Of course everyone with half a brain will say it is not worth the cost. Specially if you decide to have your degree on Bachelor of arts in history with a minor on "the social and historical circumstances of the people southwest of the Ural mountains in the 15th century", I fail to see employability or a return on investment soon.
Also, the way the education has been privatized in the USoA, if you want to graduate with a paper that says "harvard, yale, MIT or GeorgiaTech" it makes more sense and is cheaper to look in your state for the best state university that allows you to transfer as many credist as possible to any of those, do your fisrt three years there, then transfer as many credits as possible to your ultimate taget, and do your last 1.5~2 years there. It will be significantly cheaper, so less economic burden on you.
And, do not get me started on people that, after 2 years on a super-costly university discover that, after all, they did not want to study a BA in history with a minor on "the social and historical circumstances of the people southwest of the Ural mountains in the 15th century", but instead, want to study a BA on Geography with a minor on "the specific geography of the indonesian achipelago", wasting 2 years of supper expensive tuition, because they went straight to the super-costly university instead of reamining in-state, so the change of heart comes with a reduced price-tag. I mean, nothing wrong with realizing that you made a mistake with your career choice. Is worse even to realize you made a mistake and yet continue because of a sunken cost falacy, or family/social/peer pressure. Everything wrong with making the change of heart more costly than it should have been.
TL;DR: If you want to pursue a 4 year degre, look for high employability high return careers (within your calling) and do your first 3 years in state (so less student debt for you), in an institution that allows you to transfer as many cradits as possible to your final target, it will be cheaper overall, and, in case of a change of heart, the change of direction will be cheaper as well.
JM2C
YMMV
Full disclosure: My country (Venezuela) gave me university education for free (I consider a tuition of U$D 10 per year free), but my country did not pay for room, board, or books and materials. This was the top notch university for engineering in my country, and the academic level was nice indeed. As I was inmature (I entered university @ 16), a career that should have taken 5 years took me 7, nonetheless, I got an honorific mention on my thesis, so I was able to mend the ship once I became a more mature person. My country was generous and forgiving, and I was very fortunate, priviledged even.
Ubuntu just extended their LTS to 15 years. Microsoft could do it too if they wanted. When they realize no one wants ClippyPilot they will be forced to provide a traditional version of Windows again.
LTS kernels are supported for two years. The Linux Civil Infrastructure Group support (just barely) certain LTS kernels for 10 years... I am dying to see who will support the kernel of ubuntu for 15 years.
Or they will change the kernel at the end of the 10 years, which in turn means changes on the hardware and the upper layers of the software, while keeping the name of the distro the same, but you will end up doing an "upgrade that is not called an upgrade" and paying extra for the priviledge to call the upgrade the same fancy adjective-animal + version number as the old OS you had.
As they are comparin end of support of Win7 to end of support from Win10. Thing is, when support for Win7 ended, there was no ESU for users, and what's more, there was no Free-ish ESU for users. Meanwhile, Win10 has a (Free-ish) ESU for users.
So, the real comparison is to compare adoption of Win10 when Win7 reached end of support to adoption of Win11 when Win10's Free-ish ESU runs out, that is to say: Nov 2026
So take all the companies you view as viable competitors to Amazon. [...] Yeah technically Walmart and Target compete with Amazon.
The '90s called, and want their Amazon back. Amazon in 2025 competes in various fronts.
If the laid off engineers worked in the "Tat-Bazaar" competitors exist beyond Target and Walmart and include the websites Costco, BJ's, and for Amazon Engineers located in LatAm, Sites like Mercado Libre.
If the fired engineers worked in Amazon Prime Video, the doors are wide open at Netfilx, Apple TV (plus or not plus, I do not remember), Disney+, HBO Max, Peackcok/Universal+, and plenty of other streamers worldwide.
In Cloud, engineers fired could go seek employment in competitors like Microsoft Cloud, oracle cloud, Google Cloud, IBM Cloud, OVH, Hetzner, and plenty of companies offering OpenStack clouds. Heck, since netflix (and many other large companies) runs on top of amazon clud, maybe they want some engineers with intimate knowledge of how things work inside the "black box"
Were those engineers working at AI efforts at Amazon? OpenAI, anthropic, Google, Grok, meta and many more are there waiting.
Were said engineers working with gadgets like alexa? plenty of consumer electronics companies looking for good engineers
I see plenty of competition for Amazon engineers, if all these companies were also not reducing and re-aligning their engineering efforts.
And please, I/we do not buy the argument that the Ilumminati are sitting on the boards of all the large companies, in tall leather chairs, with cigars and cognac, plotting the end of the peasants class.
Again, in this particular case, is not lack of competition, but lack of unionization.
"Nuclear war can ruin your whole compile." -- Karl Lehenbauer