ​is​ ​that​ ​they​ ​re​ ​more​ ​strict​ ​with​ ​screening​ ​with​ ​a​ ​GPA​ ​bar​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​low
acceptance​ ​rate.
Good​ ​PhD​ ​programs​ ​typically​ ​also​ ​prefer​ ​applicants​ ​with​ ​a​ ​3.6+​ ​too​ ​regardless,​ ​though.

There​ ​are​ ​cases​ ​where​ ​it's​ ​acknowledged​ ​in​ ​the​ ​industry,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​very​ ​human​ ​dependent.​ ​If​ ​your
recruiter​ ​knows​ ​about​ ​it,​ ​then​ ​you're​ ​good.​ ​If​ ​they​ ​don't,​ ​too​ ​bad.

● >>​ ​How​ ​much​ ​do​ ​your​ ​academic​ ​advisers​ ​help​ ​in​ ​selection​ ​of​ ​courses?​ ​Are​ ​they​ ​just
nominally​ ​present​ ​to​ ​talk​ ​to​ ​you​ ​about​ ​what​ ​your​ ​major​ ​requires,​ ​or​ ​do​ ​they​ ​have​ ​an
intimate​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​most​ ​courses​ ​to​ ​guide​ ​your​ ​selection?

From​ ​my​ ​own​ ​experience,​ ​my​ ​academic​ ​advisor​ ​was​ ​pretty​ ​useless.​ ​They're​ ​kinda​ ​just​ ​given​ ​an
additional​ ​responsibility​ ​they​ ​don't​ ​want​ ​and​ ​hardly​ ​know​ ​anything​ ​about​ ​graduation​ ​requirements
and​ ​options.​ ​They​ ​typically​ ​just​ ​nod,​ ​and​ ​agree​ ​to​ ​whatever​ ​you​ ​tell​ ​them.​ ​Typically,​ ​they​ ​have​ ​to
sign​ ​off​ ​on​ ​things​ ​you​ ​petition​ ​for​ ​like​ ​extra​ ​credit​ ​and​ ​stuff,​ ​and​ ​they're​ ​pretty​ ​liberal​ ​on​ ​that.​ ​My
interaction​ ​with​ ​my​ ​academic​ ​advisor​ ​is:
"Here's​ ​my​ ​plan.​ ​Is​ ​it​ ​okay?"
"Uhhhh,​ ​yeahh​ ​I​ ​think​ ​so"
"Cool,​ ​could​ ​you​ ​please​ ​sign​ ​here"
"yes,​ ​cool"

● The​ ​best​ ​way​ ​to​ ​plan​ ​your​ ​classes​ ​is​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​the​ ​ambitious​ ​seniors.​ ​I'm​ ​sure​ ​they'd​ ​love​ ​to​ ​help
you,​ ​and​ ​they​ ​give​ ​good​ ​advice.​ ​I​ ​would​ ​often​ ​talk​ ​to​ ​the​ ​head​ ​of​ ​the​ ​CS​ ​program​ ​just​ ​to​ ​tally​ ​off
whether​ ​X​ ​course​ ​met​ ​Y​ ​requirement,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​like.​ ​That's​ ​useful​ ​too.

● >>​ ​By​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​the​ ​introductory​ ​writing​ ​courses,​ ​are​ ​Indian​ ​HS​ ​students​ ​comfortable
writing​ ​papers?

What​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​papers?​ ​There's​ ​two​ ​kinds​ ​of​ ​writing​ ​-​ ​technical​ ​and​ ​non-technical.​ ​Non-technical
writing​ ​is​ ​a​ ​skill,​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​teach,​ ​and​ ​often​ ​taught​ ​poorly.
Technical​ ​writing​ ​is​ ​something​ ​I​ ​think​ ​you​ ​can​ ​easily​ ​pick​ ​up,​ ​but​ ​they'll​ ​tack​ ​on​ ​a​ ​requirement​ ​for
that​ ​too.
 Typically,​ ​most​ ​Indian​ ​HS​ ​students​ ​are​ ​comfortable​ ​with​ ​writing​ ​by​ ​default,​ ​even​ ​without​ ​this
content.​ ​For​ ​those​ ​who​ ​aren't,​ ​they​ ​offer​ ​many​ ​super​ ​basic​ ​intro​ ​writing​ ​classes​ ​for​ ​people​ ​who​ ​struggle
with​ ​the​ ​language.

● >>​ ​For​ ​a​ ​PhD/MS​ ​program,​ ​does​ ​college​ ​reputation​ ​matter​ ​a​ ​lot?​ ​Will​ ​a​ ​top​ ​20​ ​liberal​ ​arts
college​ ​graduate​ ​be​ ​at​ ​any​ ​significant​ ​disadvantage?

It​ ​matters​ ​-​ ​not​ ​as​ ​much​ ​as​ ​publications​ ​and​ ​classes​ ​you've​ ​taken​ ​and​ ​grades​ ​and​ ​experience​ ​and
research​ ​work,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​matters.​ ​Two​ ​main​ ​reasons.

Brand​ ​name​ ​is​ ​something​ ​no​ ​one​ ​likes​ ​to​ ​trust,​ ​but​ ​everybody​ ​has​ ​biases​ ​towards,​ ​like​ ​I​ ​said
before,​ ​Identical​ ​applications​ ​from​ ​Harvard​ ​and​ ​Iowa​ ​State,​ ​and​ ​we​ ​know​ ​who's​ ​going​ ​to​ ​pick​ ​what.

It's​ ​likely​ ​that​ ​professors​ ​are​ ​more​ ​reputable​ ​there​ ​and​ ​more​ ​in​ ​touch​ ​with​ ​other​ ​professors​ ​at​ ​big
colleges.​ ​Liberal​ ​Arts​ ​college​ ​technical​ ​professors​ ​are​ ​typically​ ​the​ ​"almost​ ​retired,​ ​kinda​ ​still​ ​doing​ ​my
thing​ ​"​ ​type,​ ​and​ ​are​ ​less​ ​connected​ ​to​ ​other​ ​big​ ​name​ ​professors​ ​at​ ​big​ ​name​ ​universities.
Recommendations​ ​matter​ ​a​ ​LOT​ ​in​ ​PhD​ ​apps.​ ​If​ ​a​ ​famous​ ​prof,​ ​or​ ​a​ ​close​ ​friend​ ​of​ ​a​ ​prof​ ​at​ ​the​ ​school
you're​ ​applying​ ​to,​ ​says​ ​you​ ​worked​ ​with​ ​him​ ​and​ ​"impressed​ ​him",​ ​that​ ​can​ ​almost​ ​single​ ​handedly​ ​get
you​ ​in.

● >>Hey​ ​I​ ​am​ ​most​ ​probably​ ​attending​ ​Purdue​ ​...How​ ​is​ ​Purdue​ ​for​ ​CS​ ​according​ ​to​ ​you​ ​?
Have​ ​you​ ​met​ ​any​ ​Purdue​ ​alumni​ ​at​ ​FB?

Things​ ​I​ ​know​ ​about​ ​Purdue:

1.​ ​They​ ​accept​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​people,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​end​ ​up​ ​dropping​ ​out.​ ​They​ ​have​ ​a​ ​low​ ​retention​ ​rate.
2.​ ​They​ ​are​ ​a​ ​fairly​ ​standard​ ​college,​ ​but​ ​because​ ​they​ ​accept​ ​so​ ​many​ ​people,​ ​some​ ​below
standard,​ ​many​ ​people​ ​end​ ​up​ ​with​ ​bad​ ​grades.
3.​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​see​ ​many​ ​of​ ​them​ ​at​ ​any​ ​big​ ​tech​ ​companies.​ ​I've​ ​never​ ​met​ ​a​ ​Purdue​ ​grad​ ​at​ ​Google​ ​or
Facebook​ ​or​ ​Coursera.​ ​This​ ​may​ ​just​ ​be​ ​a​ ​bias​ ​-​ ​I'm​ ​unlikely​ ​to​ ​remember​ ​a​ ​Purdue​ ​grad​ ​in​ ​comparison​ ​to
a​ ​Princeton​ ​grad,​ ​or​ ​maybe​ ​Purdue​ ​grads​ ​are​ ​less​ ​obnoxious​ ​about​ ​where​ ​they​ ​went​ ​to​ ​school.

● >>​ ​how​ ​easy/hard​ ​is​ ​it​ ​for​ ​CS​ ​majors​ ​to​ ​get​ ​into​ ​Investment​ ​banking/​ ​consulting?

​ ​If​ ​you're​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major,​ ​please​ ​don't​ ​get​ ​into​ ​investment​ ​banking​ ​or​ ​consulting.​ ​Please​ ​find​ ​a​ ​major
you're​ ​actually​ ​passionate​ ​about.

Don't​ ​practice​ ​cricket​ ​so​ ​you​ ​can​ ​play​ ​kabaddi

​>>​ ​why​ ​I​ ​asked​ ​about​ ​investment​ ​banking​ ​is​ ​because​ ​if​ ​I​ ​do​ ​go​ ​to​ ​UIUC​ ​I​ ​plan​ ​to​ ​take​ ​the
business​ ​minor​ ​in​ ​the​ ​3rd​ ​year.​ ​That's​ ​why​ ​I​ ​was​ ​asking​ ​about​ ​how​ ​CS​ ​majors​ ​fare​ ​in​ ​investment
banking,​ ​in​ ​the​ ​event​ ​that​ ​I​ ​do​ ​want​ ​to​ ​switch​ ​fields
 I​ ​understand​ ​your​ ​situation,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​disconcerting​ ​that​ ​you're​ ​considering​ ​switching​ ​fields​ ​even
before​ ​you've​ ​tried​ ​CS​ ​in​ ​college.​ ​I​ ​would​ ​highly​ ​recommend​ ​analyzing​ ​your​ ​future​ ​career​ ​choices​ ​and
making​ ​the​ ​best​ ​decision​ ​you​ ​can​ ​as​ ​early​ ​as​ ​you​ ​can.​ ​Regardless​ ​of​ ​what​ ​me​ ​or​ ​anybody​ ​else​ ​thinks​ ​of
I-banking,​ ​if​ ​that's​ ​what​ ​you​ ​think​ ​you'd​ ​excel​ ​at,​ ​then​ ​don't​ ​try​ ​to​ ​circle​ ​around​ ​to​ ​it.​ ​Just​ ​study​ ​something
which​ ​will​ ​directly​ ​plant​ ​you​ ​there.

If​ ​you​ ​don't​ ​enjoy​ ​something,​ ​cross​ ​that​ ​bridge​ ​when​ ​it​ ​gets​ ​there.

To​ ​answer​ ​your​ ​question,​ ​a​ ​late​ ​switch​ ​to​ ​any​ ​different​ ​stream​ ​is​ ​looked​ ​down​ ​upon​ ​in​ ​comparison
to​ ​an​ ​early​ ​choice.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​stick​ ​to​ ​majoring​ ​in​ ​CS​ ​and​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​in​ ​I​ ​banking,​ ​it's​ ​difficult.​ ​I-banking​ ​is​ ​also
strange​ ​because​ ​getting​ ​in​ ​is​ ​largely​ ​based​ ​on​ ​how​ ​well​ ​(read:much,​ ​lol)​ ​you​ ​talk​ ​and​ ​how​ ​pretty​ ​you​ ​look

● >>​ ​what​ ​are​ ​some​ ​things​ ​you​ ​wish​ ​you​ ​knew​ ​in​ ​your​ ​freshman​ ​year?

Random​ ​general​ ​freshman​ ​advice,​ ​in​ ​addition​ ​to​ ​the​ ​three​ ​points​ ​I​ ​made​ ​somewhere​ ​above:
1.​ ​If​ ​there​ ​was​ ​one​ ​simple​ ​thing​ ​I​ ​could​ ​tell​ ​you,​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​"be​ ​humble,​ ​be​ ​curious."
Don't​ ​think​ ​too​ ​highly​ ​of​ ​yourself​ ​and​ ​always​ ​look​ ​to​ ​learn​ ​-​ ​from​ ​peers,​ ​from​ ​experiences,​ ​from
professors.​ ​Question​ ​things​ ​that​ ​seem​ ​like​ ​truths.
What​ ​should​ ​separate​ ​you,​ ​the​ ​Princeton​ ​[or​ ​insert​ ​college​ ​here]​ ​graduate​ ​from​ ​someone​ ​who
goes​ ​to​ ​LPU​ ​is​ ​not​ ​fancier​ ​words​ ​and​ ​a​ ​higher​ ​end​ ​suit.​ ​It's​ ​not​ ​that​ ​he​ ​listens​ ​to​ ​Honey​ ​Singh​ ​and​ ​you
listen​ ​to​ ​Vitamin​ ​String​ ​Quartet​ ​or​ ​Vampire​ ​Weekend.​ ​It's​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​when​ ​met​ ​with​ ​a​ ​problem​ ​-​ ​"Is​ ​rape
in​ ​India​ ​a​ ​problem"​ ​-​ ​you'll​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​break​ ​it​ ​down​ ​logically​ ​and​ ​they​ ​won't.​ ​They​ ​may​ ​say​ ​"of​ ​course​ ​man
look​ ​its​ ​happening​ ​everywhere"​ ​and​ ​you​ ​may​ ​say​ ​"But​ ​per​ ​capita,​ ​it's​ ​much​ ​less​ ​than​ ​many​ ​developed
countries.​ ​It​ ​may​ ​be​ ​a​ ​problem,​ ​but​ ​is​ ​it​ ​our​ ​biggest​ ​one?".​ ​He​ ​will​ ​say​ ​"No​ ​man,​ ​so​ ​many​ ​go​ ​unreported".
You​ ​can​ ​say​ ​"Even​ ​accounting​ ​for​ ​90%​ ​unreported​ ​rapes,​ ​our​ ​rape​ ​figures​ ​are​ ​better​ ​than​ ​many
developed​ ​countries.​ ​Also,​ ​rape​ ​is​ ​sensationalized​ ​and​ ​only​ ​jumped​ ​out​ ​as​ ​a​ ​problem​ ​when​ ​it​ ​moved​ ​from
a​ ​rural​ ​scenario​ ​to​ ​an​ ​urban​ ​one.​ ​India​ ​only​ ​cares​ ​about​ ​it's​ ​urban​ ​population's​ ​problems".​ ​He:​ ​"I​ ​dunno
man​ ​you're​ ​a​ ​rapist".​ ​It's​ ​the​ ​acumen​ ​with​ ​which​ ​you​ ​can​ ​tackle​ ​everyday​ ​issues,​ ​in​ ​my​ ​opinion,​ ​that
should​ ​separate​ ​you.

2.​ ​Don't​ ​judge​ ​people.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​people​ ​who​ ​actually​ ​want​ ​to​ ​study​ ​English,​ ​and​ ​then​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be
a​ ​belly​ ​dancer.​ ​That's​ ​okay.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​people​ ​who​ ​will​ ​party​ ​all​ ​day​ ​and​ ​all​ ​night.​ ​That's​ ​okay.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​go​ ​to
Princeton​ ​and​ ​someone​ ​who​ ​goes​ ​to​ ​Purdue​ ​argues​ ​against​ ​something​ ​you're​ ​saying,​ ​don't​ ​dismiss​ ​him
because​ ​"he's​ ​from​ ​Purdue,​ ​yuck."​ ​Don't​ ​be​ ​that​ ​asshole.​ ​No​ ​one​ ​likes​ ​that​ ​asshole.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​do,​ ​or​ ​did​ ​well
for​ ​yourself,​ ​good​ ​for​ ​you!​ ​Don't​ ​shove​ ​it​ ​into​ ​other​ ​people's​ ​faces​ ​because​ ​they​ ​may​ ​have​ ​not​ ​been​ ​as
lucky​ ​or​ ​fortunate​ ​to​ ​be​ ​rich,​ ​or​ ​get​ ​aid,​ ​or​ ​they​ ​may​ ​not​ ​even​ ​want​ ​the​ ​same​ ​things​ ​you​ ​do.​ ​Don't​ ​let
college​ ​get​ ​in​ ​the​ ​way​ ​of​ ​being​ ​human.

3.​ ​Don't​ ​lose​ ​your​ ​personality.​ ​Many​ ​Indians​ ​come​ ​to​ ​America​ ​and​ ​have​ ​a​ ​strange​ ​desire​ ​to
revoke​ ​anything​ ​Indian​ ​about​ ​them.​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​why.​ ​I've​ ​often​ ​seen​ ​that​ ​Indians​ ​have​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​xenophilia
with​ ​everything​ ​-​ ​there's​ ​plenty​ ​of​ ​examples.​ ​Don't​ ​do​ ​that.​ ​Don't​ ​lose​ ​your​ ​accent​ ​[bend​ ​it,​ ​don't​ ​change
it].​ ​Don't​ ​start​ ​dissing​ ​anything​ ​Bollywood​ ​and​ ​your​ ​vernacular.​ ​Don't​ ​start​ ​hating​ ​on​ ​India​ ​and​ ​not​ ​talking
in​ ​your​ ​vernacular​ ​with​ ​friends​ ​who​ ​speak​ ​it.​ ​Don't​ ​not​ ​talk​ ​about​ ​cricket​ ​because​ ​you​ ​have​ ​white​ ​friends
around​ ​[they​ ​would​ ​never​ ​offer​ ​you​ ​the​ ​same​ ​courtesy​ ​with​ ​baseball].​ ​You​ ​don't​ ​need​ ​to​ ​change​ ​yourself
to​ ​fit​ ​in.​ ​They'll​ ​like​ ​you​ ​for​ ​who​ ​you​ ​are.

● >>​ ​ ​Thoughts​ ​on​ ​waterloo?

Severely​ ​underrated.​ ​They're​ ​everywhere,​ ​like​ ​ants.​ ​Like​ ​there's​ ​all​ ​these​ ​colleges​ ​you​ ​know​ ​of​ ​in
America​ ​and​ ​all​ ​of​ ​a​ ​sudden,​ ​there's​ ​a​ ​bunch​ ​of​ ​Waterloo​ ​guys.​ ​Google,​ ​Facebook,​ ​Coursera,​ ​and
in​ ​general​ ​in​ ​the​ ​valley​ ​-​ ​I've​ ​met​ ​a​ ​ton​ ​of​ ​folks​ ​from​ ​Waterloo.

I​ ​hear​ ​they​ ​manufacture​ ​some​ ​tremendous​ ​engineers.

● >>​ ​what​ ​is​ ​your​ ​average​ ​day​ ​working​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​like?

Work​ ​life:
I​ ​live​ ​in​ ​Manhattan,​ ​and​ ​work​ ​is​ ​a​ ​10-15​ ​minute​ ​commute,​ ​bed​ ​to​ ​desk.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​no​ ​strict​ ​work
hours​ ​-​ ​the​ ​general​ ​principle​ ​is​ ​-​ ​work​ ​hard,​ ​don't​ ​miss​ ​important​ ​meetings,​ ​and​ ​get​ ​your​ ​work​ ​done.​ ​The
people​ ​on​ ​my​ ​team​ ​at​ ​least,​ ​are​ ​super​ ​passionate​ ​and​ ​very​ ​nerdy.​ ​We've​ ​had​ ​bar​ ​conversations​ ​about
algebraic​ ​topology​ ​-​ ​sometimes​ ​it​ ​can​ ​get​ ​a​ ​tad​ ​nauseating.​ ​But​ ​because​ ​we​ ​all​ ​really​ ​enjoy​ ​the​ ​work​ ​we
do​ ​and​ ​have​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​freedom​ ​in​ ​the​ ​direction,​ ​it's​ ​enjoyable​ ​and​ ​we​ ​work​ ​more​ ​hours​ ​than​ ​we​ ​need​ ​to
because​ ​we​ ​want​ ​to​ ​get​ ​stuff​ ​done,​ ​not​ ​because​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to.​ ​Typically,​ ​anywhere​ ​from​ ​8​ ​to​ ​16​ ​hour​ ​days.
Breakfast​ ​lunch​ ​and​ ​dinner​ ​are​ ​catered​ ​to​ ​us,​ ​so​ ​we​ ​don't​ ​have​ ​to​ ​worry​ ​about​ ​meals.​ ​There's​ ​a​ ​coffee
bar,​ ​an​ ​actual​ ​bar,​ ​a​ ​ping​ ​pong​ ​table​ ​and​ ​some​ ​other​ ​conveniences​ ​too,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​nice.​ ​Drinking​ ​after​ ​a
long​ ​day​ ​of​ ​work,​ ​either​ ​at​ ​work,​ ​or​ ​at​ ​a​ ​bar​ ​nearby,​ ​is​ ​common.

In​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​work,​ ​I​ ​work​ ​on​ ​Places​ ​Search​ ​Ranking,​ ​and​ ​do​ ​Machine​ ​Learning​ ​and​ ​Infrastructure
work​ ​for,​ ​obv,​ ​Facebook.​ ​Typically​ ​tasks​ ​can​ ​range​ ​to​ ​writing​ ​classifiers​ ​to​ ​predict​ ​hours​ ​of​ ​operations​ ​of
places,​ ​to​ ​figuring​ ​out​ ​how​ ​logging​ ​is​ ​done​ ​to​ ​find​ ​a​ ​bug​ ​that's​ ​killing​ ​your​ ​metric.​ ​All​ ​technology​ ​work​ ​at
competent​ ​companies​ ​is​ ​data​ ​driven,​ ​so​ ​there's​ ​little​ ​to​ ​no​ ​office​ ​politics.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​have​ ​a​ ​point,​ ​back​ ​it​ ​up
with​ ​data,​ ​and​ ​you​ ​win.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​have​ ​a​ ​feature​ ​idea,​ ​make​ ​it,​ ​test​ ​it​ ​on​ ​a​ ​part​ ​of​ ​the​ ​population​ ​-​ ​if​ ​the
intended​ ​metrics​ ​rise,​ ​you​ ​win.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​nice​ ​atmosphere​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​a​ ​power​ ​game​ ​at​ ​all,​ ​but
a​ ​constant​ ​search​ ​for​ ​truth​ ​(even​ ​though​ ​that​ ​truth​ ​may​ ​sometimes​ ​be​ ​as​ ​simple​ ​as​ ​"will​ ​filtering​ ​out​ ​adult
entertainment​ ​places​ ​increase​ ​engagement?")

● >>​ ​what​ ​would​ ​be​ ​better​ ​for​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major?​ ​Overall​ ​prestige​ ​(a​ ​university​ ​like​ ​Yale)​ ​or​ ​prestige
in​ ​CS​ ​(UIUC)?

I​ ​think​ ​you're​ ​establishing​ ​a​ ​false​ ​dichotomy​ ​between​ ​prestige​ ​and​ ​good​ ​at​ ​CS.​ ​The​ ​real​ ​question
for​ ​me,​ ​especially​ ​with​ ​something​ ​like​ ​Yale​ ​-​ ​UIUC​ ​is​ ​the​ ​tremendous​ ​network​ ​of​ ​peers​ ​and​ ​alumni
and​ ​dare​ ​I​ ​say,​ ​on​ ​average​ ​smarter​ ​student​ ​body,​ ​vs​ ​great​ ​CS​ ​program.

Super​ ​boring​ ​answer:​ ​There's​ ​no​ ​clear​ ​cut​ ​answer​ ​-​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​good,​ ​you'll​ ​excel​ ​at​ ​both​ ​places.​ ​If
you're​ ​deciding​ ​between​ ​the​ ​two,​ ​weigh​ ​the​ ​pros​ ​and​ ​cons​ ​according​ ​to​ ​your​ ​own​ ​goals​ ​and​ ​values.

Fun​ ​answer:

1.​ ​Yale​ ​actually​ ​has​ ​a​ ​poor​ ​CS​ ​program

Yale​ ​-​ ​UIUC​ ​is​ ​a​ ​super​ ​hard​ ​one.​ ​It's​ ​not​ ​like​ ​Princeton​ ​-​ ​UIUC,​ ​where​ ​I'd​ ​probably​ ​pick​ ​Princeton.
Yale​ ​actually​ ​has​ ​a​ ​*struggling*​ ​CS​ ​program.​ ​You​ ​should​ ​google​ ​for​ ​it​ ​-​ ​they're​ ​not​ ​getting​ ​funding​ ​and
they're​ ​losing​ ​faculty.

2.​ ​Yale​ ​peers​ ​are​ ​probably​ ​smarter

Just​ ​going​ ​by​ ​the​ ​numbers,​ ​people​ ​are​ ​probably​ ​smarter​ ​on​ ​average,​ ​than​ ​UIUC.​ ​This​ ​means
several​ ​things.​ ​One,​ ​they're​ ​still​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​get​ ​into​ ​great​ ​jobs​ ​with​ ​a​ ​poor​ ​CS​ ​program​ ​because​ ​teaching
yourself​ ​simple​ ​Data​ ​Structures​ ​and​ ​Algorithms​ ​to​ ​pass​ ​an​ ​interview​ ​is​ ​easy,​ ​and​ ​Yale​ ​carries​ ​the​ ​brand
value​ ​to​ ​pass​ ​screening​ ​in​ ​most​ ​cases.
Two,​ ​you​ ​surround​ ​yourself​ ​with​ ​smarter​ ​people,​ ​and​ ​you​ ​will​ ​grow​ ​-​ ​this​ ​is​ ​a​ ​common​ ​truth.

3.​ ​Yale​ ​is​ ​significantly​ ​smaller

This​ ​means​ ​you​ ​get​ ​to​ ​know​ ​people​ ​better​ ​and​ ​you're​ ​not​ ​lost​ ​in​ ​a​ ​crowd.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​preferable,​ ​but
how​ ​much​ ​does​ ​that​ ​matter​ ​to​ ​you.

4.​ ​It's​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​understand​ ​the​ ​value​ ​of​ ​influential​ ​peers​ ​in​ ​the​ ​long​ ​run.
People​ ​at​ ​Yale​ ​are​ ​sons​ ​and​ ​daughters​ ​of​ ​Presidents​ ​and​ ​Senators​ ​and​ ​you​ ​might​ ​run​ ​into​ ​Kim
Jong​ ​Un's​ ​son​ ​there.​ ​This​ ​seems​ ​unimportant,​ ​but​ ​to​ ​develop​ ​a​ ​circle​ ​of​ ​highly​ ​influential​ ​people​ ​is
immensely​ ​valuable​ ​in​ ​the​ ​very​ ​long​ ​run.​ ​Even​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​40​ ​and​ ​average,​ ​being​ ​called​ ​over​ ​to​ ​drink​ ​with​ ​a
Senator​ ​is​ ​still​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​win​ ​-​ ​and​ ​all​ ​because​ ​of​ ​your​ ​college.
 To​ ​sum​ ​up,​ ​the​ ​advantage​ ​of​ ​Yale​ ​are​ ​only​ ​advantages​ ​you​ ​can​ ​reap​ ​as​ ​an​ ​undergrad.​ ​Any​ ​lack
in​ ​CS​ ​knowledge​ ​from​ ​a​ ​poor​ ​CS​ ​program​ ​can​ ​easily​ ​be​ ​made​ ​up​ ​in​ ​grad​ ​school,​ ​a​ ​masters​ ​or​ ​even​ ​in​ ​the
industry.​ ​I'd​ ​pick​ ​Yale.
You​ ​obviously​ ​can't​ ​generalize​ ​this​ ​to​ ​all​ ​such​ ​comparisons,​ ​but​ ​for​ ​Yale​ ​UIUC,​ ​I'd​ ​pick​ ​Yale.

● >>​ ​which​ ​is​ ​the​ ​quirkiest​ ​app​ ​you've​ ​ever​ ​come​ ​across?

Quirkiest​ ​app?​ ​That's​ ​a​ ​quirky​ ​question.​ ​Yik​ ​yak​ ​is​ ​kinda​ ​quirky​ ​and​ ​cool​ ​at​ ​the​ ​same​ ​time.

● >>I'm​ ​an​ ​EE​ ​major​ ​(EE​ ​is​ ​ ​),​ ​but​ ​on​ ​paper,​ ​I'm​ ​somewhat​ ​stronger​ ​as​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​one​ ​(into
competitive​ ​programming​ ​and​ ​all),​ ​and​ ​I'm​ ​almost​ ​equally​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​CS​ ​as​ ​I​ ​am​ ​in​ ​EE.
How​ ​relevant​ ​would​ ​it​ ​be​ ​to​ ​double​ ​major​ ​in​ ​EECS,​ ​for​ ​someone​ ​who's​ ​very​ ​interested​ ​in
working​ ​on​ ​embedded​ ​systems​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Internet​ ​of​ ​Things?​ ​Would​ ​you​ ​recommend​ ​it?​ ​I
understand​ ​that​ ​you​ ​aren't​ ​an​ ​EE​ ​person,​ ​but​ ​I'd​ ​appreciate​ ​what​ ​you'd​ ​have​ ​to​ ​say.

Double​ ​majoring​ ​is​ ​hard,​ ​and​ ​I​ ​would​ ​never​ ​recommend​ ​it​ ​unless​ ​you're​ ​extremely​ ​uncertain.​ ​You
should​ ​definitely​ ​not​ ​think​ ​"oh​ ​I​ ​have​ ​two​ ​majors​ ​I'm​ ​twice​ ​as​ ​good​ ​as​ ​everybody".​ ​There's​ ​a
trade-off​ ​to​ ​double​ ​majoring​ ​-​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​that​ ​you​ ​sacrifice​ ​the​ ​ability​ ​to​ ​do​ ​one​ ​thing​ ​in​ ​detail.​ ​This
can​ ​mean​ ​not​ ​being​ ​able​ ​to​ ​go​ ​super​ ​deep​ ​into​ ​CS​ ​or​ ​EE.​ ​It​ ​can​ ​mean​ ​not​ ​being​ ​able​ ​to​ ​do​ ​a
Masters​ ​which​ ​could​ ​come​ ​back​ ​to​ ​bite​ ​you​ ​later​ ​on​ ​if​ ​youre​ ​looking​ ​for​ ​an​ ​H1B.
EE+CS​ ​is​ ​a​ ​common​ ​double​ ​major,​ ​but​ ​think​ ​about​ ​what​ ​you're​ ​losing​ ​to​ ​do​ ​it.

● >>Also,​ ​what's​ ​the​ ​coolest​ ​thing​ ​you've​ ​seen​ ​a​ ​fellow​ ​friend​ ​or​ ​college​ ​student​ ​nearby
make?

The​ ​coolest​ ​thing​ ​I​ ​remember​ ​was​ ​at​ ​PennApps.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​they​ ​won​ ​PennApps​ ​that​ ​year​ ​and​ ​I'm
100%​ ​sure​ ​they​ ​built​ ​it​ ​before​ ​they​ ​came,​ ​but​ ​nonetheless.​ ​It​ ​was​ ​this​ ​library​ ​for​ ​iOS​ ​apps​ ​that
allowed​ ​you​ ​to​ ​push​ ​code​ ​changes​ ​to​ ​the​ ​app​ ​bypassing​ ​the​ ​app​ ​store.​ ​It​ ​was​ ​amazing.​ ​They​ ​had
3​ ​phones,​ ​and​ ​a​ ​web​ ​portal,​ ​and​ ​they'd​ ​pass​ ​down​ ​code​ ​from​ ​the​ ​portal,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​phone​ ​apps
would​ ​automatically​ ​update​ ​(​ ​change​ ​color,​ ​and​ ​logic,​ ​and​ ​strings).​ ​Lot​ ​of​ ​oohs​ ​and​ ​aahs​ ​ensued.
It​ ​IS​ ​a​ ​hackathon,​ ​so​ ​its​ ​impossible​ ​to​ ​tell​ ​if​ ​they​ ​just​ ​hardcoded​ ​some​ ​examples,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​super
lame,​ ​but​ ​if​ ​indeed​ ​it​ ​did​ ​what​ ​they​ ​said​ ​it​ ​did,​ ​it​ ​was​ ​pretty​ ​impressive.

● >>How​ ​does​ ​one​ ​manage​ ​a​ ​killer​ ​GPA​ ​and​ ​to​ ​party​ ​like​ ​a​ ​boss.​ ​Basically​ ​how​ ​to​ ​get​ ​the
most​ ​of​ ​the​ ​college​ ​life?

​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​what​ ​your​ ​definition​ ​of​ ​a​ ​"killer​ ​GPA"​ ​is.​ ​GPA​ ​for​ ​the​ ​most​ ​part​ ​didn't​ ​matter​ ​to
anybody​ ​but​ ​myself​ ​anyway.​ ​GPA​ ​is​ ​also​ ​not​ ​the​ ​right​ ​metric​ ​to​ ​compare​ ​people​ ​by​ ​because
 different​ ​students​ ​in​ ​different​ ​colleges​ ​in​ ​different​ ​majors​ ​taking​ ​different​ ​classes​ ​cannot​ ​be
compared​ ​by​ ​one​ ​number.

In​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​time​ ​management,​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​hard.​ ​Partying​ ​means​ ​taking​ ​Friday​ ​and​ ​Saturday​ ​night​ ​off
and​ ​not​ ​being​ ​lazy​ ​next​ ​morning.​ ​People​ ​waste​ ​so​ ​much​ ​time​ ​binge​ ​watching​ ​TV​ ​shows​ ​and​ ​lazing​ ​around
on​ ​FB/Netflix​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​redirect​ ​this​ ​time​ ​correctly.

● >>Could​ ​you​ ​tell​ ​us​ ​about​ ​some​ ​MOOCs​ ​you've​ ​loved?

Super​ ​embarrassing​ ​because​ ​despite​ ​working​ ​at​ ​Coursera,​ ​I​ ​haven't​ ​taken​ ​a​ ​MOOC​ ​start​ ​to
finish.​ ​I've​ ​seen​ ​several​ ​videos​ ​of​ ​several​ ​MOOCs​ ​to​ ​learn​ ​small​ ​things.​ ​Why​ ​would​ ​I​ ​take​ ​a
MOOC​ ​if​ ​I​ ​go​ ​to​ ​a​ ​college​ ​which​ ​offers​ ​most​ ​of​ ​the​ ​things​ ​I'm​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​anyway?

● >>​ ​ORFE​ ​vs​ ​Econ​ ​for​ ​someone​ ​who​ ​does​ ​NOT​ ​want​ ​to​ ​go​ ​into​ ​finance/banking?​ ​Will​ ​ORFE
still​ ​be​ ​relevant​ ​without​ ​the​ ​wall​ ​street?
​ ​can​ ​ORFE​ ​get​ ​you​ ​jobs​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Sillicon​ ​Valley?
It​ ​seems​ ​to​ ​be​ ​the​ ​perfect​ ​mix​ ​of​ ​finance,​ ​math​ ​and​ ​cs​ ​for​ ​me​ ​but​ ​I'm​ ​worried​ ​about​ ​job
viability​ ​etc.

ORFE​ ​vs​ ​Econ​ ​-​ ​What's​ ​your​ ​end​ ​goal?

I​ ​wonder​ ​why​ ​so​ ​many​ ​Princeton​ ​guys​ ​do​ ​ORFE.​ ​It​ ​never​ ​caught​ ​on​ ​at​ ​Cornell.​ ​In​ ​my​ ​opinion,
ORFE​ ​will​ ​significantly​ ​reduce​ ​your​ ​chances​ ​as​ ​opposed​ ​to​ ​CS.​ ​People​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​what​ ​ORFE​ ​is,​ ​will​ ​find
it​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​gauge​ ​exactly​ ​what​ ​you​ ​know​ ​and​ ​don't​ ​know,​ ​and​ ​will​ ​struggle​ ​to​ ​see​ ​how​ ​finance​ ​is​ ​related​ ​to
being​ ​a​ ​Software​ ​Engineer.​ ​It​ ​also​ ​begs​ ​the​ ​question​ ​-​ ​why​ ​are​ ​you​ ​doing​ ​ORFE​ ​if​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in
tech?​ ​Do​ ​CS​ ​if​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in​ ​tech​ ​and​ ​if​ ​ORFE​ ​is​ ​something​ ​you​ ​enjoy,​ ​take​ ​classes​ ​on​ ​the​ ​side.

As​ ​with​ ​most​ ​things,​ ​I'm​ ​sure​ ​you​ ​can​ ​do​ ​it,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​will​ ​probably​ ​reduce​ ​your​ ​chances.

​>>​ ​ORFE​ ​is​ ​your​ ​ticket​ ​to​ ​Wall​ ​Street​ ​algorithmic​ ​trading.

None​ ​of​ ​the​ ​best​ ​algo​ ​traders​ ​are​ ​on​ ​Wall​ ​Street.

​>>​ ​It​ ​won't​ ​be​ ​less​ ​relevant​ ​than​ ​how​ ​CS​ ​will​ ​be​ ​useful​ ​outside​ ​technology

Probably​ ​not​ ​true.​ ​This​ ​doesn't​ ​apply​ ​generally,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​got​ ​offers​ ​in​ ​many​ ​of​ ​the​ ​top​ ​Algo​ ​Trading
places.
 Algo​ ​Traders​ ​write​ ​code.​ ​Therefore​ ​they​ ​need​ ​CS​ ​people.

​>>​ ​Guys​ ​i​ ​have​ ​taken​ ​many​ ​ORFE​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​have​ ​loads​ ​of​ ​ORFE​ ​friends.​ ​ORFE​ ​involves
programming​ ​and​ ​quant​ ​skills.​ ​Its​ ​basically​ ​applied​ ​maths.​ ​Its​ ​maths​ ​applied​ ​to​ ​finance.​ ​Though
my​ ​major​ ​was​ ​economics​ ​finally​ ​But​ ​ORFE​ ​is​ ​a​ ​very​ ​well​ ​recognized​ ​degree​ ​around​ ​the​ ​US

​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​you,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​have​ ​algo​ ​trader​ ​friends​ ​and​ ​you​ ​claimed​ ​"It​ ​won't​ ​be​ ​less​ ​relevant​ ​than​ ​how
CS​ ​will​ ​be​ ​useful​ ​outside​ ​technology"​ ​which​ ​I'm​ ​disputing.

Yet​ ​I​ ​dont​ ​recall​ ​ever​ ​meeting​ ​an​ ​ORFE​ ​major​ ​in​ ​technology.

​>>​ ​Quantitative​ ​finance​ ​is​ ​more​ ​of​ ​a​ ​niche​ ​than​ ​CS,​ ​but​ ​the​ ​applied​ ​math​ ​skills​ ​u​ ​learn​ ​from
ORFE​ ​are​ ​applicable​ ​broadly.​ ​good​ ​discussion​ ​nonetheless!
​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​deny​ ​the​ ​applicability​ ​of​ ​applied​ ​math​ ​skills​ ​broadly.​ ​I​ ​simply​ ​don't​ ​see​ ​it​ ​necessarily​ ​being
a​ ​compelling​ ​enough​ ​reason​ ​to​ ​be​ ​hired​ ​in​ ​a​ ​technology​ ​company.
If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in​ ​Tech,​ ​being​ ​a​ ​CS​ ​major​ ​is​ ​a​ ​better​ ​option​ ​than​ ​being​ ​a​ ​ORFE.
If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in​ ​Algo​ ​Trading,​ ​you​ ​can​ ​do​ ​either.​ ​CS​ ​majors​ ​usually​ ​code​ ​and​ ​have​ ​to​ ​work
to​ ​transition​ ​to​ ​the​ ​financial​ ​engineering​ ​side​ ​at​ ​some​ ​places.​ ​At​ ​some​ ​places​ ​they​ ​make​ ​no​ ​distinction
between​ ​what​ ​CS​ ​and​ ​ORFE​ ​majors​ ​do​ ​-​ ​they'll​ ​teach​ ​you​ ​coding​ ​if​ ​you​ ​dont​ ​know​ ​enough​ ​and​ ​finance​ ​if
you​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​enough.

​>>​ ​agreed​ ​if​ ​the​ ​end​ ​goal​ ​is​ ​to​ ​work​ ​at​ ​a​ ​tech​ ​company.
​ ​keep​ ​an​ ​open​ ​mind.​ ​There​ ​is​ ​more​ ​to​ ​the​ ​world​ ​than​ ​tech.

Super​ ​sorry​ ​to​ ​butt​ ​in,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​find​ ​"there​ ​is​ ​more​ ​to​ ​the​ ​world​ ​than​ ​tech"​ ​a​ ​little​ ​condescending.

If​ ​you​ ​mean​ ​algo​ ​trading,​ ​it's​ ​worth​ ​noting​ ​that​ ​Algo​ ​Trading​ ​is​ ​nothing​ ​but​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​smart​ ​guys
dedicating​ ​all​ ​their​ ​brains​ ​to​ ​making​ ​a​ ​ton​ ​of​ ​money​ ​purely​ ​for​ ​themselves.​ ​If​ ​this​ ​is​ ​"more​ ​to​ ​the​ ​world",
than​ ​I​ ​find​ ​that​ ​a​ ​little​ ​shallow.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​obviously​ ​my​ ​opinion,​ ​having​ ​categorically​ ​chosen​ ​tech​ ​over
algorithmic​ ​trading.

​>>​ ​are​ ​you​ ​trying​ ​to​ ​say​ ​that​ ​facebooks​ ​of​ ​the​ ​world​ ​are​ ​non-profits?​ ​Come​ ​on​ ​dude,​ ​the
berlin​ ​wall​ ​fell​ ​a​ ​long​ ​time​ ​ago
​>>​ ​I​ ​just​ ​hope​ ​the​ ​guys​ ​on​ ​this​ ​group​ ​who​ ​are​ ​going​ ​to​ ​college​ ​soon​ ​to​ ​have​ ​an​ ​open​ ​mind,
and​ ​not​ ​go​ ​with​ ​a​ ​pre-conceived​ ​notion​ ​that​ ​any​ ​one​ ​discipline​ ​(tech​ ​or​ ​otherwise)​ ​is​ ​the​ ​end​ ​goal
without​ ​exploring​ ​other​ ​careers,​ ​where​ ​they​ ​may​ ​excel​ ​more​ ​at.
 No,​ ​but​ ​we​ ​provide​ ​a​ ​free​ ​service​ ​in​ ​exchange​ ​for​ ​revenue.​ ​Our​ ​yearly​ ​numbers​ ​are​ ​not​ ​bank
account​ ​dollar​ ​counts,​ ​but​ ​a​ ​count​ ​at​ ​how​ ​many​ ​users​ ​we​ ​have.​ ​We​ ​provide​ ​social​ ​value​ ​to​ ​the​ ​world
through​ ​this​ ​service.

I'm​ ​not​ ​debating​ ​capitalism​ ​here.

I'm​ ​debating​ ​the​ ​morality​ ​between​ ​earning​ ​money​ ​purely​ ​for​ ​yourself,​ ​and​ ​earning​ ​money​ ​in
exchange​ ​for​ ​developing​ ​a​ ​service.​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​one​ ​to​ ​butt​ ​into​ ​your​ ​morality,​ ​but​ ​when​ ​you​ ​say​ ​"there's​ ​more
to​ ​the​ ​world"​ ​and​ ​proceed​ ​to​ ​indoctrinate​ ​your​ ​juniors​ ​into​ ​the​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​most​ ​self-serving​ ​professions​ ​in
the​ ​world,​ ​you​ ​should​ ​probably​ ​clarify.

>>​ ​I​ ​just​ ​hope​ ​the​ ​guys​ ​on​ ​this​ ​group​ ​who​ ​are​ ​going​ ​to​ ​college​ ​soon​ ​to​ ​have​ ​an​ ​open​ ​mind,
and​ ​not​ ​go​ ​with​ ​a​ ​pre-conceived​ ​notion​ ​that​ ​any​ ​one​ ​discipline​ ​(tech​ ​or​ ​otherwise)​ ​is​ ​the
end​ ​goal​ ​without​ ​exploring​ ​other​ ​careers,​ ​where​ ​they​ ​may​ ​excel​ ​more​ ​at.

​ ​If​ ​that's​ ​what​ ​you​ ​meant,​ ​I​ ​agree​ ​completely.​ ​It​ ​seemed​ ​like​ ​you​ ​were​ ​saying​ ​"There's​ ​more​ ​to​ ​the
world​ ​than​ ​cliched​ ​tech,​ ​like​ ​algo​ ​trading"​ ​which​ ​implied​ ​one​ ​was​ ​better

● >>​ ​ ​i​ ​know​ ​you​ ​said​ ​that​ ​a​ ​double​ ​major​ ​is​ ​largely​ ​a​ ​waste​ ​of​ ​time​ ​and​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​better​ ​for
you​ ​to​ ​focus​ ​on​ ​one​ ​major​ ​and​ ​absolutely​ ​own​ ​it,​ ​but​ ​what​ ​are​ ​your​ ​thoughts​ ​on​ ​a
computer​ ​science​ ​and​ ​management/finance​ ​double​ ​major/degree​ ​especially​ ​if​ ​you​ ​want
are​ ​really​ ​passionate​ ​about​ ​a​ ​product​ ​manager​ ​(PM)​ ​role​ ​at​ ​a​ ​top​ ​tech​ ​firm,​ ​where​ ​having​ ​a
holistic​ ​competency​ ​would​ ​be​ ​great​ ​and​ ​you​ ​love​ ​both​ ​fields?

What​ ​in​ ​the​ ​world​ ​do​ ​you​ ​mean​ ​by​ ​being​ ​passionate​ ​about​ ​product​ ​management?​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​mean​ ​"I
want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​up​ ​the​ ​hierarchy"?​ ​because​ ​that​ ​is​ ​not​ ​what​ ​product​ ​management​ ​is,​ ​and​ ​is​ ​has​ ​nothing​ ​to​ ​do
with​ ​two​ ​majors.

>>​ ​sorry​ ​i​ ​meant​ ​i​ ​had​ ​an​ ​interest​ ​in​ ​both​ ​fields​ ​(tech​ ​+​ ​biz).​ ​i​ ​found​ ​one​ ​way​ ​to​ ​combine
them​ ​them​ ​as​ ​in​ ​the​ ​PM​ ​Role.​ ​so​ ​i​ ​was​ ​asking​ ​in​ ​that​ ​case​ ​would​ ​a​ ​double​ ​major​ ​in​ ​cs​ ​+
econ/finance/​ ​management​ ​be​ ​a​ ​good​ ​choice​ ​against​ ​your​ ​advice​ ​of​ ​double​ ​majors​ ​in​ ​general?

There's​ ​two​ ​types​ ​of​ ​"PMs"​ ​-​ ​Engineering​ ​leads​ ​and​ ​PMs.​ ​PMs​ ​are​ ​Product​ ​Managers​ ​who,​ ​at
places​ ​like​ ​Google,​ ​"need​ ​to​ ​know​ ​how​ ​to​ ​code",​ ​but​ ​they​ ​don't.​ ​They​ ​look​ ​at​ ​metrics​ ​and​ ​dashboards​ ​all
day​ ​and​ ​organize​ ​people.​ ​Engineering​ ​leads​ ​architect​ ​how​ ​a​ ​solution​ ​can​ ​be​ ​made​ ​given​ ​the​ ​technology
and​ ​tools​ ​at​ ​their​ ​disposal.​ ​Engineering​ ​leads​ ​happen​ ​when​ ​software​ ​engineers​ ​get​ ​promoted​ ​to​ ​a​ ​level
where​ ​they​ ​are​ ​more​ ​valuable​ ​in​ ​making​ ​high​ ​level​ ​decisions​ ​instead​ ​of​ ​coding.​ ​The​ ​final​ ​track​ ​ends​ ​in
being​ ​CTO.​ ​PMs​ ​get​ ​promoted​ ​on​ ​a​ ​very​ ​different​ ​line,​ ​and​ ​end​ ​up​ ​more​ ​towards​ ​the​ ​COO​ ​side.​ ​Being​ ​a
PM​ ​is​ ​super​ ​hard,​ ​and​ ​not​ ​necessarily​ ​more​ ​valuable​ ​than​ ​being​ ​a​ ​Software​ ​Engineer​ ​(many​ ​of​ ​my​ ​friends
interned​ ​as​ ​a​ ​PM​ ​and​ ​switched​ ​back​ ​to​ ​software).​ ​Common​ ​reasons​ ​why​ ​people​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​PM:​ ​I​ ​dislike
coding​ ​and​ ​want​ ​to​ ​get​ ​rid​ ​of​ ​that​ ​responsibility.​ ​Common​ ​reasons​ ​to​ ​not​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​PM:​ ​I​ ​do​ ​bitchwork,
I​ ​can't​ ​directly​ ​affect​ ​metrics,​ ​software​ ​engineers​ ​have​ ​no​ ​respect​ ​for​ ​me,​ ​I​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​just​ ​hang​ ​around​ ​and
hope​ ​things​ ​happen.

What​ ​makes​ ​a​ ​good​ ​PM:​ ​Good​ ​thinking​ ​skills,​ ​there's​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​bias​ ​towards​ ​white​ ​people​ ​imo,​ ​good
communication​ ​skills,​ ​etc.​ ​It's​ ​much​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​get​ ​than​ ​Software​ ​Engineering​ ​simply​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​less​ ​in
demand.​ ​It​ ​was​ ​a​ ​role​ ​sort​ ​of​ ​created​ ​by​ ​Marissa​ ​Mayer​ ​but​ ​no​ ​one​ ​is​ ​really​ ​sure​ ​how​ ​impactful​ ​they​ ​are.
Tech​ ​companies​ ​need​ ​developers​ ​and​ ​can​ ​use​ ​PMs​ ​to​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​intra​ ​team​ ​communication.

If​ ​this​ ​is​ ​something​ ​that​ ​appeals​ ​to​ ​you​ ​still,​ ​that's​ ​fine!​ ​PMs​ ​typically​ ​need​ ​a​ ​tech​ ​background​ ​-
some​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​basic​ ​programming​ ​experience.​ ​Other​ ​than​ ​that,​ ​not​ ​business​ ​is​ ​required​ ​at​ ​all.​ ​You​ ​can​ ​be
any​ ​major​ ​you​ ​want​ ​if​ ​you​ ​can​ ​code,​ ​get​ ​past​ ​the​ ​resume​ ​screen​ ​and​ ​give​ ​your​ ​interviews​ ​-​ ​which​ ​involve
writing​ ​code,​ ​and​ ​reasoning​ ​about​ ​product​ ​problems

​>>​ ​Thanks​ ​for​ ​the​ ​insights.​ ​do​ ​you​ ​know​ ​any​ ​other​ ​jobs/career​ ​paths​ ​apart​ ​from​ ​starting
your​ ​own​ ​startup​ ​that​ ​really​ ​allow​ ​someone​ ​to​ ​combine​ ​an​ ​interest​ ​in​ ​tech​ ​and​ ​business?​ ​i​ ​wanna
consider​ ​other​ ​options​ ​aside​ ​from​ ​PM.​ ​also​ ​doesn't​ ​a​ ​Google​ ​type​ ​PM​ ​give​ ​you​ ​great​ ​insights​ ​into
running​ ​a​ ​large​ ​tech​ ​team​ ​and​ ​they​ ​basically​ ​groom​ ​you​ ​into​ ​a​ ​"mini​ ​CEOs"​ ​as​ ​Marissa​ ​Mayer​ ​I
think​ ​envisioned​ ​it?

Dual​ ​interest​ ​of​ ​tech​ ​and​ ​business?​ ​Hardly​ ​-​ ​more​ ​like​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​tech,​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​math​ ​and​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​stats,
and​ ​some​ ​finance​ ​(not​ ​business).

The​ ​thing​ ​is​ ​that​ ​unlike​ ​Facebook​ ​and​ ​Google,​ ​DE​ ​Shaw​ ​and​ ​Two​ ​Sigma​ ​are​ ​not​ ​places​ ​you
choose.​ ​They​ ​are​ ​places​ ​that​ ​choose​ ​you.​ ​The​ ​selectivity​ ​makes​ ​it​ ​attractive.​ ​The​ ​compensation​ ​even
more​ ​so.
But​ ​you​ ​add​ ​no​ ​social​ ​value,​ ​which​ ​may​ ​or​ ​may​ ​not​ ​be​ ​important​ ​to​ ​you.

​>>​ ​I​ ​just​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​see​ ​aside​ ​from​ ​a​ ​startup,​ ​where​ ​else​ ​would​ ​the​ ​dual​ ​interest​ ​and
competency​ ​really​ ​be​ ​useful.​ ​And​ ​yeah​ ​adding​ ​social​ ​value​ ​personally​ ​is​ ​important.​ ​if​ ​there​ ​really
is​ ​no​ ​use,​ ​then​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​better​ ​to​ ​consider​ ​majoring​ ​in​ ​one​ ​field​ ​and​ ​absolutely​ ​owning​ ​it​ ​like
Deedy​ ​said​ ​earlier.​ ​Also,​ ​I​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​hear​ ​how​ ​true​ ​Marrisa​ ​Meyer's​ ​vision​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Google​ ​type​ ​PM
role​ ​of​ ​turning​ ​you​ ​into​ ​a​ ​mini​ ​CEO​ ​that​ ​can​ ​really​ ​excel​ ​at​ ​leading​ ​a​ ​tech​ ​company​ ​on​ ​all​ ​fronts
(both​ ​product​ ​and​ ​business​ ​side)​ ​is?
​https://www.google.co.in/.../teams/product-management/​​ ​this​ ​really​ ​endorses​ ​the​ ​role​ ​as​ ​a
great​ ​way​ ​to​ ​satisfy​ ​the​ ​dual​ ​interest.​ ​serving​ ​as​ ​"the​ ​bridge​ ​technical​ ​and​ ​business​ ​worlds"

Reading​ ​Google's​ ​PM​ ​role​ ​description​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Google​ ​site​ ​is​ ​like​ ​saying​ ​IIPM​ ​is​ ​world​ ​class
because​ ​their​ ​site​ ​says​ ​so.​#​globalplacements

You​ ​should​ ​read​ ​more​ ​about​ ​what​ ​the​ ​role​ ​is​ ​about​ ​objectively​ ​and​ ​see​ ​what​ ​the​ ​PMs​ ​do​ ​on​ ​a​ ​day
to​ ​day​ ​basis.​ ​I​ ​don't​ ​particularly​ ​agree​ ​with​ ​Marissa​ ​Mayer's​ ​vision,​ ​but​ ​who​ ​am​ ​I​ ​to​ ​comment,​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​as
experienced​ ​as​ ​she​ ​is.

Business​ ​and​ ​tech​ ​is​ ​an​ ​interesting​ ​juncture.​ ​Based​ ​on​ ​what​ ​you​ ​say,​ ​it​ ​seems​ ​like​ ​Biz​ ​dev
(business​ ​development)​ ​at​ ​a​ ​tech​ ​company​ ​,​ ​including​ ​PM​ ​roles,​ ​are​ ​the​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​thing​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do.

● >>​ ​How​ ​would​ ​you​ ​suggest​ ​a​ ​non-CS​ ​major​ ​to​ ​go​ ​about​ ​becoming​ ​competent​ ​at​ ​CS,​ ​and
not​ ​just​ ​introductory​ ​programming?

That's​ ​easy.​ ​To​ ​become​ ​competent​ ​in​ ​CS,​ ​you​ ​should​ ​take​ ​CS​ ​classes.​ ​Even​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​non-CS,​ ​if
you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​know​ ​more​ ​than​ ​introductory​ ​programming,​ ​just​ ​take​ ​the​ ​next​ ​course​ ​after
introductory​ ​programming.
Aside​ ​from​ ​that​ ​-​ ​internships,​ ​research,​ ​open​ ​source.​ ​But​ ​all​ ​of​ ​these​ ​require​ ​at​ ​least​ ​2-3​ ​CS
classes​ ​to​ ​make​ ​any​ ​progress​ ​in

● >>​ ​can​ ​you​ ​shed​ ​some​ ​light​ ​on​ ​some​ ​other​ ​majors​ ​(​ ​Mech​ ​Engr​ ​to​ ​be​ ​specific):​ ​jobs
scenario,​ ​college​ ​reputation​ ​etc?​ ​I'm​ ​planning​ ​to​ ​join​ ​Purdue.​ ​It's​ ​well​ ​reputed​ ​for​ ​mech
engr​ ​and​ ​from​ ​my​ ​findings,​ ​many​ ​employers​ ​in​ ​the​ ​States​ ​say​ ​they​ ​don't​ ​discriminate
amongst​ ​graduates​ ​from​ ​UIUC,​ ​UMich​ ​or​ ​UTAustin​ ​as​ ​they're​ ​all​ ​equally​ ​reputed,​ ​and
ranked.​ ​Thanks.

● >>do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​any​ ​colleagues​ ​from​ ​IIT(s)?​ ​How​ ​do​ ​they​ ​compare​ ​to​ ​the​ ​grads​ ​from
schools​ ​like​ ​CMU/Berk/UIUC​ ​?

I​ ​love​ ​IIT​ ​guys​ ​because​ ​they're​ ​super​ ​smart,​ ​and​ ​super​ ​straightforward.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​do​ ​something
wrong​ ​they'll​ ​be​ ​like​ ​"bc​ ​kyun​ ​kiya​ ​yeh".​ ​I​ ​have​ ​utmost​ ​respect​ ​for​ ​them.​ ​If​ ​I​ ​were​ ​to​ ​compare​ ​IIT
graduates​ ​(straight​ ​out​ ​of​ ​undergrad)​ ​to​ ​CMU/Berk/UIUC,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​definitely​ ​smarter​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of
raw​ ​talent.​ ​That's​ ​almost​ ​undeniable​ ​because​ ​history​ ​has​ ​proven​ ​this​ ​in​ ​many​ ​ways.​ ​However,
they​ ​lack​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​practical​ ​skill.​ ​They​ ​probably​ ​won't​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​build​ ​a​ ​fancy​ ​web​ ​app,​ ​but​ ​give
them​ ​a​ ​problem​ ​set​ ​and​ ​they'll​ ​blow​ ​through​ ​it.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​long​ ​run,​ ​IIT​ ​grads​ ​end​ ​up​ ​just​ ​as​ ​good​ ​if​ ​not
better.​ ​Keep​ ​in​ ​mind​ ​that​ ​an​ ​IIT​ ​CS​ ​grad​ ​from​ ​the​ ​top​ ​5​ ​IITs​ ​is​ ​a​ ​top​ ​100​ ​ranker.​ ​If​ ​he's​ ​in​ ​the​ ​US
 for​ ​a​ ​PhD,​ ​that​ ​means​ ​he's​ ​probably​ ​a​ ​9​ ​pointer​ ​too.​ ​No​ ​matter​ ​how​ ​much​ ​coaching​ ​you​ ​did​ ​or
how​ ​maggu​ ​you​ ​may​ ​be,​ ​that's​ ​some​ ​serious​ ​achievement.

● >>What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​say​ ​about​ ​CS​ ​at​ ​the​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Maryland?​ ​Rankings​ ​are​ ​pretty
good,​ ​is​ ​any​ ​of​ ​your​ ​colleague​ ​a​ ​UMD​ ​graduate?

Yes,​ ​I​ ​have​ ​several​ ​friends​ ​from​ ​UMD.​ ​It's​ ​well​ ​known​ ​and​ ​well​ ​respected.​ ​They're​ ​also​ ​known​ ​to
be​ ​a​ ​good​ ​research​ ​university.​ ​I​ ​met​ ​several​ ​UMD​ ​guys​ ​in​ ​the​ ​valley.

● >>​ ​Deedy​ ​why​ ​didn't​ ​you​ ​choose​ ​Google?

Google​ ​is​ ​a​ ​great​ ​company,​ ​but​ ​team​ ​mobility​ ​is​ ​little​ ​and​ ​more​ ​often​ ​than​ ​not​ ​super​ ​smart​ ​people
are​ ​doing​ ​really​ ​boring​ ​work​ ​because​ ​of​ ​"business​ ​needs".​ ​Very​ ​few​ ​people​ ​do​ ​the​ ​super
interesting​ ​work​ ​and​ ​they​ ​either​ ​have​ ​10+​ ​years​ ​of​ ​experience​ ​and/or​ ​a​ ​PhD.​ ​The​ ​culture​ ​is​ ​also
much​ ​less​ ​fast​ ​paced​ ​than​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​-​ ​which​ ​is​ ​good​ ​for​ ​the​ ​long​ ​term​ ​from​ ​a​ ​company
perspective​ ​but​ ​bad​ ​for​ ​the​ ​short​ ​term.​ ​Every​ ​year​ ​or​ ​so​ ​youre​ ​encourage​ ​to​ ​move​ ​to​ ​a​ ​different
team​ ​and​ ​try​ ​something​ ​completely​ ​new.
Lastly,​ ​I​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​stay​ ​in​ ​New​ ​York​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​lifestyle​ ​here​ ​and​ ​I​ ​liked​ ​Facebook's​ ​NY​ ​office
more.​ ​Facebook​ ​seemed​ ​like​ ​they​ ​were​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​work​ ​harder​ ​to​ ​hire​ ​me.​ ​Also,​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​misconception
that​ ​working​ ​at​ ​Facebook​ ​is​ ​all​ ​about​ ​creating​ ​like​ ​buttons,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​tech​ ​infra​ ​and​ ​the​ ​data​ ​is​ ​world​ ​class
stuff​ ​that​ ​I​ ​get​ ​to​ ​play​ ​with.
That's​ ​why.

● >>​ ​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​immensely​ ​helpful​ ​to​ ​me​ ​if​ ​you​ ​give​ ​me​ ​your​ ​views​ ​on​ ​choosing​ ​Berkeley
or​ ​Harvey​ ​Mudd​ ​College​ ​for​ ​Computer​ ​Science.​ ​Harvey​ ​Mudd​ ​seems​ ​to​ ​offer​ ​a​ ​more
'intimate'​ ​undergrad​ ​education,​ ​specially​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​relationships​ ​you​ ​build​ ​with​ ​the
faculty​ ​and​ ​the​ ​attention​ ​you​ ​get​ ​from​ ​them​ ​-​ ​which​ ​is​ ​great.​ ​However,​ ​I​ ​feel​ ​that​ ​I​ ​am​ ​more
of​ ​a​ ​self​ ​motivated​ ​learner​ ​and​ ​(maybe)​ ​don't​ ​particularly​ ​care​ ​that​ ​much​ ​about​ ​class​ ​size.​ ​I
care​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​about​ ​diversity​ ​(i​ ​think​ ​i​ ​like​ ​the​ ​idea​ ​of​ ​bigger​ ​schools),​ ​and​ ​I​ ​really​ ​care​ ​a​ ​lot
about​ ​opportunities​ ​-​ ​specially​ ​those​ ​outside​ ​the​ ​classroom​ ​(research,​ ​internships,
hackathons,​ ​startups​ ​etc).​ ​I​ ​would​ ​also​ ​maybe​ ​like​ ​to​ ​squeeze​ ​in​ ​more​ ​units​ ​into​ ​a​ ​few
semesters,​ ​cash​ ​in​ ​AP/​ ​A-Level​ ​credits​ ​and​ ​skip​ ​a​ ​few​ ​classes​ ​and​ ​graduate​ ​early​ ​(or​ ​take
up​ ​more​ ​advanced​ ​courses),​ ​all​ ​of​ ​which​ ​don't​ ​really​ ​happen​ ​at​ ​Mudd​ ​as​ ​opposed​ ​to
Berkeley.​ ​Does​ ​it​ ​seem​ ​fair​ ​to​ ​choose​ ​Berkeley​ ​by​ ​the​ ​process​ ​by​ ​which​ ​I​ ​am​ ​judging​ ​this
college​ ​choice?​ ​And​ ​do​ ​you​ ​know​ ​something​ ​good​ ​about​ ​Mudd​ ​that​ ​may​ ​change​ ​my​ ​mind
 or​ ​still​ ​feel​ ​I​ ​should​ ​choose​ ​Mudd?

I'd​ ​choose​ ​Berkeley​ ​over​ ​HMC.​ ​I​ ​think​ ​your​ ​thinking​ ​process​ ​is​ ​accurate.
I​ ​don't​ ​want​ ​to​ ​go​ ​to​ ​a​ ​200​ ​person​ ​college.
I​ ​am​ ​also​ ​a​ ​self​ ​motivated​ ​learner.
I​ ​appreciate​ ​when​ ​employers​ ​know​ ​what​ ​my​ ​college​ ​is.
I​ ​like​ ​the​ ​proximity​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Bay​ ​area.
Cashing​ ​in​ ​on​ ​APs​ ​matters​ ​to​ ​me.
Diversity​ ​rocks.

● >>​ ​do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​any​ ​plans​ ​for​ ​coming​ ​back​ ​to​ ​india​ ​and​ ​disrupting​ ​the​ ​scene​ ​here?

Yes,​ ​it's​ ​on​ ​my​ ​wish​ ​list.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​difficult​ ​thing​ ​to​ ​do,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​really​ ​want​ ​to.

I​ ​think​ ​most​ ​of​ ​the​ ​problems​ ​technology​ ​companies​ ​and​ ​startups​ ​are​ ​solving​ ​in​ ​America​ ​are​ ​first
world​ ​problems.​ ​Be​ ​it​ ​Snapchat​ ​or​ ​very​ ​enterprise​ ​focussed​ ​companies​ ​like​ ​Palantir.​ ​Angel​ ​List​ ​will​ ​give
you​ ​a​ ​ton​ ​of​ ​examples.
I​ ​would​ ​much​ ​rather​ ​contribute​ ​to​ ​social​ ​change​ ​in​ ​India​ ​where​ ​the​ ​problems​ ​are​ ​much​ ​more
basic.​ ​Imagine​ ​life​ ​before​ ​Zomato​ ​-​ ​Zomato​ ​had​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​change​ ​in​ ​how​ ​people​ ​live​ ​in​ ​India.​ ​Uber​ ​too.​ ​As
the​ ​internet​ ​reaches​ ​more​ ​and​ ​more​ ​people​ ​living​ ​in​ ​worse​ ​and​ ​worse​ ​conditions,​ ​the​ ​impact​ ​any​ ​idea​ ​can
have​ ​is​ ​much​ ​more.​ ​It​ ​doesn't​ ​even​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​startup​ ​-​ ​money​ ​is​ ​not​ ​the​ ​primary​ ​motive​ ​at​ ​all.​ ​I​ ​would
be​ ​fulfilled​ ​by​ ​starting​ ​a​ ​school​ ​in​ ​India​ ​as​ ​well.​ ​Or​ ​building​ ​a​ ​free​ ​service​ ​that​ ​helps​ ​people​ ​in​ ​whatever
way​ ​it​ ​can.
So,​ ​I​ ​do​ ​want​ ​to​ ​come​ ​back​ ​to​ ​India​ ​and​ ​change​ ​things​ ​back​ ​home

● >>​ ​how's​ ​the​ ​partying​ ​scene​ ​at​ ​Cornell​ ​lol

Cray

● >>​ ​Is​ ​working​ ​20​ ​hours​ ​a​ ​week​ ​feasible​ ​if​ ​you​ ​are​ ​on​ ​a​ ​normal​ ​workload,​ ​and​ ​are​ ​involved
in​ ​extracurriculars?​ ​Also,​ ​is​ ​the​ ​20​ ​hr​ ​max.​ ​work​ ​per​ ​week​ ​rule​ ​relaxed​ ​only​ ​during
summers,​ ​or​ ​is​ ​it​ ​applicable​ ​to​ ​winter​ ​as​ ​well?​ ​Is​ ​there​ ​any​ ​restriction​ ​during​ ​holidays
 You​ ​can​ ​work​ ​full​ ​time​ ​(on​ ​paper​ ​-​ ​40​ ​hours​ ​a​ ​week)​ ​during​ ​summer​ ​and​ ​winter,​ ​I​ ​believe.​ ​No
concessions​ ​for​ ​holidays.​ ​Given​ ​that​ ​I​ ​was​ ​being​ ​paid​ ​to​ ​do​ ​research,​ ​it​ ​was​ ​conveniently​ ​both​ ​my
source​ ​of​ ​income​ ​and​ ​extra​ ​curricular,​ ​so​ ​you​ ​shouldn't​ ​antagonize​ ​those​ ​things.
If​ ​you​ ​have​ ​too​ ​many​ ​commitments​ ​on​ ​top​ ​of​ ​your​ ​20​ ​hour​ ​a​ ​week​ ​job,​ ​id​ ​imagine​ ​it​ ​would
become​ ​unmanageable​ ​really​ ​quickly.

● >>​ ​What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​will​ ​prevent​ ​facebook​ ​from​ ​being​ ​the​ ​next​ ​myspace​ ​or​ ​orkut?(apart
from​ ​the​ ​too​ ​big​ ​to​ ​fail​ ​argument)​ ​Its​ ​still​ ​wildly​ ​popular​ ​in​ ​india​ ​but​ ​i've​ ​heard​ ​from​ ​friends
in​ ​the​ ​states​ ​that​ ​it​ ​has​ ​become​ ​popular​ ​and​ ​cool​ ​to​ ​shun​ ​facebook​ ​and​ ​hate​ ​it.

Since​ ​we​ ​rely​ ​very​ ​heavily​ ​on​ ​data​ ​that​ ​is​ ​constantly​ ​telling​ ​us​ ​how​ ​often​ ​and​ ​how​ ​many​ ​and​ ​in
what​ ​way​ ​people​ ​engage​ ​and​ ​share​ ​and​ ​interact​ ​with​ ​one​ ​another​ ​on​ ​the​ ​platform,​ ​and​ ​track
these​ ​metrics​ ​rigorously,​ ​at​ ​the​ ​very​ ​least​ ​Facebook​ ​as​ ​a​ ​company​ ​will​ ​know​ ​when​ ​it​ ​is​ ​"coming​ ​to
an​ ​end"​ ​(and​ ​it​ ​isn't).​ ​As​ ​with​ ​most​ ​big​ ​companies​ ​-​ ​apple,​ ​Amazon,​ ​Microsoft,​ ​Google​ ​and
Facebook​ ​-​ ​the​ ​media​ ​loves​ ​writing​ ​unsubstantiated​ ​articles​ ​hinting​ ​at​ ​their​ ​downfall.​ ​This​ ​is
expected​ ​because,​ ​as​ ​media,​ ​"the​ ​big​ ​falls"​ ​is​ ​a​ ​much​ ​juicer​ ​headline​ ​than​ ​"the​ ​big​ ​get​ ​bigger".​ ​I
think​ ​just​ ​about​ ​every​ ​year​ ​somebody​ ​says​ ​"has​ ​apple​ ​stopped​ ​innovating",​ ​but​ ​they​ ​just​ ​roar​ ​on.
As​ ​it​ ​is​ ​with​ ​Facebook.​ ​Whatsapp​ ​turned​ ​out​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​great​ ​buy,​ ​as​ ​is​ ​Instagram.​ ​Messenger​ ​is
doing​ ​tremendously​ ​well​ ​and​ ​Facebook​ ​pay​ ​could​ ​be​ ​a​ ​game​ ​changer​ ​in​ ​the​ ​long​ ​run.​ ​Messenger
had​ ​grown​ ​into​ ​a​ ​platform​ ​which​ ​has​ ​also​ ​been​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​success.​ ​Advertisers​ ​now​ ​prefer​ ​video​ ​and
we're​ ​soon​ ​outgrowing​ ​YouTube​ ​I​ ​believe.​ ​Everything​ ​is​ ​looking​ ​positive​ ​for​ ​us​ ​now,​ ​and​ ​given​ ​our
data​ ​driven​ ​approach,​ ​we​ ​can't​ ​prevent​ ​suffering​ ​the​ ​same​ ​fate​ ​as​ ​MySpace​ ​but​ ​we'll​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to
see​ ​it​ ​coming​ ​and​ ​iterate​ ​quickly​ ​extremely​ ​quickly.

● >>​ ​Views​ ​on​ ​net​ ​neutrality?​ ​I​ ​ask​ ​this​ ​because​ ​i've​ ​heard​ ​of​ ​the​ ​fb​ ​initiative​ ​to​ ​provide​ ​free
internet​ ​in​ ​africa.​ ​Its​ ​a​ ​good​ ​thing​ ​but​ ​isn't​ ​a​ ​net​ ​service​ ​controlling​ ​the​ ​access​ ​to​ ​internet
the​ ​main​ ​vice​ ​that​ ​net​ ​neutrality​ ​wants​ ​to​ ​fight.​ ​Isn't​ ​that​ ​the​ ​reason​ ​why​ ​every​ ​one​ ​was​ ​up
against​ ​comcast?

So,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​my​ ​view​ ​and​ ​the​ ​company's​ ​view.​ ​Facebook's​ ​view​ ​on​ ​net​ ​neutrality​ ​is​ ​this​ ​-​ ​we​ ​don't
want​ ​to​ ​make​ ​your​ ​services​ ​slower​ ​and​ ​give​ ​ourselves​ ​the​ ​"fast​ ​lane",​ ​we​ ​just​ ​want​ ​to​ ​leverage
our​ ​money​ ​to​ ​bring​ ​you​ ​Facebook​ ​for​ ​free​ ​keeping​ ​all​ ​other​ ​things​ ​the​ ​same,​ ​because​ ​some
connectivity​ ​is​ ​better​ ​than​ ​none.
http://www.cnet.com/.../facebooks-zuckerberg-muses-on.../
 I​ ​tend​ ​to​ ​agree,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​think​ ​it​ ​could​ ​be​ ​a​ ​slippery​ ​slope

● >>​ ​assuming​ ​I​ ​have​ ​~80K​ ​in​ ​debt​ ​from​ ​UIUC,​ ​how​ ​easy​ ​would​ ​this​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​clear​ ​up?​ ​I'm
really​ ​really​ ​scared​ ​about​ ​this​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​the​ ​only​ ​thing​ ​stopping​ ​me​ ​from​ ​committing.​ ​I​ ​just
got​ ​my​ ​financial​ ​aid​ ​package​ ​from​ ​them,​ ​hence​ ​the​ ​question

I​ ​obviously​ ​can't​ ​answer​ ​this​ ​for​ ​you.​ ​It​ ​depends​ ​on​ ​how​ ​long​ ​you​ ​take​ ​to​ ​graduate,​ ​how​ ​much
your​ ​other​ ​sources​ ​of​ ​income​ ​are,​ ​how​ ​much​ ​your​ ​full​ ​time​ ​job​ ​pays,​ ​taxes,​ ​your​ ​living​ ​expenses,
etc.​ ​Taking​ ​debt​ ​is​ ​always​ ​going​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​risk,​ ​because​ ​you​ ​could,​ ​touchwood,​ ​fall​ ​really​ ​ill
tomorrow,​ ​and​ ​everything​ ​goes​ ​to​ ​shit.​ ​The​ ​job​ ​industry​ ​could​ ​flip​ ​on​ ​its​ ​head​ ​in​ ​4​ ​years.​ ​You​ ​may
just​ ​not​ ​be​ ​as​ ​competent​ ​enough​ ​as​ ​you​ ​think​ ​to​ ​get​ ​a​ ​job​ ​in​ ​four​ ​years.​ ​It's​ ​important​ ​to
understand​ ​that​ ​systemic​ ​risk.

In​ ​case​ ​everything​ ​goes​ ​according​ ​to​ ​plan,​ ​and​ ​if​ ​the​ ​employment​ ​scenario​ ​stays​ ​the​ ​same​ ​for​ ​the
next​ ​4​ ​years,​ ​and​ ​you​ ​get​ ​a​ ​standard​ ​technology​ ​job,​ ​you'll​ ​be​ ​compensated​ ​$150k​ ​odd.​ ​Cut​ ​taxes​ ​and
living​ ​expenses,​ ​and​ ​minimally​ ​you'll​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​save​ ​$50k,​ ​right?​ ​Figure​ ​out​ ​the​ ​math​ ​for​ ​yourself.​ ​Is​ ​it
worth​ ​1-2​ ​years​ ​of​ ​dedicating​ ​your​ ​compensation​ ​to​ ​your​ ​loans​ ​for​ ​you,​ ​in​ ​exchange​ ​for​ ​UIUC?

● >>​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​you​ ​could​ ​beat​ ​Mark​ ​Zuckerberg​ ​in​ ​a​ ​fight​ ​to​ ​death​ ​?

Uncle​ ​Mark​ ​has​ ​been​ ​hitting​ ​the​ ​gym​ ​lately.​ ​Wouldn't​ ​want​ ​to​ ​mess​ ​with​ ​Uncle​ ​Mark.

● >>​ ​like​ ​we​ ​call​ ​the​ ​employees​ ​of​ ​Google​ ​Zurich​ ​as​ ​Zooglers,​ ​new​ ​Google​ ​employees​ ​are
called​ ​Nooglers,​ ​is​ ​there​ ​anything​ ​similar​ ​at​ ​FB?

haha.​ ​New​ ​Facebook​ ​employees​ ​are​ ​called​ ​n00bs,​ ​and​ ​we​ ​call​ ​our​ ​one​ ​year​ ​anniversary​ ​at​ ​work
Faceversaries.​ ​Not​ ​quite​ ​up​ ​to​ ​the​ ​mark​ ​with​ ​Google's​ ​propaganda

● >>​ ​I​ ​want​ ​to​ ​tech​ ​and​ ​do​ ​an​ ​MBA.​ ​Plz​ ​advize.

There's​ ​obviously​ ​a​ ​very​ ​rampant​ ​very​ ​entrenched​ ​preconceived​ ​notion​ ​in​ ​India​ ​that​ ​doing
engineering​ ​and​ ​an​ ​MBA​ ​is​ ​some​ ​gold​ ​standard​ ​of​ ​success.​ ​There's​ ​no​ ​denying​ ​this.​ ​Everybody
preaches​ ​about​ ​it​ ​and​ ​IIT​ ​IIM​ ​is​ ​like​ ​the​ ​original​ ​Indian​ ​dream.​ ​However​ ​few​ ​know​ ​why​ ​this​ ​dream
came​ ​up​ ​and​ ​why,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​many​ ​young​ ​ambitious​ ​students​ ​blindly​ ​follow​ ​it​ ​because​ ​who
doesn't​ ​want​ ​to​ ​be​ ​successful​ ​in​ ​society's​ ​eyes.
 There's​ ​two​ ​main​ ​sort​ ​of​ ​families​ ​from​ ​which​ ​this​ ​thinking​ ​arose​ ​-​ ​the​ ​traditional​ ​Indian​ ​business
family​ ​and​ ​the​ ​traditional​ ​Indian​ ​middle​ ​class​ ​family.​ ​Think​ ​about​ ​back​ ​in​ ​the​ ​post​ ​freedom​ ​era.​ ​Let's​ ​talk
about​ ​the​ ​first​ ​case.​ ​Indian​ ​business​ ​families​ ​who​ ​do​ ​something​ ​like​ ​steel​ ​or​ ​construction​ ​or​ ​infrastructure
related​ ​want​ ​their​ ​kids​ ​to​ ​do​ ​follow​ ​this​ ​line.​ ​This​ ​makes​ ​sense.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​know​ ​you're​ ​going​ ​to​ ​take​ ​over​ ​the
family​ ​business,​ ​what​ ​better​ ​way​ ​to​ ​prepare​ ​than​ ​to​ ​learn​ ​the​ ​technical​ ​science​ ​behind​ ​it,​ ​apply​ ​and​ ​see
how​ ​it's​ ​used​ ​in​ ​the​ ​broader​ ​industry​ ​and​ ​then​ ​do​ ​an​ ​Mba​ ​and​ ​learn​ ​about​ ​business​ ​abroad​ ​and​ ​come
home​ ​and​ ​apply​ ​those​ ​skills​ ​in​ ​expanding​ ​your​ ​business.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​come​ ​from​ ​this​ ​background,​ ​your
reasoning​ ​is​ ​sound.

The​ ​second​ ​case​ ​is​ ​the​ ​middle​ ​class​ ​family.​ ​Given​ ​how​ ​poor​ ​India​ ​as​ ​a​ ​country​ ​was​ ​post
independence,​ ​the​ ​gold​ ​standard​ ​for​ ​success​ ​was​ ​wealth.​ ​It​ ​so​ ​happened​ ​that​ ​the​ ​most​ ​common​ ​way​ ​this
was​ ​achieved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​masses​ ​was​ ​by​ ​doing​ ​engineering​ ​in​ ​college​ ​at​ ​the​ ​very​ ​successful​ ​IITs,​ ​and​ ​then​ ​by
getting​ ​an​ ​MBA​ ​later.​ ​These​ ​people​ ​became​ ​elite​ ​businessmen​ ​and​ ​are​ ​undoubtedly​ ​super​ ​successful​ ​at
what​ ​they​ ​do.​ ​Parents​ ​are​ ​very​ ​blinded​ ​by​ ​this​ ​and​ ​oblivious​ ​to​ ​changes​ ​in​ ​how​ ​the​ ​market​ ​works​ ​(and​ ​the
market​ ​has​ ​changed​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​since​ ​then),​ ​and​ ​moreover​ ​a​ ​parent​ ​is​ ​much​ ​more​ ​concerned​ ​about​ ​their​ ​child's
wealth​ ​than​ ​his​ ​or​ ​her​ ​own​ ​passion,​ ​particularly​ ​in​ ​India.

There's​ ​several​ ​things​ ​to​ ​note​ ​about​ ​why​ ​applying​ ​this​ ​framework​ ​abroad​ ​is​ ​inaccurate;
1.​ ​You​ ​get​ ​paid​ ​sufficiently​ ​with​ ​an​ ​engineering​ ​job​ ​in​ ​America.​ ​Sometimes​ ​getting​ ​an​ ​MBA
doesn't​ ​even​ ​lead​ ​to​ ​wealth​ ​boost​ ​but​ ​leaves​ ​you​ ​debt​ ​ridden​ ​and​ ​in​ ​a​ ​job​ ​you​ ​hate.
2.​ ​MBAs​ ​in​ ​America,​ ​unlike​ ​India,​ ​cost​ ​$160k​ ​for​ ​2​ ​years.​ ​It's​ ​also​ ​worth​ ​noting​ ​that​ ​it​ ​costs​ ​2
years​ ​of​ ​your​ ​life.
3.​ ​Your​ ​parents​ ​seldom​ ​care​ ​for​ ​whether​ ​you​ ​like​ ​your​ ​job,​ ​but​ ​more​ ​for​ ​whether​ ​you're​ ​making
money.​ ​Obviously,​ ​you​ ​care​ ​if​ ​you​ ​like​ ​your​ ​job,​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​hard​ ​to​ ​believe​ ​that​ ​you​ ​like​ ​business.
4.​ ​In​ ​today's​ ​market,​ ​businesses​ ​are​ ​becoming​ ​less​ ​and​ ​less​ ​dependent​ ​and​ ​reliant​ ​on​ ​MBAs,
particularly​ ​because​ ​you​ ​learn​ ​nothing​ ​in​ ​this​ ​two​ ​year​ ​degree​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​all​ ​about​ ​a​ ​college​ ​brand​ ​name​ ​and
networking.
5.​ ​There​ ​exist​ ​many​ ​successful​ ​Indians​ ​and​ ​other​ ​people​ ​with​ ​MBAs​ ​in​ ​America,​ ​yes.​ ​Many​ ​of
them​ ​are​ ​executive​ ​MBAs,​ ​where​ ​by​ ​virtue​ ​of​ ​passion​ ​for​ ​ones​ ​job​ ​one​ ​rises​ ​to​ ​a​ ​rank​ ​where​ ​it's​ ​essential
that​ ​I​ ​understand​ ​something​ ​about​ ​business.​ ​At​ ​a​ ​stage​ ​like​ ​this​ ​the​ ​company​ ​pays​ ​for​ ​your​ ​education​ ​at
an​ ​elite​ ​university​ ​who​ ​graciously​ ​offers​ ​because​ ​they​ ​get​ ​to​ ​list​ ​you​ ​as​ ​alumni.

Many​ ​people​ ​do​ ​an​ ​MBA​ ​without​ ​realizing​ ​what​ ​they're​ ​getting​ ​into.​ ​They're​ ​driven​ ​into​ ​this​ ​gold
standard​ ​ideal​ ​by​ ​society​ ​and​ ​when​ ​they​ ​realize​ ​it's​ ​not​ ​something​ ​they​ ​like,​ ​they​ ​feign​ ​enjoyment​ ​and​ ​try
to​ ​make​ ​up​ ​for​ ​it​ ​with​ ​material​ ​obsessions.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​life​ ​of​ ​suits​ ​and​ ​formality​ ​and​ ​I​ ​find​ ​it​ ​inherently​ ​hard​ ​to
digest​ ​how​ ​"business"​ ​is​ ​something​ ​one​ ​is​ ​passionate​ ​about.
 The​ ​way​ ​I​ ​see​ ​it,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​only​ ​a​ ​couple​ ​of​ ​good​ ​reasons​ ​to​ ​do​ ​an​ ​MBA:
1.​ ​You​ ​have​ ​a​ ​family​ ​business.
2.​ ​You're​ ​really​ ​unhappy​ ​with​ ​your​ ​job.​ ​You​ ​thought​ ​you'd​ ​like​ ​it​ ​but​ ​you​ ​don't.​ ​Now​ ​you​ ​want​ ​a
career​ ​change,​ ​to​ ​something​ ​different.
3.​ ​Your​ ​current​ ​job​ ​is​ ​paying​ ​you​ ​peanuts.​ ​It's​ ​unsustainable​ ​and​ ​you​ ​can't​ ​live​ ​like​ ​this.​ ​You​ ​need
a​ ​salary​ ​upgrade.
4.​ ​You're​ ​an​ ​executive​ ​at​ ​a​ ​company​ ​and​ ​your​ ​company​ ​will​ ​pay​ ​for​ ​it,​ ​and​ ​give​ ​you​ ​a​ ​promotion.
5.​ ​Your​ ​line​ ​of​ ​work​ ​requires​ ​you​ ​to​ ​get​ ​an​ ​MBA​ ​to​ ​make​ ​career​ ​progress​ ​(finance).

● What​ ​is​ ​the​ ​job​ ​scene​ ​for​ ​someone​ ​who​ ​has​ ​studied​ ​Math/CS​ ​from​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college?​ ​Is
it​ ​very​ ​different​ ​compared​ ​to​ ​someone​ ​who​ ​went​ ​to​ ​a​ ​tech​ ​school?

Significantly​ ​worse,​ ​given​ ​what​ ​I've​ ​seen.​ ​From​ ​all​ ​the​ ​engineers​ ​I've​ ​met​ ​in​ ​all​ ​my​ ​internships​ ​and
meet​ ​ups​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Valley,​ ​I've​ ​not​ ​met​ ​one​ ​student​ ​from​ ​Williams​ ​or​ ​Amherst​ ​or​ ​Bowdoin​ ​or
Middlebury.​ ​I've​ ​met​ ​one​ ​from​ ​Swarthmore​ ​and​ ​one​ ​from​ ​Pomona.​ ​Amongst​ ​PhD​ ​students,​ ​I've
met​ ​two​ ​very​ ​smart​ ​ones​ ​-​ ​one​ ​from​ ​Haverford​ ​and​ ​one​ ​from​ ​Carleton.

Again,​ ​I​ ​said​ ​this​ ​before​ ​-​ ​there​ ​are​ ​two​ ​biases​ ​I​ ​might​ ​be​ ​subject​ ​two.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​fewer​ ​tech
people​ ​from​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​schools​ ​so​ ​naturally​ ​the​ ​industry​ ​presence​ ​is​ ​lower.​ ​And​ ​people​ ​from​ ​these
schools​ ​are​ ​far​ ​far​ ​more​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​say​ ​"oh​ ​I​ ​go​ ​to​ ​a​ ​small​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college​ ​in​ ​Pennsylvania",​ ​because​ ​not
many​ ​people​ ​know​ ​they​ ​exist.

I​ ​believe​ ​it​ ​significantly​ ​hurts​ ​your​ ​chances.​ ​Employment​ ​is​ ​clearly​ ​not​ ​a​ ​driving​ ​factor​ ​when​ ​you
chose​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college.​ ​Fewer​ ​people​ ​know​ ​you​ ​exist.​ ​Fewer​ ​(if​ ​any)​ ​tech​ ​companies​ ​come​ ​to​ ​those
colleges​ ​to​ ​recruit​ ​directly​ ​and​ ​you'd​ ​be​ ​surprised​ ​how​ ​few​ ​people​ ​recognize​ ​these​ ​names.​ ​In​ ​terms​ ​of
actual​ ​CS​ ​education,​ ​I'm​ ​driven​ ​to​ ​believe​ ​they're​ ​worse​ ​too​ ​(again​ ​if​ ​you​ ​chose​ ​to​ ​go​ ​a​ ​liberal​ ​arts​ ​college
your​ ​primary​ ​motivator​ ​is​ ​probably​ ​not​ ​a​ ​solid​ ​tech​ ​education).​ ​Most​ ​colleges​ ​have​ ​a​ ​super​ ​small​ ​CS
department​ ​and​ ​many​ ​CS​ ​departments​ ​still​ ​kinda​ ​cling​ ​on​ ​to​ ​math.​ ​They​ ​are​ ​heavily​ ​theoretical,​ ​which
means​ ​they​ ​cater​ ​more​ ​to​ ​grad​ ​school​ ​than​ ​the​ ​industry.​ ​Research​ ​opportunities​ ​are​ ​much​ ​fewer​ ​because
-​ ​why​ ​would​ ​a​ ​great​ ​professor​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do​ ​research​ ​at​ ​a​ ​college​ ​which​ ​doesn't​ ​have​ ​the​ ​infrastructure​ ​or
funding​ ​he​ ​needs.​ ​They​ ​also​ ​lack​ ​general​ ​connectivity​ ​to​ ​things.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​not​ ​many​ ​hackathons​ ​at​ ​these
places.​ ​There's​ ​not​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​prominent​ ​tech​ ​alumni​ ​base​ ​from​ ​these​ ​places.
 Everybody​ ​has​ ​their​ ​own​ ​priorities,​ ​but​ ​if​ ​excelling​ ​in​ ​a​ ​technical​ ​field​ ​is​ ​high​ ​on​ ​yours,​ ​liberal​ ​arts
colleges,​ ​in​ ​my​ ​opinion,​ ​are​ ​not​ ​the​ ​right​ ​place.

>>​ ​ ​is​ ​it​ ​the​ ​same​ ​with​ ​math​ ​majors​ ​too?

Yes,​ ​but​ ​less​ ​so.​ ​When​ ​you​ ​say​ ​math​ ​major,​ ​my​ ​default​ ​assumption​ ​is​ ​that​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do
graduate​ ​school​ ​-​ ​a​ ​PhD.​ ​If​ ​this​ ​is​ ​the​ ​case,​ ​you're​ ​pretty​ ​well​ ​set​ ​from​ ​anywhere​ ​as​ ​long​ ​as​ ​you're​ ​smart.

However​ ​-
Yes​ ​it's​ ​true​ ​that​ ​the​ ​system​ ​still​ ​has​ ​bias.​ ​Given​ ​everything​ ​identical,​ ​I'd​ ​imagine​ ​an​ ​MIT​ ​math
major​ ​edging​ ​out​ ​over​ ​Williams.

I​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​how​ ​many​ ​hard​ ​core​ ​math​ ​researchers​ ​in​ ​their​ ​prime​ ​to​ ​choose​ ​to​ ​be​ ​at​ ​liberal​ ​arts
colleges.​ ​Possibly​ ​more​ ​than​ ​CS,​ ​though.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do​ ​grad​ ​school,​ ​it's​ ​strongly​ ​preferred​ ​that​ ​you​ ​do
some​ ​research​ ​work​ ​in​ ​college.​ ​I'm​ ​not​ ​sure​ ​if​ ​this​ ​is​ ​the​ ​case​ ​for​ ​math,​ ​but​ ​if​ ​so,​ ​that's​ ​a​ ​disadvantage.

The​ ​other​ ​thing​ ​is,​ ​I​ ​mentioned​ ​this​ ​before,​ ​recommendations.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​big​ ​deal​ ​in​ ​grad​ ​school​ ​apps.
When​ ​you​ ​apply​ ​for​ ​grad​ ​school,​ ​typically​ ​you​ ​go​ ​to​ ​MIT​ ​Stanford​ ​Caltech​ ​etc.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​are​ ​from​ ​those​ ​top
schools,​ ​you're​ ​much​ ​more​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​have​ ​professors​ ​in​ ​that​ ​network​ ​who​ ​know​ ​each​ ​other.​ ​If​ ​you've
worked​ ​with​ ​a​ ​professor​ ​who​ ​knows​ ​another​ ​guy​ ​from​ ​MIT,​ ​you're​ ​recommendation​ ​is​ ​doubly​ ​valuable.​ ​If
you're​ ​working​ ​with​ ​a​ ​no​ ​name​ ​prof​ ​who​ ​doesn't​ ​get​ ​published​ ​a​ ​lot,​ ​then​ ​it​ ​means​ ​much​ ​less.

● >>​ ​I​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​your​ ​opinion​ ​about​ ​CS​ ​from​ ​USC.​ ​How​ ​often​ ​are​ ​USC​ ​graduates
recruited​ ​at​ ​Facebook?

Answered​ ​before.​ ​There​ ​are​ ​few.​ ​I​ ​may​ ​have​ ​met​ ​one.​ ​[subject​ ​to​ ​biases.​ ​Please​ ​read​ ​some
comments​ ​above]

● >>​ ​You​ ​said​ ​that​ ​transfer​ ​in​ ​us​ ​is​ ​shit​ ​tough.​ ​So,​ ​have​ ​you​ ​ever​ ​met/known​ ​any​ ​indian​ ​who
transferred​ ​from​ ​an​ ​indian​ ​college/university?

One​ ​of​ ​my​ ​close​ ​friends​ ​transferred​ ​from​ ​UMass​ ​to​ ​Cornell.​ ​The​ ​only​ ​instance​ ​I've​ ​even​ ​heard​ ​of
India​ ​->​ ​US​ ​transfer​ ​in​ ​undergrad​ ​is​ ​the​ ​legendary​ ​Raghu​ ​Mahajan,​ ​who​ ​if​ ​you​ ​don't​ ​know​ ​topped
IIT,​ ​chose​ ​CS​ ​out​ ​of​ ​peer​ ​pressure,​ ​hated​ ​it,​ ​came​ ​to​ ​MIT​ ​to​ ​do​ ​Physics.​ ​He's​ ​now​ ​a​ ​string​ ​theorist
and​ ​part​ ​time​ ​god.
 ● >>​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​it​ ​is​ ​advisable​ ​for​ ​a​ ​student​ ​aspiring​ ​to​ ​major​ ​in​ ​a​ ​subject​ ​like​ ​Physics​ ​to
take​ ​on​ ​a​ ​heavy​ ​loan​ ​for​ ​a​ ​University​ ​like​ ​Cornell?​ ​What​ ​would​ ​your​ ​advice​ ​be​ ​to​ ​people
who,​ ​in​ ​spite​ ​of​ ​having​ ​applied​ ​abroad,​ ​end​ ​up​ ​pursuing​ ​their​ ​Undergraduate​ ​education​ ​in
India​ ​due​ ​to​ ​reasons​ ​such​ ​as​ ​financial​ ​constraints?

It's​ ​not​ ​ever​ ​"advisable"​ ​to​ ​take​ ​a​ ​loan​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​personal​ ​risk.​ ​For​ ​Physics,​ ​it's​ ​even​ ​riskier​ ​because
your​ ​future​ ​just​ ​happens​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​non-financially​ ​heavy​ ​one.​ ​You​ ​CAN​ ​make​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​money​ ​if​ ​youre
really​ ​smart​ ​in​ ​finance​ ​after​ ​Physics​ ​if​ ​youre​ ​super​ ​smart,​ ​but​ ​it's​ ​probably​ ​something​ ​temporary
you'll​ ​do​ ​to​ ​pay​ ​off​ ​your​ ​loans​ ​(hopefully).

If​ ​you​ ​stay​ ​in​ ​India​ ​due​ ​to​ ​financial​ ​constraints,​ ​the​ ​ball​ ​game​ ​is​ ​very​ ​different.​ ​Do​ ​well,​ ​get​ ​a​ ​good
GPA​ ​no​ ​matter​ ​how​ ​much​ ​mugging​ ​it​ ​takes.​ ​At​ ​the​ ​same​ ​time,​ ​if​ ​you​ ​like​ ​competitive​ ​coding,​ ​try​ ​it​ ​out.​ ​If
you're​ ​good,​ ​it​ ​could​ ​get​ ​you​ ​places.​ ​(but​ ​only​ ​if​ ​you​ ​enjoy​ ​it).​ ​If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​go​ ​into​ ​the​ ​industry,​ ​apply​ ​for
an​ ​M.Eng/MS​ ​program​ ​abroad,​ ​and​ ​it's​ ​an​ ​easy​ ​ticket.​ ​These​ ​programs​ ​are​ ​pretty​ ​lax​ ​with​ ​their​ ​admission
standards​ ​but​ ​still​ ​don't​ ​give​ ​much​ ​aid​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​about​ ​1-2​ ​years​ ​of​ ​full​ ​tuition,​ ​depending​ ​on​ ​the​ ​program.
If​ ​you​ ​want​ ​to​ ​do​ ​a​ ​PhD,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​super​ ​good​ ​in​ ​India​ ​-​ ​try​ ​getting​ ​published​ ​research​ ​out.
Try​ ​researching​ ​at​ ​the​ ​IITs/IIITs​ ​if​ ​not​ ​abroad.​ ​PhD​ ​is​ ​super​ ​super​ ​competitive,​ ​and​ ​typically​ ​is​ ​done​ ​right
after​ ​undergrad.​ ​It's​ ​a​ ​5​ ​year​ ​completely​ ​paid​ ​for​ ​program,​ ​but​ ​when​ ​considering​ ​it,​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​think
about​ ​what​ ​your​ ​future​ ​goals​ ​and​ ​interests​ ​are​ ​because​ ​it's​ ​for​ ​a​ ​very​ ​particular​ ​set​ ​of​ ​people.

● >>​ ​Any​ ​tips​ ​for​ ​CS​ ​Students​ ​who​ ​are​ ​not​ ​Attending​ ​Ivy/MIT,Stanford​ ​to​ ​succeed​ ​?

None​ ​of​ ​the​ ​advise​ ​in​ ​comments​ ​above​ ​was​ ​specific​ ​to​ ​any​ ​school.

Be​ ​humble,​ ​be​ ​curious.

Work​ ​hard​ ​and​ ​long​ ​hours
maintain​ ​a​ ​good​ ​GPA
at​ ​least​ ​try​ ​research
interact​ ​with​ ​profs​ ​often
attempt​ ​to​ ​contribute​ ​to​ ​an​ ​open​ ​source​ ​project
be​ ​very​ ​solid​ ​with​ ​your​ ​basics
interact​ ​and​ ​be​ ​open​ ​to​ ​more​ ​ideas​ ​from​ ​more​ ​people
attend​ ​a​ ​few​ ​hackathons​ ​to​ ​network​ ​with​ ​people​ ​from​ ​other​ ​colleges​ ​[winning​ ​doesn't​ ​mean​ ​much]
place​ ​out​ ​of​ ​intro​ ​classes​ ​as​ ​much​ ​as​ ​possible​ ​so​ ​you​ ​can​ ​take​ ​advanced​ ​classes​ ​that​ ​involve
reading​ ​research​ ​papers
 ● >>​ ​Life​ ​is​ ​very​ ​different​ ​for​ ​Med​ ​Students​ ​after​ ​UG,​ ​isnt​ ​it?​ ​How​ ​much​ ​of​ ​the​ ​long​ ​game
should​ ​we​ ​play,​ ​given​ ​that​ ​it​ ​may​ ​well​ ​take​ ​12+​ ​years​ ​for​ ​a​ ​paying​ ​job?

I​ ​told​ ​you​ ​what​ ​I​ ​know​ ​about​ ​Med​ ​school​ ​UG​ ​life.​ ​After​ ​undergrad,​ ​I​ ​think​ ​it​ ​works​ ​something​ ​like
this:

Work​ ​your​ ​ass​ ​off​ ​to​ ​get​ ​into​ ​Med​ ​school.​ ​Med​ ​school​ ​is​ ​statistically​ ​the​ ​hardest​ ​thing​ ​to​ ​get​ ​into.
And​ ​you're​ ​competing​ ​with​ ​a​ ​significantly​ ​strong​ ​academically​ ​inclined​ ​student​ ​body.​ ​Everyone​ ​wants​ ​to
do​ ​the​ ​same​ ​thing.

Once​ ​you​ ​get​ ​in,​ ​many​ ​take​ ​a​ ​gap​ ​year​ ​or​ ​chill.​ ​Many​ ​take​ ​a​ ​gap​ ​year​ ​just​ ​to​ ​apply​ ​-​ ​it's​ ​a​ ​super
huge​ ​deal.

Once​ ​you're​ ​in​ ​to​ ​the​ ​good​ ​ones​ ​-​ ​Mt​ ​Sinai,​ ​UC​ ​San​ ​Fran,​ ​Harvard,​ ​etc​ ​etc​ ​there's​ ​a​ ​ton​ ​of​ ​good
ones.​ ​Even​ ​if​ ​you're​ ​into​ ​the​ ​worse​ ​ones,​ ​it​ ​doesn't​ ​really​ ​matter.​ ​Med​ ​school​ ​is​ ​pretty​ ​brutal​ ​no​ ​matter
where​ ​you​ ​go.​ ​It's​ ​I​ ​think​ ​5-6​ ​years​ ​(I'm​ ​not​ ​sure)​ ​and​ ​your​ ​peers​ ​are​ ​not​ ​only​ ​mad​ ​smart​ ​they're​ ​clearly
insanely​ ​dedicated​ ​to​ ​have​ ​got​ ​there.​ ​Towards​ ​the​ ​end,​ ​or​ ​after​ ​those​ ​5-6​ ​years​ ​(I'm​ ​not​ ​sure),​ ​you​ ​do​ ​a
residency.​ ​There's​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​research​ ​into​ ​med​ ​student​ ​-​ ​residency​ ​matching​ ​problems​ ​by​ ​Econ/CS​ ​profs​ ​-
you​ ​should​ ​read​ ​into​ ​it,​ ​it's​ ​super​ ​interesting.​ ​Getting​ ​matched​ ​is​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​stress​ ​because​ ​I​ ​think​ ​you​ ​end​ ​up
being​ ​pushed​ ​into​ ​settling​ ​at​ ​that​ ​hospital​ ​or​ ​clinic​ ​(before​ ​you​ ​open​ ​your​ ​own).​ ​After​ ​that,​ ​depending​ ​on
the​ ​type​ ​of​ ​doctor​ ​you​ ​are​ ​(and​ ​much​ ​less,​ ​but​ ​a​ ​little​ ​bit​ ​on​ ​where​ ​you​ ​went​ ​to​ ​school),​ ​you​ ​get​ ​paid​ ​a​ ​fuck
ton​ ​of​ ​money.​ ​Surgeon​ ​salaries​ ​are​ ​about​ ​$500k​ ​-$1m,​ ​no​ ​questions​ ​asked.
It's​ ​less​ ​a​ ​question​ ​of​ ​whether​ ​you'll​ ​get​ ​paid​ ​that​ ​much,​ ​more​ ​a​ ​question​ ​of​ ​whether​ ​you'll​ ​survive
all​ ​this​ ​and​ ​be​ ​living,​ ​and​ ​sane.

If​ ​you're​ ​not​ ​married​ ​yet,​ ​your​ ​baldness​ ​finds​ ​a​ ​wife​ ​pretty​ ​easily​ ​cause​ ​who​ ​the​ ​fuck​ ​wouldn't​ ​date
a​ ​doctor.​ ​You​ ​get​ ​married,​ ​you​ ​settle​ ​down,​ ​you​ ​go​ ​to​ ​the​ ​hospital​ ​and​ ​delay​ ​death​ ​for​ ​your​ ​patients​ ​until
you​ ​die​ ​yourself.​ ​I'm​ ​only​ ​partially​ ​kidding​ ​about​ ​the​ ​last​ ​bit.

● >>​ ​ ​I'm​ ​an​ ​international​ ​student​ ​and​ ​they're​ ​looking​ ​for​ ​Green​ ​card​ ​holders/​ ​US​ ​citizen​ ​to
get​ ​a​ ​security​ ​clearance.​ ​I'm​ ​leaning​ ​towards​ ​the​ ​astro​ ​(Space​ ​side​ ​of​ ​things)​ ​and​ ​I​ ​could
find​ ​virtually​ ​nothing​ ​to​ ​help​ ​me​ ​out.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​thinking​ ​of​ ​working​ ​some​ ​random​ ​MechE​ ​job
and​ ​then​ ​doing​ ​an​ ​MBA
So,​ ​one​ ​of​ ​my​ ​best​ ​friends​ ​and​ ​roommate​ ​for​ ​two​ ​years​ ​was​ ​exactly​ ​in​ ​your​ ​shoes.He​ ​was​ ​at
Cornell,​ ​doing​ ​MechE​ ​with​ ​a​ ​focus​ ​on​ ​Aerospace,​ ​and​ ​it​ ​was​ ​absolutely​ ​what​ ​he​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​do.​ ​He
was​ ​passionate​ ​and​ ​a​ ​hundred​ ​percent​ ​sure.​ ​And​ ​he​ ​ran​ ​into​ ​the​ ​same​ ​problem.In​ ​fact,​ ​another
close​ ​friend,​ ​a​ ​senior​ ​2​ ​years​ ​older​ ​than​ ​me​ ​was​ ​in​ ​those​ ​shoes​ ​too.​ ​And​ ​this​ ​guy​ ​actually​ ​topped
his​ ​entire​ ​batch​ ​in​ ​MechE.​ ​He​ ​had​ ​a​ ​crazy​ ​4.2​ ​GPA​ ​or​ ​something.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​end,​ ​he​ ​decided​ ​to​ ​go
into​ ​Consulting​ ​because​ ​he​ ​just​ ​couldn't​ ​find​ ​a​ ​good​ ​MechE​ ​job.My​ ​roommate​ ​was​ ​more
headstrong.​ ​He​ ​had​ ​a​ ​very​ ​high​ ​3.9-er​ ​GPA​ ​and​ ​he​ ​could​ ​do​ ​CS,​ ​and​ ​Econ,​ ​and​ ​anything​ ​he
wanted,​ ​but​ ​he​ ​focussed​ ​on​ ​his​ ​passion.Now​ ​he's​ ​been​ ​admitted​ ​into​ ​a​ ​PhD​ ​program​ ​at​ ​Stanford,
focussing​ ​in​ ​Aerospace.Once​ ​you​ ​get​ ​a​ ​PhD​ ​those​ ​same​ ​restricted​ ​employment​ ​opportunities
open​ ​up​ ​for​ ​research,​ ​and​ ​that's​ ​what​ ​he​ ​wants​ ​to​ ​do.
Given​ ​that​ ​you're​ ​a​ ​freshman,​ ​consider​ ​these​ ​two​ ​options:
1.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​are​ ​talented​ ​and​ ​have​ ​good​ ​academic​ ​credentials​ ​and​ ​think​ ​you​ ​can​ ​maintain​ ​them​ ​and
are​ ​super​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​Aero,​ ​focus​ ​on​ ​a​ ​PhD.
​ ​2.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​just​ ​want​ ​to​ ​work​ ​in​ ​the​ ​industry​ ​straight​ ​up,​ ​and​ ​are​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​sacrifice​ ​your​ ​passion​ ​for
money,​ ​than​ ​there's​ ​no​ ​point​ ​doing​ ​MechE,​ ​working​ ​a​ ​crap​ ​job,​ ​and​ ​then​ ​doing​ ​an​ ​MBA.​ ​Just​ ​do
Econ/finance​ ​and​ ​try​ ​to​ ​get​ ​a​ ​consulting​ ​job​ ​on​ ​Wall.