Remix.run Logo
shetaye 2 hours ago

Regarding Stanford specifically, I did not see the number broken down by academic or residential disability (in the underlying Atlantic article). This is relevant, because

> Some students get approved for housing accommodations, including single rooms and emotional-support animals.

buries the lede, at least for Stanford. It is incredibly commonplace for students to "get an OAE" (Office of Accessible Education) exclusively to get a single room. Moreover, residential accommodations allow you to be placed in housing prior to the general population and thus grant larger (& better) housing selection.

I would not be surprised if a majority of the cited Stanford accommodations were not used for test taking but instead used exclusively for housing (there are different processes internally for each).

Aurornis 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The original article which is linked in this post goes into much better detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-universit...

Schools and universities have made accommodations a priority for decades. It started with good intentions, but parents and students alike have noticed that it's both a) easy to qualify for a disability and b) provides significant academic advantages if you do.

Another big accommodation request is extra time on tests. At many high schools and universities, getting more time than your peers to take tests is as simple as finding a doctor who will write the write things in a note for you. Some universities grant special permissions to record lectures to students with disabilities, too.

If you don't have a disability, you aren't allowed to record lectures and you have to put your pencil down at the end of the normal test window. As you can imagine, when a high percentage of the student body gets to stay longer for a hard test, the wheels start turning in students' heads as they realize cheating is being normalized and they're being left behind by not getting that doctors' note.

The rampant abuse is really becoming a problem for students with true disabilities. As you can imagine, when the disability system is faced with 1/3 of the student body registering for disability status the limited number of single rooms and other resources will inevitably get assigned to people who don't need it while some who actually do need it are forced to go without.

outside2344 35 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just training for working at McKinsey after graduation

Invictus0 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

Navigating Bureaucracy 101

lumost 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They lead with the headline that most of these students have a mental health disability - particularly ADHD. Is it surprising that legalized Amphetamines drive teenagers to higher performance for a short period in their lives? Adderall and other amphetamines only have problems with long term usage.

It should be expected that some portion of the teenage population sees a net-benefit from Amphetamines for the duration of late high school/college. It's unlikely that that net-benefit holds for the rest of their lives.

ultrarunner 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Adderall and other amphetamines only have problems with long term usage.

My research was done a long time ago. I understood Ritalin to have mild neurotoxic effects, but Adderall et al to be essentially harmless. Do you have a source for the benefits giving way to problems long-term?

Regardless, your overall point is interesting. Presumably, these drugs are (ridiculously tightly) controlled to prevent society-wide harm. If that ostensible harm isn't reflected in reality, and there is a net benefit in having a certain age group accelerate (and, presumably, deepen) their education, perhaps this type of overwhelming regulatory control is a mistake. In that sense, it's a shame that these policies are imposed federally, as comparative data would be helpful.

Aurornis a few seconds ago | parent [-]

> I understood Ritalin to have mild neurotoxic effects, but Adderall et al to be essentially harmless.

There is no conclusive research on humans, but you have these backwards. Ritalin (methylphenidate) is thought to have less risk for neurotoxicity than Adderall (amphetamine). Amphetamine enters the neuron and disrupts some internal functions as part of its mechanism of action, while Ritalin does not.

Both drugs will induce tolerance, though. The early motivation-enhancing effects don't last very long.

There are also some entertaining studies where researchers give one group of students placebo and another group of students Adderall, then have them self-rate their performance. The Adderall group rates themselves as having done much better, despite performing the same on the test. If you've ever seen the confidence boost that comes from people taking their first stimulant doses, this won't come as a big surprise.

notrealyme123 13 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wow that's interesting! Could you share your sources?

only-one1701 12 minutes ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

bad_haircut72 6 minutes ago | parent [-]

I dont know why you're getting downvoted, I see this all the time and its infuriating. Its a deflection tactic to burn peoples time.

only-one1701 a few seconds ago | parent [-]

I think you answered your own question as to why this is getting downvoted

izacus 8 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

It's much more likely that ADHD diagnosis is easier to get when trying to get disability benefits and has practically no downsides for the student.

It's much harder to fake deafness or blindness to get that extra housing and exam benefits.

op00to 22 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve lived with enough nightmare roommates in my college experience to know many people probably have some sort of disability that precludes them from having a roommate.

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
newsclues 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Follow the incentives

godelski 4 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not at Stanford, but recent (PhD) graduate and I think you're pretty spot on, but also missing some things.

The definition of disability is pretty wide. I have an emotional support animal but if it wasn't for the housing requirement I probably wouldn't have declared anything. I do have diagnosed depression[0] and ADHD. I tend to not be open about these unless it is relevant to the conversation and I don't really put it down in job applications or other questionnaires.

I say this because I really dislike Reason[1]. There's an element of truth in there, but they are also biased and using that truth to paint an inaccurate narrative. Reason says I've made this part of my identity, but that couldn't be further from the truth. What they're aware of and using to pervert the narrative is that our measurements have changed. That's a whole other conversation than what they said and they get to sidestep several more important questions.

[rant]

Also, people are getting diagnosed more! I can't tell you why everyone has a diagnosis these days, but I can say why I got my ADHD diagnosis at the age of 30 (depression was made pretty young). For one, social stigma has changed. I used to completely hide my depression and ADHD. Now that it is more acceptable I will openly discuss it when the time is right, but it's not like I'm proud of my depression or ADHD. But there is also the fact that the world has changed and what used to be more manageable became not. Getting treated changed my life for the better, but the modern world and how things are going have changed things for the worse. Doing a PhD is no joke[2], doing it in a pandemic is crazy, doing it in a ML boom (and researching ML) is harder, and doing it with an adversarial advisor is even worse. On top of that the world is just getting more difficult to navigate for me. Everything is trying to grab my attention and I have to be far more defensive about it. Instead of being in an office where I can signal "work mode" and "open to talk mode" with a door I get pings on slack by people who want to be synchronous with an asynchronous communication platform, messaging "hey"[3] and nothing else. A major issue with ADHD is triage, because everything seems like an emergency. If you're constantly pinging me and I can't signal that I need to be left alone, then that just drives the anxiety up. This is only worsened by the fact that Slack's notification system is, at best, insufferable[4]. So I don't know about everyone else, but I'm absolutely not surprised that other peoples' anxiety is shooting through the roof. We haven't even mentioned politics, economics, or many other things I know you're all thinking about.

[/rant]

So yeah, there's the housing issue and I do think that's worth talking about (it's true for an apartment too[5]). I'd gladly pay the pet deposit and extra money per month for a pet. It is never an option, so people go "nuclear". BUT ALSO I think we should have a different conversation about the world we're actually creating and how it is just making things difficult. The world is complicated, no surprise, but our efforts to oversimplify things are just making it more complicated. I really just wish we'd all get some room to breathe and rethink some things. I really wish we could just talk like normal human beings and stop fighting, blaming, and pointing fingers as if there's some easy to dismiss clear bad guy. There's plenty of times where there is, but more often there is no smoking gun. I know what an anxiety feedback loop looks like and I really don't know why we want the whole world to do this. They fucking suck! I don't want to be in one! Do you?

[0] My mom passed away when I was a pre-teen. I think no one is surprised nor doubts this diagnosis.

[1] I'm also not a big fan of The Atlantic. Both are highly biased

[2] I actually think a PhD should be a great place for ADHD people. Or research in general. Many of us get sucked down rabbit holes and see things from a different point of view. These can be major advantages in research and science. But these are major hurdles when the academic framework is to publish or perish. There's no ability to get depth or chase rabbit holes. I was always compared to peers who published 50 papers in a year as if that is a good thing. (Yeah, the dude did a lot of work and he should be proud, but those papers are obviously shallow. He should be proud, but we also need nuance in how we evaluate. https://youtube.com/shorts/rDk_LsON3CM)

[3] https://youtu.be/OF_5EKNX0Eg?t=8

[4] Thanks, I really needed that phone notification to a message I responded to an hour ago. Thanks, I really needed that notification to a muted channel. Thanks, I really needed that notification to a random thread I wasn't mentioned in and have never sent a single message in. Thanks, I'm glad I didn't get a notification to that @godelski in #general or #that-channel-I-admin. Does slack even care about what my settings say?

[5] My hypothesis is that the no pet clauses are put in because people use templates. And justified because one bad experience gets shared and sits in peoples heads stronger than the extra money in their pockets.

lostmsu 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I suppose cheating to get housing benefits is less of a dumpster fuck vs cheating to get ahead of other people in education.

aaronbwebber 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It means that the action we should take in response to this article is "building more dorms with singles" rather than "we need to rethink the way that we are making accommodations for disabilities in educational contexts".

That seems like an important distinction, and makes the rest of the article (which focuses on educational accommodations) look mistaken.

shetaye 3 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

True, but unfortunately the response from Stanford has been to introduce triple and quad rooms ;)

This is not entirely their fault. Stanford is subject to Santa Clara County building regulations, and those tend not to be friendly to large university developments (or any large developments for that matter).

I vaguely recall the recent Escondido Graduate Village Residences (EVGR) construction taking a while to get through the regulatory pipeline.

The true underlying issue here is just that there is not enough quality housing for the number of students Stanford admits.

IgorPartola 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I worked in residential life while in college and can tell you that placing freshmen in singles is a horrible idea. It leads to isolation and lets mental health issues fester. Some need it but you do not want to place anyone who doesn’t into a room alone especially in their first year.

shetaye 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I agree in that freshmen should get the "experience" at least once. However, the way Stanford has arranged housing has meant that a good number of students will not live in a single for any of their 4 years.

tomrod 16 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Meh. I think you're overstating it. To meet your anecdata, I had both the first college year, and single > double by a large margin.

Onawa 3 minutes ago | parent [-]

It depends on the person. I lived alone in my last year of undergrad and it sent me into a deep depression. I figured out that living alone was too much isolation for me and moved back in with a roommate. That helped to pull me out of my depression and be able to finish my degree.

seizethecheese 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I suppose so, but nonetheless it still likely harms the rest of the students who are honest by raising the price of housing for all students.

echelon 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

The diploma or credentials should be marked with the conditions of admission. That would prevent abuse from those who don't or shouldn't qualify for special admission conditions.

crooked-v 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

...and punish those who genuinely develop or suffer from some new condition after admittal.

Aurornis 7 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cheating to get limited housing benefits starves those limited resources from truly disabled students who actually need them.

Also, there are academic components to disability cheating. As the article notes, registering for a disability at some of these universities grants you additional time to take tests.

bee_rider an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In the context of academics I’d call it manipulating, exploiting or scamming the housing system, rather than cheating. Just because academic cheating is the center-of-gravity for this type of conversation, and, IMO, a much much bigger deal.

If someone says they cheated in school, the first thing that pops into your head probably isn’t that they might have gotten a single dorm room, right?

only-one1701 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

This whole comment thread has been a crazy way to find out the ways people justify immoral behavior to themselves.

femiagbabiaka 37 minutes ago | parent [-]

This kind of minor fraud is completely normalized within middle and upper classes. It's half the way many kids end up at these schools in the first place, thinking of the "pay-to-play" scandal at USC a while back.

only-one1701 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

So it’s funny, I grew up upper middle class with an extremely severe morality taught to me re: this kind of thing — integrity, etc. My entire adult life has been a lesson in how that’s a maladaptive trait in America in 2025.

afavour 31 minutes ago | parent [-]

That has been one of the underpinning lessons of Trump's America to me. That playing by the rules and doing the right thing just makes me a sucker. Once a critical mass of people start to feel that way (if they don't already) it'll have a devastating effect on society.

(when I say "Trump's America" I don't directly mean Trump himself, though he's certainly a prominent example of it. It feels like it's everywhere. One of the first times I really noticed it was the Netflix show "Inventing Anna". A dramatization of the real life story of a scammer, Anna Sorokin. Netflix paid her $320,000 for her story. She led a life of crime and successfully profited from it. Now she's been on Dancing with the Stars, essentially she's been allowed to become the celebrity she pretended to be.)

saalweachter 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

"It's always been this way" and "everyone does it" are what bad people say to justify themselves.

watwut 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Donald Trump won twice. Republican party is mostly cheering everything he does. Ho won by lying a lot. Media mostly sanewashed it. Meanwhile, GOP complained they did not sanewashed it enough.

HN itself and startup culture celebrate breaking the rules and laws to earn money. It is ok to break the law if you are rich enough. People here were defending gambling apps despite all the shady stuff they do just a few weeks ago.

The white collar crime was barely prosecuted before, now the DOJ is loosing even the ability to prosecute it. So, I think the effect you worry about already happened, long time ago.

BeetleB 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> If someone says they cheated in school, the first thing that pops into your head probably isn’t that they might have gotten a single dorm room, right?

It isn't, but if I'm on the hiring end and I know you play games like this, I'm not hiring you. I can work with less competent folks much better.

40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
MangoToupe an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I suppose stanford does optimize for cheating, but this still seems excessive

nextos 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I reviewed incoming applications during one Oxbridge academic application cycle, I raised some serious concerns, nobody listened, and therefore I refuse to take part of that any longer. Basically, lots of students are pretending to be disabled to enhance the chances of applications that would not be particularly outstanding, taking spots from truly disabled students.

All it takes is lack of principles, exaggerating a bit, and getting a letter from a doctor. Imagine you have poor eyesight requiring a substantial correction, but you can still drive. That's not a disability. Now, if you create a compelling story inflating how this had an adverse impact on your education and get support letters, you might successfully cheat the system. I have seen several such cases. The admissions system is not effectively dealing with this type of fraud.

reliabilityguy a minute ago | parent | next [-]

> The admissions system is not effectively dealing with this type of fraud.

If I was the university I would prefer these types of disabled students. Why not:

1. They are not really disabled, so I do not have to spend a lot of many for real accommodations

2. No need to deal with a higher chance (I’m guessing here) of academic difficulties

3. Basically, I hit disability metric without paying any cost!

ahtihn 21 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> Imagine you have poor eyesight requiring a substantial correction, but you can still drive. That's not a disability

It absolutely is a disability! The fact that it's easy to deal with it doesn't change that fact.

I would not find it credible that it has a real impact on education though.

RachelF 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sadly, society also optimizes for cheating. Meritocracy is a myth.

In many ways Stanford is preparing students for the real world by encouraging cheating.

trollbridge 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Or Stanford is influential enough that it creates the future new world, which now will have far more cheating.

only-one1701 39 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

This is what it comes down to

josefritzishere an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I use the word "cheating" like I use the word "hacking." The connotation can be either good or bad or contextually. You are defeating a system. The intent of the cheater/hacker is where we get into moral judgements. (This is a great sub-thread.)

outside2344 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I mean, they watch our president, who got a JET for god knows what, and after seeing that, why shouldn't they grab for the bag?

margalabargala an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The word "cheating" is loaded with a lot of values and judgement that I think makes it inappropriate to use the way you did.

There's a point where it's not immoral to leverage systems available to you to land yourself in a better situation. Avoiding increasingly-overcrowded housing situations is I think one of them.

If Stanford's standards for these housing waivers are sufficiently broad that 38% of their students quality, isn't that a problem with Stanford's definitions, not with "cheating"?

groundzeros2015 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The direct result of this thinking is that people who need the accommodation face difficulty in getting it.

You don’t have to return your shopping cart. You don’t have to donate to the collection plate. You don’t have to give a coworker recognition.

But when everyone has an adversarial “get mine” attitude the systems have to be changed. Instead of assuming good intent they have to enforce it. Enforcement is very expensive and very unpleasant. (For example, maybe you need to rent the shopping cart.)

Unfortunately enforcement is a self fulfilling cycle. When people see others cheating they feel they need to cheat just to not be left behind.

You may be from a culture where this is the norm. Reflect on its impact and how we would really like to avoid this.

shadowgovt an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> You don’t have to donate to the collection plate

Hey, if they stop using the money I donate to advertise that my neighbors are abominations in the eyes of God they can have my money again.

zeroCalories an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The problem is that people simply have no investment in a community anymore. This is a direct consequence of globalization and capitalism. Travel to a foreign land, exploit the locals, and return home. Westerners are just now realizing that they're on the receiving end of it now.

swatcoder an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> There's a point where it's not immoral to leverage systems available to you to land yourself in a better situation.

That sounds loaded with a lot of value judgment. I don't think it's inappropriate for you to suggest it, but I think you'll find that a lot of people who value equitability, collaboration, communalism, modesty, earnestness, or conservation of resources might not share that perspective with you.

It turns out that people just disagree about values and are going to weigh judgment on others based on what they believe. You don't have to share their values, but you do kind of just need to be able to accept that judgment as theirs when you do things they malign.

socalgal2 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I live in liberal cities. Nearly every car drive and bicycle rider has the attitude "F everyone else, I'm going to break every law if I find it inconvenient to myself. Who cares if it affects others"

This is not in alignment with "equitability, collaboration, communalism, modesty, earnestness, or conservation of resources"

People claim those values but rarely actually follow them.

decremental 28 minutes ago | parent [-]

[dead]

guelo an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What is the honorable value that leads to "I'll get mine screw everybody else"?

ahmeneeroe-v2 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In the culture I grew up in, this was considered cheating.

delichon an hour ago | parent [-]

A culture that honored truth telling and integrity. Was that long ago or far away?

shermantanktop an hour ago | parent [-]

"culture i grew up in" could easily mean "what my parents/older relatives told me they did, when they told me to be like them."

Once you grow up, you realize your parents were human, made self-interested decisions, and then told themselves stories that made their actions sound principled. Some more than others, of course.

IAmBroom an hour ago | parent [-]

I'll skip the "my parents" part, because I'm an old, but ... NO ONE had independent housing their Freshman year in college at my hometown uni, unless they had prior residency in the area (were commuting from home).

So, yeah: that morality did exist, and not just in fables.

BeetleB 33 minutes ago | parent [-]

I went to a mediocre undergrad, and a top 5 school for grad. The difference in morals was quite notable, and cheating was much more prevalent in the latter (not just in classes, but for things like this as well).

arolihas 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The problem is the promotion of values and behaviors that plague a low-trust society. I think making excuses for it is truly inappropriate and immoral.

Cpoll an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is tragedy of the commons exactly. Whether it's moral depends entirely on the ethical theory you subscribe to.

> a problem with Stanford's definitions

Only if students aren't lying on their application.

iepathos an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree with you that cheating is a loaded word, but the question at the end here that the rules or standards enable users to work around it therefore it's not cheating is a bad semantic argument. We can use the exact same argument to excuse every kind of rule breaking that people do. If a hacker drains a billion dollars out of a smart contract, then they literally were only able to do so because the coded rules of the smart contract itself enabled it through whatever flaw the hacker identified. That doesn't make it less illegal or not cheating for the hacker. It feels like victim blaming to point the finger at the institution being exploited or people who get hacked and say its their problem not the individuals intentionally exploiting them.

BeetleB 35 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

While on the one hand I get where you're coming from, on the other hand I simply say "One does not have to go to Stanford."

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> a point where it's not immoral to leverage systems available to you to land yourself in a better situation

That point is probably behind someone at Stanford.

inglor_cz an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This attitude was one of the things that collapsed the former Eastern Bloc. "He who does not steal is stealing from his own family."

nradov 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

Stealing from work was so normalized in the former USSR that it wasn't even considered stealing, just "carrying out". Jobs in meatpacking facilities were highly desired because even though nominal wages were low, workers could make so much more by selling on the black market. The entire system was rotten from top to bottom.

jay_kyburz an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you lie (or exaggerate) about a disability and claim a benefit, you could be denying somebody with more serious disabilities getting the help they need.

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
iwontberude an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

donbox an hour ago | parent [-]

please... enough with the lazy stereotypes

Supermancho 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

Google: China Cheating. Stereotype or not, it's a well documented characteristic of some social systems. This isn't to imply a moralist view. This cultural phenomena is a recognized pattern of behavior across industries, as well as the education system. It's viciously pragmatic. A key part of their rapid industrialization and digital transition. It's not surprising, given the success, nor is it necessary to pretend otherwise.

lostmsu an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> The word "cheating" is loaded with a lot of values and judgement that I think makes it inappropriate to use the way you did.

I'm glad you had no problem with "dumpster fuck".