From the immigrant perspective that was true for many, coming from another country where any status in the US is better. They may be privileged from the perspective of others who couldn't make it out, but from the US perspective it's something different.
There is a pretty famous story from Saturday Night Live. The characters of the "two Wild and Crazy Guys" were based on an individual Steve Martin met in a bar in New York. He was an immigrant from a country in Eastern Europe and, delightfully inebriated and happy, was crowing about his new life in America. Among the things he mentioned (paraphrasing from memory of Martin describing the anecdote) "In my home country, I am doctor. Now, I sell washing machines. Is much better!"
I don't think it's the quantity of apps that are the problem. Khan Academy is famous by now. There are world-class education apps, it's just that education apps have never taken off that much. The problem is in the competition for your joy, some apps win and some apps lose.
How well would your IQ score reflect your actual intelligence if you were to take an IQ test in a language you have trouble understanding and expressing yourself with?
You're yet to establish the link between IQ score and "
burden.
That said, valuing people by their economic output is sick to me, and is a page from the Eugenicists playbook. How much of a "burden" are injured veterans, those who suffered horrific work-place accidents, or those with mental health challenges due to burn out?
> No. There are a thousand other ways of solving problems for real people, so that doesn't explain why some choose software development as their preferred method.
I don't see why we should seek an explanation if there are thousands of ways to be useful to people. Is being a lawyer particularly better than being an accountant?
I'd say the same about shows and movies, which is where the supermajority of this conversation is typically focused, especially given how much free content is over YouTube.
reply