The Facebook: Another Product of a Broken System

It's all too obvious that the college admissions process is more competitive now than ever. Whether it is derived from one of the Korean preparatory schools recently profiled in The New York Times or Horace Mann, the magic formula for a degree stamped "Harvard" is an extremely valuable commodity, regardless of location. I went through the process in 2000, when high school seniors had it easy, relatively speaking. Then, the pool of frighteningly accomplished Harvard College applicants numbered almost 20,000. This past year, there were more than 27,000. A number of factors may account for the steady rise--the elimination of Early Action decisions at Harvard, United States population demographics, and (until recently) the increasing accessibility of financial aid--but no matter which you might think is predominantly responsible, one thing is clear: the perceived value of four years at Harvard is higher than ever before.

Perhaps it was the invocation of the Muppets in my essay that caused the guardians of Byerly Hall to be sufficiently charmed to grant me admission. I'll never really know. (I am by no means suggesting that "Muppet" is a magic keyword that will cause one's college of choice to grant automatic admission!) My acceptance came as a shock because there were many students in my high school class who were equally, if not more, qualified to attend. With them in mind, looking back on those painful years of incessant studying and trekking to extra-curricular activities, I have a sad admission of my own to make: speaking for myself, on the whole I'm not sure that Harvard, and the torture leading up to it, was worth it.

I will readily admit that for the first two weeks before coursework began, I had a great time. I met more extraordinary people at Harvard than I have anywhere else, and I'm fortunate to still call many of the same people my friends today. Yet for the remaining three years that I remained before deciding to graduate early, I often used my friends as sounding boards to vent complaint after complaint about my educational venue.

To be fair, I was warned. My father, a member of the class of 1975 (but hardly a major donor and not that Greenspan), warned me that I might not like a liberal arts school and even tried to dissuade me from applying to his alma mater. Yet I remained convinced that despite my fascination with computers, I did want a liberal arts education. With many different interests, I would have been miserable in an undergraduate "business" setting that focused on one topic to the exclusion of others. This decision doomed me to a fate I could scarcely begin to imagine, for although Harvard encourages undergraduates to study a wide array of perspectives, it insists--fairly adamantly, it turns out--that they study only the "correct" ones.

Since childhood I had been fascinated by the way technology transformed society. I read the industry magazine Byte long before I read Shakespeare in high school. Yet to Harvard, technology and entrepreneurship were anything but worthy of serious academic focus; they were heretical. My proposed special concentration in the intersection between "technology and its impact on society" could not be classified purely as economics or computer science. Each Dean reacted to my proposal with the same look: how could one even think such unclassifiable thoughts!

At Harvard College in 2002, quite simply, one couldn't. Instead, I turned to my company, writing software that would help Harvard students manage the myriad complexities of daily life, from pasta quality to course evaluations. There was even a component that united the thirteen paper and electronic face books scattered across campus. I called it "The Facebook."

Despite the lack of a threat to anyone or anything, as the fall of 2003 approached I felt as though I were trapped in a spy novel. Making my web site almost led to "disciplinary action" against myself and my friends by the infamous Administrative Board. I compiled evidence that one Harvard staff member was ordered to break in to figure out how it worked. Harvard's legal apparatus was launched against what I perceived to be completely imaginary violations of intellectual property law with the blame placed squarely on my shoulders. Administrators who had no reason to know my name and who I had met years prior in passing suddenly called out, "Why hello, Aaron," when I walked by. Some Harvard administrators may have monitored my e-mail in an attempt to stay one step ahead of what they incorrectly perceived to be a looming computer security hazard.

It was about this time that I began wondering what our educational system really prepared us to do. Was it to be scholars and academics? Every effort I had made at Harvard to study what truly interested me had been thwarted, with no explanation given. Was it to be captains of industry? I saw my peers putting on suits daily to be recruited by investment banks, but none trying to build real businesses. Was it to achieve our own personal goals? Many of my friends exclaimed wistfully that they would be "successful" once they had a list of combined degrees from Harvard's graduate schools.

All around me I saw indications that many of the top young minds in the world were being trained, in essence, to study, but not to think. At best, they were strongly encouraged to build a good résumé and save the thinking for later. This mentality still exists at Harvard and elsewhere in higher education.

The ramifications of our crumbling educational standards are serious, and they have been hidden in plain sight--headlines--for years. Plagiarism now comes from Harvard students (Kaavya Viswanathan) and faculty (Charles Ogletree) alike, though no one particularly cares. Both remain at Harvard. Wall Street is collapsing a bit more with each passing day despite its inhabitants being studded with Ivy League diplomas. Not to be outdone, the extremely well-educated American intelligence community built up evidence for an entire war on faulty assumptions--and it's not even the first time. My own encounter with educated indifference--the theft of the Facebook by one of my classmates--took me four years and three hundred pages of writing to sort out. Who taught these people that the ends justified the means? The answer is probably no one person in particular, but I can think of a certain decisive process that takes place at a formative time in life that just might encourage such behavior.

It's not news that turning learning into a battle for test scores and accolades might have disastrous consequences, but it is easy to forget. Still, the link is there. Teach children to compete, as we are doing now, and compete they will, no matter the cost. Teach children to actually think, and who knows what will happen. Competition won't disappear, and there will always be misguided students and corrupt leaders, but with more independent minds there will be more people to stand up to them and to set us on a path toward innovation and progress. Maybe then we can fix the problems, beyond education, that need solving now.

Aaron Greenspan is the author of the forthcoming Authoritas: One Student's Harvard Admissions and the Founding of the Facebook Era.

Follow Aaron Greenspan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/thinkcomp

Comments

[AdobePhsyko]

The problems with our Ivy League Universities can be summed up in one sentence.
George W. Bush has a degree from Yale.
Something's Gotta be Wrong there.

[Aaron Greenspan - Huffpost Blogger]

Hello,

While I am certainly no fan of President Bush's policies, his case even before becoming President is such an outlier that I don't think it's really relevant to the point I'm trying to make here. Bush isn't the student that's trying to think for himself, who finds the structure of traditional education oppressive (though he may find education oppressive nonetheless). He's the leader that independen­t-thinking students should be standing up to.

Aaron

[bebd]

(continued from previous comment)

Perhaps you have already considered how this might sound, and for that reason have decided legal action would only be frivolous. Or, you are successful enough in your other endeavors to realize you don't need to go there. But, if you're writing a book about "the Facebook era" -- and claiming that you are in fact, someone who started that era, I've got to ask where your motivation to do so comes from...

If your response is something along the lines of "you'll have to read the book to find out..." then, I suppose I'm not interested enough to buy it, and I know plenty of websites will summarize your claims for me for free when the book is released. I understand that your point is not to reclaim your rightful ownership of the Facebook (or maybe it is?), but to use it an an example of the "broken system" (a claim with which I whole-heartedly agree). But, why? Is this just the best selling point for the book? I think your story of the lack of education going on at large "name" colleges in the US is worthy, but why drag the Facebook into it? It seems to dumb it down, for me. I realize this may be what sells. Can you offer some clarification?

thanks.

[Aaron Greenspan - Huffpost Blogger]

bebd,

Your first question is how I am involved with Facebook legally. I was never a participant in the Winklevoss matter (ConnectU, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.) with the exception of receiving a subpoena to present information at a deposition, which I did in 2007. I don't really know any of the details of their case, and the only benefit I ever derived from it was the "free" lunch I had on the day of the deposition. Facebook, Inc. paid for my lawyer's time; my lawyer paid for lunch.

Currently, I am petitioning the USPTO to cancel the registered trademark on FACEBOOK because I was denied the right to advertise my book by a large company on the grounds that using the keyword "Facebook" constituted infringement. This gets into your next question.

Whatever people may say, houseSYSTEM's Facebook was on-line on September 19, 2003, several months before the domain name "thefacebook.com" was even registered. I wrote all of the code for houseSYSTEM myself. I invited Mark Zuckerberg to join the site, I had dinner with him, and he did end up joining. The purpose of the writing the book was for me to sort out how this strange series of events took place, and what I found in the process of writing was that Mark's deceptive actions and Harvard's twisted policies were actually quite related. If Mark stole something from someone else, too, that wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I hope this clarifies things somewhat!

Aaron

[bebd]

Hi Aaron,
I've just signed up for the HuffPost with the sole aim of writing a comment on your blog. I think you have some excellent points about your Harvard education, and I have thought many of them myself both while I was in college and even more so since graduating.
Im writing, though, because I'm really curious about what you've written about the Facebook program being stolen from you.
I graduated from Harvard in '05 and knew both Zuckerberg and the Winklevass twins vaguely, though neither well, and I don't believe you and I knew each other at all.
My question is, how are you involved in any of the legal action the Winklevass twins have taken against Zuckerberg, if at all? And, if not, I have to wonder, why? It is a simple question of proof? I'll be honest and say that I'm coming at your claims with a ton of skepticism, since I know some people involved in the Zuckerberg­-WInklevas­s issues well, and each of them claim there is no way anyone but Zuckerberg invented the Facebook. Im wondering, how it is possible that TWO groups of people are claiming Zuck stole the Facebook from them?

(see continued comment, I am over the word limit)

[McJeff]

I attended the University of San Francisco ( Harvard was a possibility, but I did not want to go to an Ivy League college) in the Seventies, and my great disappointment was that the emphasis was on getting a degree that would get you a good job. Nothing wrong with that, except that was pretty much the only focus. I wanted to learn, to learn to think, to know, to be well-rounded, but the work seemed to be more about getting a degree to get a job. Surely there had to be more to life. And there was! In my experience, college did not help much at all. I have continued to self-educate for the rest of my life, and while a degree certainly helps with a career, my greatest happiness and fulfillment in life has come from my own self education, not what I "got" in college. I think in that sense we have had similar experiences.
By the way, I realize Facebook was stolen from you. I wouldn't feel too bad, at least as far as what it is. It may be worth a lot of money, but it's a pretty creepy site in my book.

[Aaron Greenspan - Huffpost Blogger]

McJeff,

Facebook, Inc.'s version of the idea may indeed be creepy, but it's important to realize that it's not the only way to implement a social network.

Aaron

[PaulAbrams]

Subtle and poignant.
For over a decade, I have observed that "information has become a substitute for thought".

[Sundialsvc4]

I look forward to reading your book, Aaron, because the thoughts that you express in this piece are mentally engaging and very well-articulated.

I was reading BYTE and admiring Robert Tinney's graphics (like "Pascal's Triangle") many years before you, and did not attend a school that was quite a household name. And then I self-built a company that has yet to catch the eye of Wall Street and most likely never will. (Not this one, anyway ... ;-) .) And so, on my different-yet parallel path, I wonder: did we lose our way? Or find it?

A "key" is prominently figured in the medallions of a great many colleges, I think, not simply because it is a classical symbol of "the power of knowledge," but also because these institutions position themselves as "the key to success." High schools will sacrifice their favorite dog to "get in." But... then?

The Internet allows more people than ever to make a -direct- entry into the business world, and the final chapter on Facebook certainly has not yet been written. (I don't envy those people, frankly.) Did "college," even Ivy League, prepare anyone for this? No, as for me, I think it fell short. I learned more from Carl Helmers (Editor of BYTE) and Pascal's Triangle. I learned that the brass-ring was out there, waiting merely to be grasped.

[themodernleader]

The American University in modern times has geared up to produce licensed, certificated "professionals" who in turn join organizational arrangements requiring such licensing and certification. The organizational arrangements, both public and private are blessed by governmental laws to be perpetual guarantees of employment longivity and status. The trend is for University curriculum declining to examine other than what is yearned by the upper echelons and entrenched bureaucratic power.
Such a condition is antithetic to democracy and wholesome for traditional inelastic class systems of haves and havenots.

[ndem]

Long live high quality state university education!!!!! More and better public schools now!!!!!! I attended both an honors Program at UT-Austin Plann II as well as UW Seattle for graduate school, and received a superb education...forget Ivy League everything and high prices...go work/study and stay in State!!!!

[Danny]

Your experience, Aaron, brought to mind my son's experience at U VA, class of 2006. He went there with such hopes for a great "liberal arts" education, and was so disappointed. Every course he WANTED to take was denied, so he settled for the remaining courses. How do you explain a college education based on "remainders"? He left bitter, and I am left to wonder what happened to a truly great state university. It seems there were the same demons at work there as there were at yours. Perhaps not teaching you to think was the plan all along.

It is a great loss to our society when academic institutions we all revere become bastions of ... nought.

What the hell is going on???

[Aaron Greenspan - Huffpost Blogger]

Danny,

I like the "Bastions of Nought" tagline. It's sad to hear that this is a more pervasive problem than I realized, but hopefully it won't mean the end of independent thinking. Based on your comment, it sounds like there may yet be hope.

Aaron