Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

State Colleges May Offer Best ROI On Comp Sci Degrees

timothy posted about 5 months ago | from the your-mileage-may-vary dept.

Education 127

jfruh (300774) writes "PayScale has recently released a survey of various U.S. colleges and majors, and determined, perhaps unsurprisingly, that computer science graduates of elite colleges make the most money in post-graduate life. However, blogger Phil Johnson approached the problem in a different way, taking into account the amount students and their families need to pay in tuition, [and found] that the best return on investment in comp sci degrees often comes from top-tier public universities, which cost significantly less for in-state students but still offer great rewards in terms of salaries for grads."

cancel ×

127 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Moo (4, Funny)

Chacham (981) | about 5 months ago | (#46629965)

Unfortunately, you have to be a finance major to understand the report.

But the Finance major can't possibly be a CS major, unless he went to college twice, which would means he can't plan anyway. Regardless, if he went for Finance first, then to CS, he obviously realized that CS was better. But, if he went for CS first, then for Finance, he would then realize that CS was better. This catch 22 is the best proof why Agile is the preferred method even when taking college courses.

Re:Moo (1)

plopez (54068) | about 5 months ago | (#46630007)

Though in finance the government bails you and you get to keep your job "unwinding" the bad decisions you made. The decisions which caused the problem in the first place. Who's dumber?

Re:Moo (1)

Chacham (981) | about 5 months ago | (#46630081)

Are you saying that a decision for finance is no decision at all?
Or are you saying that a decision for finance is a good hedging?

P.S. I should say writing, until the audio comes to a comment near you.

Re:Moo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630053)

or he double majored?

Re:Moo (2)

alen (225700) | about 5 months ago | (#46630149)

it's simple
unless you're in one of the best high schools in the USA and one of the top people in the school in math and want to be a CS major, don't bother applying to the best CS programs unless you have scholarships and your parents have money to pay

you are better off going to your state school and taking out less loans you will have to repay

Re:Moo (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630225)

And this differs from any other major, how?

Unless your parents have money or you get scholarships, a state school is always your best bet.

Re:Moo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630773)

In my case, the best CS programs in the nation are at my state schools and they're really cheap for in-state. Lots of people come from South Korea, Japan, China, and India and pay $40k/year, but in-state students only pay about $6k/year.

Calculation was flawed (4, Interesting)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46630859)

You don't have to be a finance major to understand that the calculations were flawed. They only count the amount spent on tuition. They don't count the cost of your human capital and the opportunity costs involved. Investing in yourself is not like investing in the stock market because you only have one life to invest in. So you cannot just compare the difference in tuition between a state school and Stanford because you are also giving up a portion of your young life to your educational pursuits.

Their highest 20 year net ROI/yr school was University of Virginia, but they only returned $1.3 million in total. Stanford returned $1.7 million. So even though the annual ROI was greater at the University of Virginia, you are still leaving $400k on the table by not choosing Stanford. And considering you can borrow money at 6.8% interest, it only costs you $90k more after interest to go to Stanford instead of the University of Virginia (if the loans are paid over a 20 year period).

So the only correct calculation is that going to Stanford will net you an extra $300k versus going to the University of Virginia (obviously this is not a very precise calculation though).

Re:Calculation was flawed (4, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46630971)

On the flip side, attending UVA in-state costs around $12k/year and you arent gambling your future on the hope that you DO recoup the costs.

Opportunity cost is thrown around as if attending Georgetown guarantees a high-paying job. Turns out all it guarantees is a massive debt and a shot on the roulette wheel.

Re:Calculation was flawed (1)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46632037)

On the flip side, attending UVA in-state costs around $12k/year and you arent gambling your future on the hope that you DO recoup the costs.

Opportunity cost is thrown around as if attending Georgetown guarantees a high-paying job. Turns out all it guarantees is a massive debt and a shot on the roulette wheel.

That is very true. There are few cases in life where you can get greater returns without greater risks. The investment is not just attending Georgetown; it is also working hard there. The risks of being underemployed if you apply yourself at an Ivy League school in a useful major is very low. That may not be true for a Harvard English major though.

Re:Calculation was flawed (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 5 months ago | (#46631519)

So the only correct calculation is that going to Stanford will net you an extra $300k versus going to the University of Virginia (obviously this is not a very precise calculation though).

You know what the real flaw in the calculation was? They probably didn't account for the fact that Stanford grads don't get paid a lot necessarily because they went to Stanford, but because they were already in Silicon Valley and are therefore more likely to work there after they graduate.

In contrast, Georgia Tech produces programmers of similar skill and talent, but since they're more likely to end up working in Atlanta they also end up getting paid less.

Re:Calculation was flawed (1)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46632177)

So the only correct calculation is that going to Stanford will net you an extra $300k versus going to the University of Virginia (obviously this is not a very precise calculation though).

You know what the real flaw in the calculation was? They probably didn't account for the fact that Stanford grads don't get paid a lot necessarily because they went to Stanford, but because they were already in Silicon Valley and are therefore more likely to work there after they graduate.

In contrast, Georgia Tech produces programmers of similar skill and talent, but since they're more likely to end up working in Atlanta they also end up getting paid less.

They don't need to account for the fact that Stanford grads have a greater chance of working in Silicon Valley. That is part of the draw of the school. And Stanford isn't just "lucky" that it is close to Silicon Valley. There is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem, but a good argument can be made that Silicon Valley owes much of its success to its proximity to Stanford (and now they clearly feed off of each other).

The quality of a school has little to do with the skills and talent it gives you. If you want skills just open a book. If you want amazing contacts, a prestigious degree, and the ability to work on great research projects, then you should be going to a great school. (that said, Georgia Tech is a great program and not your average state school)

You can keep your doctor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46629969)

You can keep your doctor and your old insurance!

Posted by: Barrack Obama

Re:You can keep your doctor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631333)

Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

Posted by: George W Bush

Re:You can keep your doctor (0)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 5 months ago | (#46631655)

Congrats, you've proved that the two aren't really significantly different.

Re:You can keep your doctor (0)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46632107)

Congrats, you've proved that the two aren't really significantly different.

Oh yeah, one statement got us into a war that cost trillions of dollars and one statement made some people lose their crappy insurance plans. Even if you think both are bad, you cannot possibly think they are not significantly different.

Re:You can keep your doctor (0)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 5 months ago | (#46632189)

Yes, but it shows they're both bald-faced liars. The insurance thing, while relatively small, wasn't the only thing Obama lied about. The whole NSA scandal is a much bigger one, and who knows what else he's lied to us about.

Re:You can keep your doctor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631901)

Technically, they did. [wikipedia.org]

Bullshit. (-1, Flamebait)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46629995)

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. A degree from a state university is basically toilet paper as compared to, say, MIT or Harvard or any other prestigious college/university. Second, a degree from a "cheaper" college works against you in another way - chances are that you didn't pay as much to go to that aggie school, so you don't have as much debt. Employers like indebted fresh graduates, because they're 1) idealistic and enthusiastic, having not had their souls crushed yet, and 2) a $1000 student loan payment makes it harder to quit when they treat you like shit and make you do the work of 3 people. Combine that with lower salaries and you've got a winning combination for an employer.

Re:Bullshit. (2)

MrCawfee (13910) | about 5 months ago | (#46630041)

Combine that with lower salaries and you've got a winning combination for an employer.

You proved the point of the article with this statement alone.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46630217)

No, I didn't, I contradicted it. I don't know where these folks got their numbers (probably from the PR assholes at these universities) but in my experience, if you've got a degree from a public university like I do, it goes on the last page of your resume in very small print, lest it work against you.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

redmid17 (1217076) | about 5 months ago | (#46630521)

That's been the opposite of my experience

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Zmobie (2478450) | about 5 months ago | (#46630929)

Not sure what university you went to or degree you got, but I actually have a CS degree from UNT (which is on the list) and no those numbers are pretty damn accurate (they might even be low for a 20 year ROI, running paper napkin math mine is actually a lot higher atm). Just because you have a bad anecdotal experience does not mean that is the baseline for everyone.

Yes, mine is anecdotal too, but the numbers they posted back me up and may even undersell my experience so far.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46631021)

Are you aware that UVa and Berkeley are both public universities with very low resident tuition?

Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630227)

indeed, with less debt you don't need as large of a salary. This opens more jobs because more people are willing to hire for less!

Re:Indeed (2)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46630313)

What makes you think employers base the salaries they offer on what you need or want? You'll take what they give you and you will like it, or go fuck yourself.

Re:Indeed (2)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46631003)

What makes you think employers base the salaries they offer on what you need or want? You'll take what they give you and you will like it, or go fuck yourself.

It is sad that you not only posted this but that someone else marked it as insightful. Companies will pay you what it takes to keep you and what it takes to keep you motivated. Complaining that companies don't pay you more than you are worth is no different than companies complaining that they have to pay you at all.

Would you rather have a job was just some form of charity because your boss feels bad for you? If you answer yes to that then I am not surprised that you have had such bad luck in the job market.

Re:Indeed (1)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46632305)

Companies will pay you what it takes to keep you and what it takes to keep you motivated.

Companies will pay you as little as they can possibly get away with and then 5% lower. The job market sucks, especially for new grads. They think you should consider yourself lucky that they allow you to keep working there.

Complaining that companies don't pay you more than you are worth is no different than companies complaining that they have to pay you at all.

Who's saying I should be paid more than I'm worth? My point was that the employers get to decide what you're worth, and that's as little as possible.

Would you rather have a job was just some form of charity because your boss feels bad for you?

No, I'd rather have a job that pays me what I'm worth, which, incidentally, I have.

If you answer yes to that then I am not surprised that you have had such bad luck in the job market.

I have a job. A good one. I've tripled my salary over the last 8 years or so. I can tell you that even highly-sought, highly-skilled workers like myself have to go through the HR bullshit you-should-be-grateful-we're-interviewing-you nonsense.

Employers don't care if you're happy or that you're getting paid what you're worth. They want power over you. They're kind of like car dealerships: So long as they all treat you like shit equally, that won't change. The right-wing freakout over fewer hours worked due to the ACA was really inspired by the fact that your employer can't hold your healthcare hostage as easily anymore, so they have less control over your life. (Anti-ACA trolls can fuck off.)

Re:Indeed (1)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46632615)

I have a job. A good one. I've tripled my salary over the last 8 years or so. .

I guess I don't understand where your animosity comes from then. Unless you were just in some basic tech support job 8 years ago, you are probably well into the six figures in just salary compensation. Your employer clearly thinks you are worth quite a bit, and are paying you accordingly.

I can tell you that even highly-sought, highly-skilled workers like myself have to go through the HR bullshit you-should-be-grateful-we're-interviewing-you nonsense

Who cares what those idiots think? If a company misses out on you because they have some incompetent HR staff then that is their loss. The job market for competent people is always great. I haven't had a bad experience with an HR department during my professional career. I have always been treated as a potentially valuable employee and treated with a great deal of respect. Maybe it is just because I give them the same level of respect until they give me a good reason not to.

Re:Indeed (1)

khellendros1984 (792761) | about 5 months ago | (#46632009)

You sound bitter and overly cynical. Companies will certainly pay you less than the profit that you generate for the company, and they'll pay you the minimum that they can to retain you as an employee. Those are givens. That doesn't mean that you're getting fucked. In my case, I expect that I could make more money out on my own, true. But that's with more work, fewer benefits, and taking the risk of failure on myself. I "took what they gave me", have a steady job where I'm doing work that I enjoy, and have more money than I expected to be paid before starting to work. As far as I can see, getting a degree from a public university has helped more than it hurt.

Re:Bullshit. (2)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46630061)

A degree from a state university is basically toilet paper as compared to, say, MIT or Harvard or any other prestigious college/university.

Prestige isn't worth that much. Sure, I occasionally see job ads for people with pretty degrees - especially in status driven fields like finance. But they don't pay that much of a premium for those people.

Employers like indebted fresh graduates, because they're 1) idealistic and enthusiastic, having not had their souls crushed yet, and 2) a $1000 student loan payment makes it harder to quit when they treat you like shit and make you do the work of 3 people.

While that is plausible, do you have any evidence of such a bias?

Re:Bullshit. (1)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46630165)

It's an educated assumption. If you look at it from the employer's point of view.. what are they looking for? Cheap, not good. Easily abused, not possessing self-respect. Indebted, not independent. They want interchangeable cogs that will accept horrible treatment, because it's cheaper to treat employees like shit than it is to treat them like human beings.

Re:Bullshit. (3, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46630245)

So it's not actually based on evidence? Two can play at that game.

There's the other side of the coin, namely, that a employee who wracks up a lot of debt is more likely to making bad workplace decisions (since they've already demonstrated an inclination for doing so) or engage in theft and embezzlement (because they have huge financial incentive to do so).

Re:Bullshit. (2)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | about 5 months ago | (#46630267)

I've worked in various different work environments, but thankfully nothing as horrible as that. I do know that employees with kids and a mortgage are seen as being easier to manage than contractors with large nest eggs or even employees with a sufficiently large "f.u. fund", for authoritarian managers that is. On the flip side, people in the work force who are rich and independent enough to not have to put up with any crap from their manager, are there of their own volition, and probably like what they do. Such self-motivated, happy employees generally make for better employees.

I have certainly never come across an employer who favours or actively seeks out indebted job seekers in order to have a tighter control over their workforce.

Re:Bullshit. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630461)

I have certainly never come across an employer who favours or actively seeks out indebted job seekers in order to have a tighter control over their workforce.

I have only once: it was an Indian who loved H1-Bs as he could abuse them all he wanted because they'd have a hard time leaving. I did a couple months of contract work there and I could tell that it didn't take long for him to grow to dislike me as I would stand up to him all of the time.

Re:Bullshit. (2)

ranton (36917) | about 5 months ago | (#46631201)

Prestige isn't worth that much. Sure, I occasionally see job ads for people with pretty degrees - especially in status driven fields like finance. But they don't pay that much of a premium for those people.

The prestige is a very small part of an Ivy degree's worth. The true worth comes in the connections made. Do you want all of your friends from college to be average state school graduates or Stanford graduates? I only went to a state school because I slacked off so much in my younger years, but even then my best early job opportunities came from past classmates tracking me down when they were starting companies (one startup and one consulting company). I can only imagine how much better those job opportunities would have been if my past classmates had been from Stanford, MIT, or Harvard.

One interesting theory about the value of weaker schools is that you will shine more in that environment. I got my last two jobs because former classmates remembered me as the one guy they wanted to work with. If I had went to Stanford I might not have had as good of opportunities because I could have just blended in. I may have been one of the brightest students at my state school, but probably would have been about average at Stanford or MIT.

School's what YOU make it... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630133)

Doesn't MATTER where you went for it. Comp. Sci. IS Comp. Sci., no matter WHERE you took it. Imo (& yes, experience with 6++ yrs. of collegiate academic experience AFTER highschool & dual degrees on my end), it's what YOU PUT INTO IT that counts & matters, in the long haul. You could go to "worstschoolinUSA U", but if YOU put in the time, hard work & effort (not as bad IF/WHEN you love doing what you're into & studying), it pays off, no matter what.

APK

P.S.=> Personally, I feel *IF* you blew all that extra ca$h on some "prestigious university" (& I went to a fairly highly esteemed Northeast US school, on combined academic + athletic scholarship (see Letter K) -> http://lemoynedolphins.com/spo... [lemoynedolphins.com] ), you wasted your money - actually come RIGHT DOWN TO IT? Any field can be an "autodidactically self-taught one" - look @ math & Ramanujan for example... it IS, doable.

So, I can't agree with you on what education is REALLY about - learning jobskills.

(So, I can't agree that your viewpoint's the correct one that pays off OR why you should be doing schooling beyond highschool really... So sure, as far as payoff? Your view sometimes it does do so, but I am speaking PURELY from the perspective of knowledge you gain only, not politics - you went to school to learn something you could earn a living from, since the "other guy" customer CAN'T or WON'T do the job, himself - the school you go to, no matter how "pretigious/elite" it is, won't do THAT for you)... apk

Re:School's what YOU make it... apk (1)

plopez (54068) | about 5 months ago | (#46630191)

see my comment #46630079 at the under grad level most digress are very much the same.

Agreed (almost 110%)... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630243)

With what you said here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org] except that even at postgrad/postdoc levels, it STILL is what YOU yourself make it (how much time, study, & effort you put into it, & I also mean how much ABOVE & BEYOND the 'std, academic success formula' of "for every 1 hour of class, you should study 3++ beyond it on your own" etc./et al) - I still think that even @ those levels, it's MOSTLY what you put into it, to get the MOST out of it.

APK

P.S.=> Other than that though? I am with you, 110%... apk

Are you on the right medication now? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630999)

Haven't seen YOU for a while apk. Did you take my ADVICE and seek professional help? MAYBE they CHANGED your dose - you seem less AFFECTed than you used to.

Did you get these to your name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631191)

1.) A license to practice the psychiatric sciences. 2.) A PhD in psychiatric sciences 3.) A formal examination of my "alleged mental state" (according to YOU, "Dr. Quack: 'SiDeWaLk-ShRiNk of /.' (lol))

??

* No? I didn't *think* so - hell, I knew not...

APK

P.S.=> You're nothing more than some libelous snivelling little ac troll - nothing more (that's certain, & no degree's required to identify THAT much about you - purest obvious truth)...

... apk

Re:Bullshit. (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 5 months ago | (#46630163)

The MIT or Harvard, for a degree in Computer Science doesn't offer you superior education, it just looks nice on your resume. This is all fine and good to try to get a job first job. However after time less and less is dependent on where you got your degree from, just that you got a degree.
Now we have some employers who get impressed by the fancy name, but those balance out by the ones who get turned off by it. Because they often create pretentious workers who think they know it all and are not willing to learn the real way of doing things, or listen to the experience from the guy who doesn't have such a fancy degree.

In general companies do not like their employees with a lot of debt, because they are under more stress, and stress causes more irrational behavior. Sell their car, sleep in the office, or just get snappy at customers.

A degree from a State University vs a prestigious college isn't toilet paper, especially if you are interested in going to the corporate world. Your education in a State School espectially for undergrad work is probably better then the big names. Why? They get more professors who want to teach undergrads, vs the big names where you have more professors involved in their own research projects and teaching undergrads is one of those useless chores they need to do. So you have undergrads getting better teaching, and more time understanding the content, and less time just being bullied by the professor who wants the class to fail out so he can use the rest of the semester on his research.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46630273)

The MIT or Harvard, for a degree in Computer Science doesn't offer you superior education, it just looks nice on your resume

You assume that anyone gives a shit about the quality of education once you're trying to get a job, they care about WHERE you went, not if you got a good education or not.

Now we have some employers who get impressed by the fancy name, but those balance out by the ones who get turned off by it.

Yeah, bullshit. What color is the sky on your planet?

In general companies do not like their employees with a lot of debt, because they are under more stress, and stress causes more irrational behavior. Sell their car, sleep in the office, or just get snappy at customers.

They want their employees as stressed out as possible, because they think that's the way they'll be the most productive. They're wrong, of course, but that doesn't mean they don't work people to death. If someone acts up they'll just fire them and replace them with another cog.

A degree from a State University vs a prestigious college isn't toilet paper, especially if you are interested in going to the corporate world. Your education in a State School espectially for undergrad work is probably better then the big names. Why? They get more professors who want to teach undergrads, vs the big names where you have more professors involved in their own research projects and teaching undergrads is one of those useless chores they need to do. So you have undergrads getting better teaching, and more time understanding the content, and less time just being bullied by the professor who wants the class to fail out so he can use the rest of the semester on his research.

Again, nobody gives a shit about the quality of education, they care where you went. Let's say you've got two resumes on your desk. One is from someone who had a 4.0 at Aggie U, the other is from someone with a 4.0 at Harvard. Guess which resume winds up in the bin with no further scrutiny? Hint: It's not the one from the Harvard grad.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

redmid17 (1217076) | about 5 months ago | (#46630561)

If you even have your GPA on your resume after you graduate from college, I would question quite a bit anyway

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46632095)

There's a very large local company that requires your transcripts, regardless of how long you've been in the industry.

Re:Bullshit. (4, Insightful)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 5 months ago | (#46630595)

Wow, you must work for some real assholes. Basically, you are describing a level of cluelessness in management that I think is less common than you think. Because.. really?

"You assume that anyone gives a shit about the quality of education once you're trying to get a job, they care about WHERE you went"

Only if they are clueless.

They want their employees as stressed out as possible, because they think that's the way they'll be the most productive.

They are assholes and you really don't want to be working for them. Run!

Let's say you've got two resumes on your desk. One is from someone who had a 4.0 at Aggie U, the other is from someone with a 4.0 at Harvard. Guess which resume winds up in the bin with no further scrutiny? Hint: It's not the one from the Harvard grad.

Anyone with a 4.0 from anywhere deserves a phone screen at a minimum, assuming they have relevant experience. As others have noted, as you get more experience, what you have done professionally becomes far more important than where you spent your undergrad days. Where you did your grad degree(s) is given more weight, but even then, it's what you did with your time there.

You have apparently had bad experiences in corporateland. I would suggest a few years in startups maybe.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

albeit unknown (136964) | about 5 months ago | (#46631517)

You're right, a 4.0 deserves a phone screen, but not for the reason that most think. The purpose for phone screening a 4.0 is to make sure they took the time to have a few beers once in a while, to make it more likely they'll be able to work in a team.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 5 months ago | (#46631699)

Startups are generally known for expecting ridiculously long hours, and then shafting employees when the company hits pay dirt. I don't know why you'd recommend him to go that route.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 5 months ago | (#46631839)

Startups are generally known for expecting ridiculously long hours, and then shafting employees when the company hits pay dirt. I don't know why you'd recommend him to go that route.

Yes, decent point. Long hours are common, true, and I generally have had the experience of startups turning into wind-downs, so no experience hitting pay dirt, BUT:

In a start-up you are less a cog and more integral to the success/failure of the company. The last start-up (sorry, "wind-down") I was a part of put me in the lead as the only in-house developer in the company. While the $ is maybe not as good, I found working with a smaller team to be much more gratifying than working as "corporate cog". That said, I'm working for a mid-sized company now, my bosses are decent, and it's OK.

So maybe better advice would be to simply find a decent company. Easier said than done, but there is a scale of crappiness in the corporate world, and asking around, it's possible to find reasonable places to work. Find your oasis.. (exercise left for the reader)

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 5 months ago | (#46632175)

What you say about "gratifying work" doesn't just apply to start-ups, it applies to any smaller organization. Generally, the smaller, the more opportunity you have to be integral to the success/failure of the company and have a say in things and do interesting work. You don't have to go for a start-up to get this, just focus on small-to-midsize companies. Not all small companies are start-ups.

So I agree, find a decent company. However, that's MUCH easier said than done. My experience has been that smaller companies generally have more interesting work and you get more influence, but the pay is crap and the work environment is highly variable (some companies are horrible, others are great). Whereas at large corporations, the pay is generally good, and the work environment is predictable (not usually horrible, don't have to worry about harassment, not a lot of weird rules), but the work itself usually sucks, you're just a small cog and your work probably won't amount to anything.

Glassdoor.com can be a good way of seeing what other employees think of a company. I turned down a job interview recently with this after reading about how it was standard practice at this (mid-size) company to have cameras monitoring employees, even monitoring the bathrooms, to see how much time they spent away from their desks.

Re:Bullshit. (4, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | about 5 months ago | (#46630599)

Having worked with bosses, and been part of the hiring process... Those big college names mean very little. Perhaps an equivalent of 2 more years of experience.
So we got Person A with 4 years experience and a State Degree and we got a Person with 2 years experience and a Ivy League Degree, then we will have a crap shoot. Just because of the difficulty of getting in the school means that this person has a good track record of working hard. But that is about it.
However the real value of a good education isn't getting the job, but keeping and advancing in the job. If you know your stuff then you will advance, if you just an arrogant prick unless you truly mastered the art of BS and Networking (not common with people with just a CS degree) then you will probably stay at your position while others work up.

Re:Bullshit. (2)

J. T. MacLeod (111094) | about 5 months ago | (#46630623)

> The MIT or Harvard, for a degree in Computer Science doesn't offer you superior education, it just looks nice on your resume.

Computer Science is severely improving in many universities, but the top-tier univeristies for Computer Science really do provide a CS education that's a step above what's available in most places.

This isn't liberal arts where it's money and alumni politics. Berkeley, MIT, Stanford, Carnagie Mellon, and Harvard have *fantastic* undergraduate education for computing and engineering. There are a good number of state schools that have become comparable, but they've earned their reputation for a good reason.

This comes from someone without a degree.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630751)

In addition to getting an education, you are getting an alumni network.

I have friends with MIT/Harvard degrees, and when they are looking for a job, they go to the alumni network and get access to VP/C-level types that they have never met on the strength of the college connection. This translates directly into good jobs that would not have been available if they went to State College.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Ryanrule (1657199) | about 5 months ago | (#46630883)

No, the mit/harvard/stanford degree is the ticket to get into the startup club. Without that, you are not getting money, they will just go to the guy with a copy of your idea, who went to the correct school.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46631055)

You also often get internships in your local area.

Re:Bullshit. (4, Informative)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 5 months ago | (#46630199)

Yes, brag about that Harvard CS degree. lol. [rankingsandreviews.com]

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Matheus (586080) | about 5 months ago | (#46630249)

...and there's my alma mater sitting tied for 11th :-)

The school that, I will most emphatically add, cost me less for the duration than Harvard costs per *semester these days!

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630431)

I do have one problem with that ranking there. If you look at the actual methodology, it appears to be entirely subjective. I noticed the school I attend for my masters is ranked worse than 100, where another school, which I did my undergraduate at is ranked some 40 spots higher. And I can say from personal experience, the school I'm doing my graduate work at has a much better program, and the students know there stuff a lot better. The place I did my undergrad from, 95% of the students I wouldn't hire today, the school I'm doing my grad work at, I would hire 95% of them.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46631085)

Gee, look at all of those state colleges on there.

Its almost like he had absolutely no clue what he was talking about.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630209)

A degree from a state university is basically toilet paper as compared to, say, MIT

Maybe? Maybe not.

After your say second job do they look at where you graduated? Not usually unless they are some sort of school snob. I have not met many of those in my job hopping.

Employers like indebted fresh graduates
So you get a head start on work life balance too?

While you may be trying to justify that you have huge debt and went to some 'big' school. The majority of those working out there did not. You are worrying about how say 1% of the population spends its time when you need to worry about the guy next to you.

I am nearly 700k dollar wise ahead of most of the people I work with. Because I picked 'good enough' paths and stay away from debt.

Not everyone is a rock star. Those guys are *rare*. Though everyone thinks they are. Most people are average. Once you come to accept you are average. You can get on with your life and away from the lies your parents told you.

chances are that you didn't pay as much to go to that aggie school, so you don't have as much debt
I paid front to end on my education ~30k from a 'aggie school'. I have made from that nearly 1.5 million dollars. That is a seriously awesome ROI. I have 0 debt. Because it was blindingly obvious that the dudes who came in to sell loans were *SELLING* me debt. I did not need debt, I need money.

You are advocating that I spend 3x-4x to get the *same* education with a better sticker on it.

Computer science has pretty little to do with what people actually do in the real world. I use it once and awhile. But 99% of the time I am hooking up forms to fill in some database somewhere. To actually use the CS skills I would need to work in games. I decided spending all my time at the office was destructive to my persona and my wallet.

Combine that with lower salaries and you've got a winning combination for an employer
Here is a tip. When you interview you are also interviewing the company. Look to how they treat their employees.

Debt interest is the eraser of wealth. That and taxes.

Re:Bullshit. (1, Funny)

BVis (267028) | about 5 months ago | (#46630237)

Debt interest is the eraser of wealth. That and taxes.

Aaaand we're done.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630659)

Aaaand we're done.

Cool I can have the last word then... :)

Aw, because you want to justify having some better piece of paper than me?

How much does a 6% loan cost you on 100k over 30 years? It is ~50k. 50k I can put towards something else.

If you do not think interest and taxes erases your wealth you are *really* stupid. I am giving money to people who give me something very intangible in return. It is called a bad ROI. Perhaps you may want to swing by a school and take some accounting classes. I noted you ignored my actually net worth to pick on something I bothered to work out.

I have the spreadsheets (and math) to back up my assertions. You have vague hand wavy 'this is better'. And you have a 'prestigious' degree?

You are going to need to lose the arrogance. There is one huge thing that gets you better jobs. It is attitude you shared with former co-workers (you know references and 'hey you used to work with so and so'). I have personally made sure some former co-workers stay that way. Not because they sucked at their jobs in fact quite the opposite, my other co-workers agreed quite quickly too. Because they were office poison. You are heading down that path young man. You will find yourself with no job prospects even with your ivy league degree.

Your ivy league degree gets you only a small opportunity. You are overestimating what it means (which is ok it is clear you seem to lack experience despite your lowish SD id). You will quickly find no one cares anymore. Computer programmers are a practical sort we want to know if you are competent and can get the job done. Your degree will open some doors but you will find it closes others (as you are following the people who were just as arrogant as you before then). However after job 1 or 2 you will find no one really cares at all. If they did you would see it on the resume boards.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46632783)

3 my hero.

I paid ~40k for school at the University of Wyoming. And that covered everything for 4 years: food, rent, game consoles, tuition, books, beer, etc.

I'm currently working on becoming debt free. I'm giving myself 3-5 years to pay off all of my debt, and that gives a good amount of breathing room for a comfortable/stress free lifestyle(as stress free as you can get with a career, anyways).

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Calavar (1587721) | about 5 months ago | (#46630275)

Notice that the article specifically mentioned top-tier state universities. Berkley, U Michigan, Georgia Tech, Chapel Hill: these are all state schools that are as good as or better than many elite private schools. Their CS programs might not be quite as strong as Harvard's or MIT's, but the quality to tuition ratio is definitely higher.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630487)

Harvard has a CS program?

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630287)

I'll put my "toilet paper" State College Comp. Sci. degree up against your Ivy League degree any day.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

AuMatar (183847) | about 5 months ago | (#46630301)

Yeah, your post is pretty much bullshit. A CS degree from Harvard isn't worth anything more than any other college. They aren't known for their science or engineering program. One from MIT is worth more due to their reputation in the field, but no more so than a couple of other top schools like UC-Berkley or UIUC which are public (or Stanford which isn't)..

Basically there's 3 tiers of degrees. The elite CS schools (about the top 5-6) earn bonus points, but more is expected from you. Then there's a middle tier of about a dozen schools with a good reputation but not up to the elite. It may help you get to an interview, but gives you no bonus points once there. Everything else just lumps together in the yes he has a degree box.

Please note that online degrees, MOOC certs, University of Phoenix type schools, fall under no degree at all.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630895)

It depends what type of CS work you want to do, for instance in Health and Biotech, Harvard looks REALLY good. I think there are really even more tiers than that, but also the OP's costs are completely wrong, though I'm betting those are the average actual out of pocket costs (Harvard students for instance almost universally qualify for a certain amount of scholarships.)

Re:Bullshit. (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 5 months ago | (#46632151)

Please note that online degrees, MOOC certs, University of Phoenix type schools, fall under no degree at all.

Lols. No, it's really nice for your parents to tape these to the refrigerator! For some IT jobs I imagine the un-degrees can be OK.

Re:Bullshit. (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46631015)

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. A degree from a state university is basically toilet paper as compared to, say, MIT

Clearly UVa, W&M, JMU, and GMU are all garbage schools. Or Berkeley. Or Texas A&M.

Have fun with your debt, hope your spin at the job lotto is worth it.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631017)

For the main state unis around here, freshmen get contacted by phone from the likes of Google, Facebook, Intel, IBM, AMD, Microsoft, etc. Unless those are bad companies for which to work. Most of the people at my work graduation from our local state university, in which the city has a population of under 30k, and we've lost several employees to Google and Microsoft in the past few years. We're a small shop, so those several people represented about 10% of our admins.

Happy Obama Day! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46629999)

The day of the year we set aside to honor the Obamas, their administration, and all the supportive network of regressives and their cohorts and dupes.

Happy Obama Day! You've got some spinach stuck between your teeth.

Re:Happy Obama Day! (1)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46630115)

I thought April 15 was Happy Obama Day.

Most undergrad educations are the same (2)

plopez (54068) | about 5 months ago | (#46630079)

A couple of intro classes, programming languages, discrete maths, use of the popular programming language d'jour, operating systems, data structures, algorithms and computability, compilers etc. Am I close to most people?

So basically the degree itself is a commodity, though not the person. So it doesn't really matter at the undergrad level if you go to Ivy or State. The foundation is the same. There may be differentiation at the graduate level, but that often depends more on your adviser and the adviser's reputation.

Most undergrad educations are the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630265)

Elite colleges and universities don't necessarily have better programs. The real advantage to going to an elite college is the contacts you make. In a state school you're likely to meet someone who has to work 40 hours a week and goes to school part time. That person is simply working towards a degree and will not make any contacts and probably few friends.

In an elite college, it's important to the college that you make friends and contacts that's why they're expensive. It's the quintessential college experience. No only do you make friends, but alums help graduates. Even the most minor private college knows this and will encourage student collaboration.

Re:Most undergrad educations are the same (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630455)

I teach CS at an almost Ivy school in the Philly area. I don't see any advantage to any one decent-enough CS school over any other beyond, perhaps, the contacts that might lead to one's first job. That said, determination trumps contacts. It's just not the deal that people make it out to be. Would much rather my kids get through school without 200k in debt to pay off. The logo on your diploma doesn't really matter to anybody who matters.

Re:Most undergrad educations are the same (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 5 months ago | (#46631351)

A degree from a real "Ivy" means fuck all to programmers. The only one with any relevance at all is Princeton. The CS and engineering "Ivies" are MIT and Stanford. After that there are about ten or so state schools plus CMU who lead the rankings and prestige. Most of the top 20 CS and engineering schools are state schools. Why are so many in this thread clueless about this?

But don't be absurdly egalitarian. The difference in those top schools and the rest is enormous. Most schools, public and private, that offer a CS degree are diploma mills.

April 1st (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630195)

April 1st, don't care.

Comparing Berkeley to Berkeley? (1)

Shag (3737) | about 5 months ago | (#46630235)

Berkeley is, if the (UK) Times Higher Education Supplement Rankings [timeshighe...tion.co.uk] are to be believed, one of the top 10 universities in the world - and top three [timeshighe...tion.co.uk] in engineering and technology. I'm pretty sure that constitutes "elite" standing. But in this article, it's treated as a "top-tier public university." Is it both?

Re:Comparing Berkeley to Berkeley? (1)

amacbride (156394) | about 5 months ago | (#46630343)

Yes. (Go Bears!)

Re:Comparing Berkeley to Berkeley? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631037)

MIT, Stanford, UC Berkley, and CMU are pretty much considered in a tier of their own when it comes to Computer Science. You'll notice there's lots of high ranked public schools on this list: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/computer-science-rankings. Thru 15, the majority are public universities.

Your link is WAY more general than CS, but I still tend to think it's a weird list given how far down CMU ranks.

The costs on the OP are also messed up and not actually matching to the public costs for those schools.

There's a loophole (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630269)

Public universities may offer the best ROI on degrees, but when it comes to the ROI for drop-outs, Stanford, Harvard and MIT have the market cornered.

I agree, with very few exceptions (4, Interesting)

ErichTheRed (39327) | about 5 months ago | (#46630337)

If you're after a good solid education, state schools do offer the best ROI for undergrad studies. I went to one, and was able to (barely) pay for it myself with a small amount of student loans, summer work and a little savings. Undergraduate education, from a content perspective, is very similar everywhere. I have a chemistry degree, and almost all undergrad chemistry programs are the same -- 2 survey courses, 2 organic chem, 2 physical chem, 2 analytical chem, 4 or 5 different lab courses, 4 or 5 electives (which vary based on what the schools' professors are concentrating on.)

The main differentiating factors I've noticed with private schools are the networking opportunities in and out of school, and the "cushy" factor. Even in a high tax state like New York, the state universities are pretty Spartan as far as accommodations go. Lately, states have been spending lavish sums trying to catch up in terms of sports facilities, etc. but they're still not a Harvard or Yale. Students going the state university route need to understand that they're going to get what they pay for, and likely be ahead of their private university peers in terms of raw dollars in debt when they get out. They need to be self-motivated and mature enough to handle their own affairs -- outside of class, everything at a state university is like dealing with a state agency. You're one student of thousands, and no one but you is going to care if you fail out. As far as opportunities go, private schools do give you a leg up. There are certain jobs you can't even hope to interview for such as white-shoe consulting firms or investment banking, who almost exclusively recruit from Ivy League schools. In my experience, this only applies to your first job or two, however. I've interviewed both public and private college grads, and there's an equal distribution of qualified people in each camp.

Since tuition is going way up at both the public and private levels, students who don't already have the money saved really do need to do a cost-benefit analysis. I probably would have had a better experience at somewhere like MIT or Stanford, just because I would have been studying with more smart people. But, I didn't have the money for $100K+ tuition. Students need to stop and think whether the caché of a big name school offsets the huge expense. They need to think about things like:

  • - Do I want to go to medical or law school after undergrad?
  • - Do I ever want to work in investment banking?
  • - Will I be disappointed if I don't get to work at BCG, Bain, or Booz & Company?
  • - Do I want the opportunity to hang out with the children of corporate executives and make those "school ties" connections that public university students can't get?

If the answer to any of these is "yes" and the student has a pot of money, they should go to private school. Otherwise, they should save their money. If a student is willing to hustle a little to get their first job, their accomplishments at that job and the connections they make will carry them through the rest of their careers. They probably won't reach stratospheric heights of corporate power, but talented students graduating with in-demand degrees can still do well.

Another take on it... (1, Insightful)

erp_consultant (2614861) | about 5 months ago | (#46630535)

I didn't go to an Ivy League school so I can't verify this first hand but I would suspect that both Public and Private schools offer much the same in terms of what you learn while you are there. The big advantage, I suspect, in going to a Private school is the people you meet and the contacts you make rather than what you learn in the classroom.

Think about it - who goes to expensive private schools? Sons and daughters of alumni. Kids of successful parents. Kids of wealthy foreign families. Those are tomorrows movers and shakers. Getting to meet them over a beer at the campus pub forms potentially long term relationships that might help you out down the road.

So the real value is more in who you meet than what you learn. It's not what you know it's who you know.

Re:Another take on it... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631153)

From my experience graduates from Stanford, Carnegie-Melon, etc. are helped, even expected, to start business and are given easy access to capital, meanwhile kids from state colleges are expected to work for the private school grads new startups. It might not always work that way, I'm sure some Stanford guys who for Apple or whatever, hoping to reach engineering VP or something, but general private school is for entrepreneurs and state school is for the people who will work for the entrepreneurs.

Re:Another take on it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631453)

Also, if you go to an Ivy League school you are much more likely to be taught by another student than the actual professor listed on your syllabus.

fake cost chart skewed to elite schools (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46630635)

NJIT does not cost $130,000 for an undergrad degree. Not even close. It costs me $30,000 without financial aid so this chart is off by 100k for some reason...To me this looks like a bogus chart where they over estimated the costs of cheap schools to make bourgeois private schools look better.

"Education" vs "degree" (4, Insightful)

netsavior (627338) | about 5 months ago | (#46630643)

I know very few people who actually went to university to get an education. And even fewer employers who care more about "Education" than "degree." Nearly all of the people I work with and went to college with went for a degree.
If you could do the job you want to have for the rest of your life the day you leave high school (like most software engineers who actually write code for a living - assuming some learning on the job) then your greatest ROI is to get an accredited diploma from the cheapest, fastest university you can go to.

You are filling in a checkbox, not seeking an education... don't fool yourself.

A degree is a practical expense for most people. An "education" is a luxury afforded only for the very rich. Don't go into crippling debt to get an education, you (basically everyone) can't afford that crap. You can study and learn on your own, later. You are there for a degree, and don't forget it.

An entire generation of people seem confused about this. They think an "education" is worth going into massive debt, they think an "education" will get them a job that will pay the bills... well, I should use the past tense, because nobody thinks that anymore. According to what I have read about "Millennials"

Degree as part of a structured career plan = good idea
Education as a "career will follow" plan is OVER, it was the case in 1965, but you will enjoy a lifetime full of debt and meager earnings if you use that "plan" now.

If it seems harsh and anti-education I am sorry. I am all about learning, but novelty $100,000 sheepskins, sold at 4% interest to first generation college students with no career plan - really boils my blood.

It is really disappointing that in my lifetime we have managed to shift seeking an education from an empowering experience to hopelessly and permanently hindering the lives of middle and lower class people.

Re:"Education" vs "degree" (1)

Ryanrule (1657199) | about 5 months ago | (#46630911)

Yeah, well, blame the boomers.

They think they will get to go to retirement homes. Actually, we will poison them all and take their retirement dollars.

Re:"Education" vs "degree" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46632205)

>I know very few people who actually went to university to get an education.

If you intend to work for Google, Apple, Microsoft, or any part of the industry that is high tech, all you will meet is people who went to university to get an education.

If you don't mind working more conventional jobs, a university education isn't required but gives you more flexibility in the long run.

That is the conclusion I came to back in 1992 (2)

the stapler (658635) | about 5 months ago | (#46630693)

I applied for other universities, but when it came down to it I found that going to Oregon State University was the best bang for my then-limited buck. And I've been very happy with my CS degree.

You get out of your education... (3, Interesting)

cplusplus (782679) | about 5 months ago | (#46630979)

...what you put in to it. I went to a local state university for CS, and I studied hard and did well in school. Four years later I had my BS in CS in hand having paid less than $15K in tuition (and that wasn't all that long ago). I got a job locally with the help of referrals by professors who had good working relationships with many of the local tech employers. In short, my entire education was a helluva bargain, and helped launch my career.

In my day... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631061)

I pity today's college student burdened with obscene tuition. When I decided to go back to school (because of a non-existant social life) my choices were pretty open - I had good undergrad grades and a mind-blowing GRE. Tuition/fees at UT Austin c. 1970 was under $700 a *year* and I rented a quite decent duplex for $135 a month. Planning to spend most of my time chasing coeds, I opted for a not-so-high-pressure state school over an expensive, high-pressure, prestige school. Never regretted it - chasing coeds was great fun until one caught me and I had to finish my PhD. But I came out w/o any debt and I'm still head-over-heels crazy about that girl.

Alas such school fun is no longer possible, both tuition and academic pressure is now obscene at UT. It's today's students who have to walk 5 miles in the snow to school, uphill both ways. Damn, but I wish they could share my lawn.

Um doi. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46631199)

I got CS degree from state university. So cheap I worked my way through undergrad as TA and IT help. No debt. But no debt worked against me when I bought my first brand new car a year after graduating. They said having no debt and half the money for the car was a bad thing!

insightful (1)

Mimi Zheng (3595615) | about 5 months ago | (#46631729)

I don't think it matters too much where you go to college. If you are good at computer programming, companies will try to snatch you up quick. Some people don't even go to school for it because they teach themselves how to program. Over time, it will matter less which school you came from but rather the experiences and interpersonal skills you have gained. This will help you greatly advance higher in both position and salary.

Bad training for programming careers (3, Insightful)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 5 months ago | (#46631811)

One thing I've found in the work world that they don't prepare you for at all in college is the work environment. In college, you take CS or engineering classes, and you do the work on your own, frequently in the solitude of your own apartment, or at the library where it's quiet. Then, when it's time for an exam, you take it in the classroom, and talking and discussion and other noises are not allowed. This should all be changed, because it doesn't reflect the modern work environment.

First off, students should be required to do all their programming assignments and exercises together in one large room, at rows of open tables with no dividers between them. A class full of business majors or better yet marketing majors should be brought in and sat right next to them, so they can do their collaborative projects next to the CS/engr majors. The business/marketing majors can talk loudly all they want, and interrupt the CS/engr majors while they're working with various useless comments ("How's it going!"). The CS/engr majors should not be allowed to take their work anywhere else; they have to do it only in this environment.

When it's test time, the test should be held in a busy corridor. Put all the students at long tables together on the side of the corridor, so that all the foot traffic passes right next to them.

If you can't do your programming work with lots of noise and commotion and people talking to you and walking by you constantly, you have NO business being a programmer in today's corporate world where open-plan work areas are now the norm.

Re:Bad training for programming careers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46632249)

>One thing I've found in the work world that they don't prepare you for at all in college is the work environment.
>...a bunch of claptrap...

Learning is an individual process.
Building a system is a collaborative process.

only immature companies do this (1)

peter303 (12292) | about 5 months ago | (#46632627)

Run for 20-somethings by 20-somethings. Plenty of alternatives.

ROI on Comp Sci? Turn in your green card! (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 5 months ago | (#46631929)

ROI on Comp Sci

Hahah! Good one. Almost got me. Everyone knows the best ROI is via nepotistic foriegn degree mill and a H1B visa. April fools!

You're just going to train your H1B replacement (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | about 5 months ago | (#46632453)

So why bother?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>