If anything, in my 30 years I've learned degrees only mean so much. Someone without a degree but with actual on the job experience will out perform a new grad any day of the week.

Frankly the university system has become a way to make sure the poor stay poor.

I, too, spent longer than I ever should have thinking about this. My first thought was, they're just using it in a linguistic sense, so it doesn't matter that the exponent would have to be something very small to go from 1 qualification to 4. But then I thought, hm, I guess since there's only 1 qualification for Bill, no exponent would be enough. But then I realized that grammatically the value in question is "qualification" and not "number of degrees". The number of degrees is merely standing in as a heuristic proxy to illustrate qualification. This "qualification" scale makes the most the most sense if it's between 0 and 1, representing percentiles of qualification. Therefore, the exponent applied to Bill's qualifications must also be between 0 and 1 in order to increase the value to Lundgren's. For a moment I thought this was the nail in the coffin for the original text, but of course the word "more" there again refers to the qualification, not to the exponent itself. This interpretation has the nice benefit that no matter what the exponent is, we always get a qualification value between 0 and 1. Hence I can conclude this is the only viable headcanon for this post.

This is science, not math.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson has a Phd in astrophysics and he has published a lot of papers. He is a scientist and a science communicator. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye are not the same.

Not the same with Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

I'm not his biggest fan, but I fully respect his scientific credentials. He has a PhD from Columbia. He published at least a dozen papers. There's no question that he's a scientist, a manager of scientists, as well as a science communicator.

The problem is that his success seems to have destroyed his humility. It's not that he brags about being so incredibly smart. It's more that he doesn't ever seem to sit back and say "hey, maybe this isn't something where my contributions won't be appreciated". I think his science communication is doing more good than harm. I think he's a great role model for little black boys who think all scientists are white, or that they're all stuffy nerds with no personality. But, I think he's at his best when he's in a show where there's a script and an editor. On social media and on free-form podcasts, he comes off as a know-it-all ass.

He specifically claims to be a science guy. Not a scientist.

...

BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL!

NDT is a pompous ass

Neil does have a PhD. in astrophysics, however.

He does not. This post is gatekeeping bullshit. The only thing that matters is knowledge of a subject. This shit reminds me of the worthless dumbfucks who immediately start asking for credentials when I tell them that their understanding of AI is nonsense.

the post thinks having more degrees means your more qualfied in that profession, and also prestige. experience and basic qualification> more degrees and prestige just because your an actor.