Hacker Cinema
Back to School
1986 · Film · 96 min
Directed by Alan Metter
Self-made millionaire Thornton Melon decides to get a better education and enrolls at his son Jason's college. While Jason tries to fit in with his fellow students, Thornton struggles to gain his son's respect, giving way to hilarious antics.
3 positive9 neutralfrom 12 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
Videos commenters linked
From YouTube links in the comments below. Most are clips and trailers; “Full” means the uploader says so.
12 comments on Hacker News
As you can negotiate prices at an appliance dealership, obviously people pay different prices for the same thing. The prices at the grocery store change daily, obviously people are paying different prices for the same thing. The guy you sit next to on an airplane paid a different price than you did. The pump price at the gas station can change hourly.
> They just can't extract further profit by charging richer customers more than marginal cost to transfer the consumer surplus to themselves.
The demand curve is different for every customer.
It is fraudulent to charge more than the posted price. But absent that, it's a negotiated price.
BTW, do you also feel it is unfair if a store charges a person less if the store realizes the person is a bit needy?
Just for fun, watch the movie "Back To School" starring Rodney Dangerfield. The funniest bit in it is when Dangerfield (a real estate developer) lectures the business professor on how business really works.
I've run multiple businesses. It's pretty clear that I did not have any power over the customers. I could not just raise prices and "extract" more profit, much as I would have liked to. It's hard to make money running a business. Businesses go bust all the time. I wouldn't pay too much attention to a business professor who had never run a business.
The Rodney Dangerfield film, Back To School covers this:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjuHQOgggxo
>"The neighborhoods that need investments and resources the most are still tied up in red tape.
In corridors where Prop. H did take effect, converting an office space to an entertainment venue still takes months. That is when the use is already allowed by zoning: Over 30 days where Prop. H applies and six to nine months where it does not.
Imagine trying to open a music venue, which requires an entertainment permit that takes another two to four months, plus a 30-day public notice for people to comment, plus mandatory neighborhood outreach and a hearing before the Entertainment Commission. Any opposition from a neighbor, neighborhood group, or competitor can further stall the process.
Business operators must also pass inspections by the San Francisco Fire Department, Department of Public Health and Department of Building Inspection for plumbing, electrical and building compliance. Waiting for a license from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, which includes an FBI background check, adds two to six months. This administrative and financial burden can quickly turn into a dead end and sap even determined entrepreneurs’ energy, determination and bank accounts.
As I consider opening a second art and entertainment venue, I am frustrated by the extensive paperwork and community outreach still required, despite the latest legislation intended to aid small businesses. Streamlining exemptions forced me to reject some locations due to the excessive administrative and financial burden."
Reminds me of the following movie scene:
"Back to School (1986) - Thornton Talks Business":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSLscJ2cY04&t=113s
>"San Francisco faces a critical moment with a 31.6% vacancy rate in commercial real estate..."
What a surprise!
(Not!)
totally valid question. tbh, i think i need my head examined :-)
the main points here are:
1) i've been pulling things out of DBs and putting them on web pages for 30 years, and along comes these breakthroughs in AI which...my apologies to the naysayers...i'm just blown away by what i'm witnessing, and i just _must_ learn more about how this works.
2) discovering the OMSCS program was an a-ha moment for me: it's prestigious, inexpensive, and I don't have to jump through a lot of hoops (GRE) to enroll. It only cost me < 1 hour and < $100 to apply.
3) There's no pressure on me to complete the program. I can do it one course at a time, and as long as i'm getting something out of it, i will continue. Each class is...$600-$700 or something like that. I fully am ok w/ stopping if it takes too much of a personal / marital toll on me.
4) My imposter syndrome is pretty terrible right now...part of me wants to know if i've 'still got it' (i did really well at U of MD CS).
5) I loved the Rodney Dangerfield movie "Back to School" :-)
EDIT: 6) Also i wouldn't mind converting to the MLE role at some point.
EDIT 2: I blame Paolo Perrotta for writing such an inspiring book (https://www.progml.com/) that ruined my cruise in september (kept rereading the book at the pool) and starting me on this path ;-)
It's always fun to remember that he played himself in the 1986 Rodney Dangerfield movie "Back to School". I always have to double check this when I think of it, partially because I confuse it with the time Ernest Borgnine played J.D. Salinger in an episode of "The Single Guy". It's almost like Vonnegut decided to do this only because people would some day think it sounded so obviously ridiculous and false.
There is, famously, a similar episode involving Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., in the 1986 Rodney Dangerfield comedy Back to School.
Colleges are also likely to publicly insist they don't do legacy and donation based admissions, but do it anyway. For Rodney Dangerfield's hilarious lampoon of this, see the movie "Back to School".
In the comedy movie "Back to School", wealthy business man Thornton Melon hires Kurt Vonnegut to write an essay for him on Kurt Vonnegut for English Literature class. The professor knows Melon did not write the essay and tells him "Whoever did write this doesn't know the first thing about Kurt Vonnegut!." He got an F.
The best sendup of Lit teachers reading too much symbolism was in the movie "Back to School" and the Kurt Vonnegut scenes.
Diane: Whoever did write this doesn't know the first thing about Kurt Vonnegut!
[cut to Thornton's dorm suite]
Thornton Melon: [on the phone] ... and another thing, Vonnegut! I'm gonna stop payment on the cheque!
Agreed in general. Though I can't help but think the Back to School scene is there because of the recent EconPop episode about Back to School.
There is some very good thinking in this thread, and maybe there are some really good answers to your questions. For a fast answer:
For algebra, that's easy: I'll show you how that works right away. Basically you are doing the same arithmetic you've already done for years but are doing it with letters instead of specific numbers, that is, with 'variables'. Here's how a 'variable' works: There is a number. Call it x. Now, let's see what we can say about x. Suppose we are told that
2x + 3 = 9
Now the equality will remain if we subtract 3 from both sides, so let's do that and get
2x = 6
Now the equality will remain if we divide both sides by 2. So, let's do that and get
x = 3
Or we could have been told that
ax + b = c
Then, similarly
x = (c - b)/a
That's the main idea in first year high school algebra.
For literature, you already know a lot about it and like it a lot. Why? Mostly 'literature', say, from Chaucer and Shakespeare to Dickens to the present is 'storytelling'; nearly all of movies and most of TV is storytelling; and you have no trouble understanding and liking a lot of movies and TV shows, right? For Shakespeare, if you can't read the original (tough to do if only because it's in Old English that would get a grade of F today due to bad grammar), just read the appropriate Cliff Notes or some such that just clearly explains, no doubt from experts, just what the heck is supposed to be going on in Shakespeare. Maybe the guy who wrote Cliff Notes was the last guy who actually read the original Shakespeare? Maybe not, but Cliff Notes are a much easier start than the original. Cliff Notes are easy, and it would be tough to get that much out of the original on your own. Using Cliff Notes is not cheating and, instead, is just making good use of a library or bookstore -- standard smart work.
'Literature' is mostly a case of 'art', and that is mostly 'the communication or interpretation of human experience or emotion'. So, it's about humans and especially their 'experiences' and their emotions, heavily from their 'experiences'. Does literature actually tell you a lot about people? Well, sometimes there are still no better substitutes, but now commonly can get much more solid information from, broadly, 'clinical psychology'.
'Storytelling' can be regarded as an 'ancient Greek mind trick' because it was the ancient Greeks who, apparently first, discovered that the main techniques of 'storytelling', which maybe now we can call 'formula fiction', are a sure fire way to get and hold the attention of an audience. So, sure, TV dramas use those techniques to keep people watching long enough to see the ads.
Why Shakespeare? Because, while maybe you will like it, lots of other people do like it, and for the rest of your life you will be expected to know some of the main points and quotes from Shakespeare or be regarded as 'uneducated'.
Anything actually useful in Shakespeare? Mostly we have better sources now, but sort of: There's a lot in Shakespeare about how humans feel about various parts of life; so can learn something about humans. Can see a lot of bad or dumb behavior from humans, disloyalty, deception, manipulation, self-deception, etc.; again, generally we have better sources now, but, say, Lady Macbeth was one nasty woman. For a good, short introduction to Lady Macbeth, sure, just use the Internet and, sure again, Wikipedia, say,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Macbeth
If you like movies, then with some help from Cliff Notes and the Internet, you can like some Shakespeare. Really, Shakespeare is some of what they had instead of movies long before movies. You enjoy movies; enjoy some Shakespeare.
Literature, mostly just storytelling, is simpler than one might guess. So, usually there is a 'protagonist'; that is the main character in the story. Commonly the story starts out introducing this character in a way that makes him seem real and likable. Then, BOOM, somehow suddenly the protagonist gets a problem of some kind. Now as a reader we get concerned about this character and what happens next, that is, we 'identify' with the character (ancient Greek mind trick). We don't want to walk out after the first one third of the movie, right? So, the story has 'captured our interest'. Or the story has a 'hook' to capture the reader's interest.
Then we get to see how the protagonist handles the problem. At the end the protagonist is usually successful solving the problem. In cowboy movies, the protagonist, say, the Lone Ranger, gets the bad guys. In a lot of movies, e.g., 'Back to School', he gets the girl. So, usually at the end the protagonist is successful solving his problem and the reader or audience is left happy because the audience 'identified' with the protagonist.
For a lot on how to write such stories, see, from an expert, say,
http://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-king-on-how-to-write-2014-7
So, that's algebra and literature. Got some more?
I discuss
(1) The Article.
(2) An MBA.
(3) Professional Education.
(4) Business.
(1) The Article.
The author seems angry about MBA programs, and he doesn't support his claims with solid data.
(2) An MBA.
If an MBA didn't take quite a lot of time and money and, possibly, opportunity cost, then, sure, get an MBA.
If someone has a clear objective where an MBA is important, then maybe get one.
If someone wants to be in business but really has no significant background in business from family or experience and, say, didn't major in business as an undergraduate, then maybe get an MBA.
Some of what is taught in some MBA programs is not easy to learn from experience or independent study and might be useful later in business. Examples include optimization (e.g., linear programming), statistics (random variables, distributions, expectation, variance, independence, central limit theorem, law of large numbers, conditioning, hypothesis tests, confidence intervals, the general linear model), an overview of information systems (likely not worthwhile for readers of Hacker News!), accounting, mathematics of finance (e.g., Black-Scholes), business law, organizational behavior.
(3) Professional Education.
I never wanted to be a college prof but, due to some strange circumstances, for a while was a prof in one of the better MBA programs. I concentrated on optimization and computing.
Since I was in such a program, I wanted to try to do something useful. So, I tried to offer professional education to the students. But I learned that business schools are very much against being professional, say, like law or medicine.
Instead, business schools have physics envy and want the profs sitting alone in their little offices with the door and curtains closed and thinking up some business world version of Newton's second law F = ma or Einstein's E = mc^2. So, they want research.
Of course, so far no business school prof has found anything like F = ma, but there are journals run by B-school profs where B-school profs can get whatever they do published. The journals do have some value as examples of make-work, junk-think, busy-work, prof-scam!
Shockingly, the business schools very much discourage the profs from having significant contact with real business.
If medical education were like business education, then all the med school profs would be at best second rate experts in biochemistry doing third rate work on imaginary cures for imaginary diseases and would never see real patients, and no one would go to a hospital no matter how much they hurt. Law schools? The profs there would never see clients, file a legal case, or appear in a courtroom and would do statistical studies about whatever in legal cases pursued by others. Gee, maybe they'd do research on the ratio of nouns to verbs in legal briefs!
Instead, in medical school, the students actually get a good start on medicine, that is, how to take sick people and make them well, and that utility totally blows away anything in an MBA program.
So, what happened? In WWII, the US military concluded that research in physical science was crucial. Then the top 24 or so US research universities got an offer they couldn't refuse: Take big bucks from the US Federal Government as grants for research that is promising for US national security (eventually, or medical care) or cease to be a competitive research university.
Then the B-schools, somehow, got dragged into the same thing: The profs needed no business accomplishments or experience, had no on-going contact with actual business, taught theory sometimes close to business but usually not, and did research that has little promise of utility in business or anything else for at least 100 years.
In simple terms, the business school profs commonly don't know enough about business to run a lemonade stand.
Far, far too close for comfort is the clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM
from a business school class in Dangerfield's Back to School. The clip is perceptive on several points:
(A) The prof's idea is to set up a business "from the ground" up "with a 30,000 square foot facility" and an "efficient administrative and executive structure". Uh, generally that's a lot of money spent and likely at risk before any revenue. So, it is more common in practice to start small and, if successful, then grow.
(B) Dangerfield asks, "What's the product?". The prof wants to say "That is immaterial for the purposes of our discussion here". Well, maybe "immaterial" is okay from 100,000 feet up or when just talking with the general contractor, but anyone actually in business cares a lot about the product and would want to discuss it. The prof makes a stab, "tape recorders" and from Dangerfield gets a big lesson, "Are you kidding? The Japs'll kill us on the labor costs." The lesson: It's not trivial to think of a promising product. Quite generally the "product" is from important up to crucial. So, Dangerfield doesn't want to discuss spending big bucks without the product clearly in mind, and here he is correct.
(C) Dangerfield asks, "Why build? You're better off leasing at a buck and a quarter, a buck and a half, a square foot, save your down payment". One lesson here is that the prof is being too simplistic on the build/lease decision. For a growing business, building is likely a monument to ignorance. Another lesson is, Dangerfield has actual, current costs for leasing; in a real business of that scale, the CEO knows costs in fine detail. The clip is accurate: Commonly profs don't know real costs. E.g., I ended up leading the college in buying some computing; from the work I'd done before being a prof I knew the current costs in good detail, and the other profs in information systems didn't. For a student to toss out actual cost data in class can be embarrassing, intimidating, and infuriating for a prof!
(D) Of course the high point of the exchange is where Dangerfield interrupts and says, "Oh, you left out a bunch of stuff.", and with contempt the prof responds, "Oh, really. Like what for instance?". So, Dangerfield rattles off several points of costs in the real world! Could be very good to know! The clip shows a student taking notes furiously; that's accurate: Commonly the students really do want the real stuff. Finally the line, "How about Fantasy Land" is on target and a hoot.
It's a well done clip and parody of B-school and indicates that the movie makers and much of the audience got the points quickly.
The profs are pursuing a scam and know it: The smarter ones see how to game the system and do but are ashamed of all they do. The still smarter ones leave for something else in academics or just for actual business.
Instead, for a much better model, business schools should become plainly professional and borrow from medicine. If some problem in a real business in, say, supply chain optimization becomes important, then a B-school prof with such a problem should contact the campus applied mathematics, civil engineering, or operations research department much as a medical school prof might contact someone in biochemistry or cell biology.
A business school prof is someone who teaches students how to avoid the pitfalls in business they avoided by being business school profs.
(4) Business.
For someone who wants to start a business and make it successful, there are various directions:
There are the businesses common on Main Street, and likely the best way to learn such a business is to have a father who is successful in that business and learn from the father while working in the business.
There are businesses successful due to parts of globalization; some of these opportunities are too new to learn from a father, and how to learn is not clear. Travel the world on a tramp steamer and spend a few days in each of 100 foreign ports?
And for readers of Hacker News, sure, software.
For such possibilities, I have a tough time seeing that an MBA would be worth the time, money, effort, or, especially, the opportunity costs.
So, instead of just cursing the darkness, what might B-schools do?
Well, as I said, borrow from medicine. Or, health care is important: Medical school teaches students how to deliver high quality health care; to do this, the profs need to be experts in health care and relevant parts of the human body, disease, and how they work. This expertise was difficult to get and to confirm, formulate, and teach but is crucial. The research, say, in biochemistry, is important but not nearly the same thing.
Well, business is important: B-school should teach students how to do well in business; to do this, the profs need to be experts in business and how businesses work, the problems they encounter, and how to solve the problems and do well. This expertise will be difficult to get, confirm, formulate, and teach but is crucial. The research, say, in statistics is important but not nearly the same thing.