[HN Gopher] Stanford's Department of Management Science and Engi...
___________________________________________________________________
Stanford's Department of Management Science and Engineering
Author : curioustock
Score : 36 points
Date : 2025-07-29 18:25 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (poetsandquants.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (poetsandquants.com)
| lisper wrote:
| This particular clickbait title formula -- The X No One Has Heard
| About -- drives me nuts because it is so manifestly self-
| defeating. Obviously _someone_ has heard about it. At the very
| least, the author of the piece has heard about it, and now all of
| their readers have heard about it too.
| cadamsdotcom wrote:
| Ah, the classic "no one goes there anymore, it's too crowded"
| :)
|
| HN titles generally shouldn't be clickbait.. what would you
| suggest instead?
| lisper wrote:
| In this case I would have gone with something like:
|
| Management Science & Engineering (MS&E): Stanford's
| interdisciplinary hub
| taude wrote:
| ha, no one would have clicked on that title. Needs some cta
| and pep in it.
|
| But Claude gives me:
|
| "Stanford's 230-Student Program That Produces More Unicorn
| Founders Than Most Schools"
|
| "Why Stanford Engineers Are Choosing MS&E Over CS: A
| Technical MBA That Actually Works"
|
| "Stanford's MS&E: The 7.8% Acceptance Rate Program Behind
| Instagram, Gusto, and Sourcegraph
|
| "How Stanford's MS&E Became Y Combinator's Secret Feeder
| Program"
|
| "
| dylan604 wrote:
| You could have gone with something a bit catchier, "The
| Stanford Program that few people know about" which would
| have the same sentiment and would definitely get more
| clicks than your suggestion.
| lisper wrote:
| I guess that depends on what you think the purpose of
| these titles is: to get people to click, or to tell them
| what the article is actually about so they can make an
| informed decision whether or not to click. If your goal
| is the former then just go with "The secret to
| everything! Best article ever written! Must read!" no
| matter what the actual content is.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Do you want people to read the thing or not. Giving the
| exact course name as the title guarantees very few people
| will read it. Telling the potential reader there's a
| class few people know about has a better chance. I think
| we can all agree that the point of any written text is
| for _someone_ to read it at some point. How many books
| have titles that are descriptive of the contents and not
| something just to get you to at least pick it up and read
| the jacket? How many titles of movies or music albums as
| well? Just so as we are all clear that your attempt to be
| pedantic on a title definition was very much ignoring
| anything but something like a news headline
| Obscurity4340 wrote:
| This is an extremely amusing turn of phrase
| dylan604 wrote:
| Oh man, if you liked that, then you should read up on more
| Yogisms:
|
| https://yogiberramuseum.org/about-yogi/yogisms/
| hyghjiyhu wrote:
| > no one goes there anymore, it's too crowded
|
| This seems like a paradox but actually isn't.
|
| The trick is to correctly interpret what is actually being
| said. No one goes there anymore - this is clearly meant in a
| casual imprecise way not literally 0. So how can we precisely
| state what is meant?
|
| I would interpret it as the proportion of some group of
| people going there is now very low.
|
| On the other hand that it is crowded is a different thing. It
| says that the absolute number of people going there is too
| high. Furthermore, those people may be different from the
| group in the first part.
|
| Two example scenarios:
|
| * None of my friends go there anymore, the number of tourists
| is too high.
|
| * As the city has grown, the place has reached capacity
| meaning that a smaller proportion of the city can visit.
| alankarmisra wrote:
| It's like the secret beaches in every south-east asian nook and
| crany. They're so secret there's signs pointing to them every
| where and they are overrun with tourists.
| sas224dbm wrote:
| Tony Wheeler has a lot to answer for
| junar wrote:
| Pretty sure any Stanford student would have heard about it. For
| students graduating in 2023-2024 year, Management Science and
| Engineering was the 9th most popular bachelor's degree and 7th
| most popular master's degree.
|
| https://irds.stanford.edu/data-findings/degrees-conferred
| tomhow wrote:
| We've de-baited the title now.
| apparent wrote:
| Of the famous founders, over half were Stanford undergrads and
| therefore likely were "coterm" students. That means they just
| added a year to their degree and got this degree tacked on. That
| saves lots of time and money compared to going to Stanford as a
| master's student. There are a lot of things that are "worth it"
| if you don't have to move apartments/cities and get it for half
| the price -- but which are not nearly as worth it if you're
| paying double and add the friction of moving to the area in order
| to enroll.
| m-ee wrote:
| I'm not sure how it factors into the overall admission
| statistics but getting accepted for a coterm is, or at least
| was, significantly easier and more straightforward. In my time
| it just meant a GPA above a certain cutoff, a letter of rec
| from a professor, and non embarrassing GRE scores. A very good
| letter of recommendation could make up for deficiencies in the
| other two. It's not exactly a super selective elite club like
| the article implies if you're already there for undergrad.
| TMWNN wrote:
| Can Stanford undergrads coterm in MS&E with any undergraduate
| major?
| m-ee wrote:
| Yes, I knew people who cotermed in MS&E (and other masters
| programs) with a different undergrad major. I think you just
| need to make sure you fulfill whatever prereq courses they
| ask for but my knowledge is old at this point. I imagine
| you'd be fine going from any engineering major to MS&E, but
| if you were an English major who happened to take a bunch of
| math and physics that would probably work too.
| constantcrying wrote:
| Maybe it is because I am not from the US and from a country with
| a very different work culture, but this whole thing seems
| ridiculously narcissistic. A person with such a degree becoming
| my coworker or my boss seems like a nightmare. Even talking to
| someone who "made it through" such a degree is something I would
| rather avoid.
| mocmoc wrote:
| this industry is rotten
| lenerdenator wrote:
| Things rot from the head down, and Stanford arguably counts
| as the head.
| coupdejarnac wrote:
| I've taken a few graduate courses at Stanford MS&E through their
| non degree program, and I give the experience three thumbs up.
| mathattack wrote:
| I've met several of these students. It's like an MBA, but less
| social networking and more math. (And can be done co-term or in a
| year)
|
| So does it add some value to someone who is already getting a
| bachelors in EE, CS or similar? Sure.
|
| Would I put a history major with an MS&E degree in charge of
| anything significant? Probably not.
|
| I suspect that the admissions rate of 7% is independent of
| coterms.
| TexanFeller wrote:
| > Management Science
|
| It's jarring and galling to see management and science put
| together in a way that's suggestive of management being a
| science. It reeks of stolen valor.
|
| Obligatory Feynman on "sciences":
| https://youtu.be/tWr39Q9vBgo?si=SYTZSNA0G-RZDguA
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-29 23:00 UTC)