To hoover up vast numbers of people and train them as programmers, project mangers etc (not testers, the world is full of testers).<p>If the universities were not just free, but had lots of other benefits to make them appealing.... and they taught all the development and restored fields to qualify them to work at FB, GOOG ASPL, MSFT, whichever TGU (Tech Giant University) they attend.
There is a huge value in on-the-job training, but that value comes from a direct alignment between the work and the learning.<p>Time delays in the University model (for one thing) make it hard to produce what is needed. For instance if you want to "learn deep learning", you could get a PhD, and maybe 9 years later you will be an expert, but 9 years is a very long time and the field may be tapped out and deep learning PhD's will be driving cabs.
> Should tech giants create their own free universities?<p>No. Trade schools, yes, of course -- they (for-profit companies) are the only
ones in a position to teach students how to work in the industry. But
universities are different type of institution, they should be conducting
research, teaching topics more theoretical/abstract/fundamental for the field,
and should not depend on whims of industrial giants.
There is a lot of infrastructural work behind a university. Why would a tech giant deviate some of its capital to train people in a specific field within the corporation? Besides having to pay for the student to attend and graduate, they would also have to pay them a competitive salary afterwards ? What specifically is the advantage point ?