11 ms·

The longer students stay in a PhD program, the less likely they want to be professors. Typically many first year students say this, but the numbers quickly drop

The longer students stay in a PhD program, the less likely they want to be professors. Typically many first year students say this, but the numbers quickly drop off in later years. When I was a PhD student, I gave a few talks and blogged about this issue. I would present all these statistics in my talks about what they needed to do to be competitive, and people just absolutely hated me for it. One person said she wanted to punch me in the face. That said, she emailed me years later to tell me that she became a professor, despite those statistics. If you have a lot of tenacity (doing a postdoc), are willing to settle for a school that isn't top-50, and are reasonably productive (a few papers per year) it is doable. Every single one of my friends that graduated and still wanted to be a professor, is one now, but it took 3-5 years of additional work. This is true for my friends in psychology, computer science, EE, and neuroscience. Of course, now all my other friends say, "Why the hell did you choose to be a professor where you work 80 hours per week and make less than most undergraduates with CS degrees, even when your area of expertise is AI?" Lastly, I want to add that a PhD is a degree in learning how to do research and in becoming one of the world's foremost experts on a particular topic. There are lots of great things to do with a PhD that aren't being a professor.

chriskanan 9y ago
If anyone is interested, here are my old blog posts on the requirements for getting an interview for a professorship at a top-50 school: [1] http://www.chriskanan.com/planning-for-life-after-your-phd/ http://www.chriskanan.com/planning-for-life-after-your-phd/ [2] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-computer-science-professors-at-americas-best-universities/ http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-computer-science-pro... [3] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-ucsds-computer-science-faculty-candidates/ http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-ucsds-computer-scien...
- nopinsight 9y ago
  From your [3] above, do theory PhD graduates usually have more or fewer publications? What would be your guesstimates of the mean/median number of first author publications of faculty candidates at a top school? "Number First Author Publications (excluding theory folks) Mean: 12.8±6.5 Median: 14.5 Range: 2 – 25"
  - chriskanan 9y ago
    In other areas of computer science, first author counts for a lot. It indicates a person did the majority of the implementation work, probably wrote the first draft of the paper, etc. Typically the last author is the PI that came up with the idea, mentored the first author, and funded the work. The contributions of those in the middle are less well defined. In CS theory (and math), they go by alphabetical author order, so none of the aforementioned rules work unless there is only a single author. So, I excluded the theory folks from the first author analysis.
    - nopinsight 9y ago
      Thank you for the explanation!
    - lbeltrame 9y ago
      This is true in life sciences as well although IIRC this is more of a tradition than something written and defined.
    - raister 9y ago
      This is changing, thankfully. First authors should be the ones leading the paper, according to contributions. Some journals are asking for the actual contributions performed by each author, which I think is very good. Alphabetical order should be banned, period.
      - SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
        You state your opinion, but don't justify it -- could you share why you think it is important we list first author by contribution? What does this accomplish? Obviously not everyone agrees (or you wouldn't have felt the need to post), so why not share why you think you're right, so we can discuss the issue? Edit: Well, we've proven that people feel very strongly about this, but I'm no closer to understanding why people care so much about it. (ie, what they think it accomplishes.) C'est la Internet, I suppose.
- neuromantik8086 9y ago
  Paul Litvak has also written a few interesting posts, both about moving into industry from academia and about the current academic job market: [1] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/05/16/why-social-science-grad-students-would-make-great-product-managers/ http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/05/16/why-social-science-grad... [2] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/02/18/simgradschool-a-study-in-new-faculty-hiring-practices/ http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/02/18/simgradschool-a-study-i...
bhnmmhmd 9y ago
I'm really interested in applications of technology (including AI, ML, etc.) in business. But the only way I can get into any US university is by doing a Ph.D. (I live abroad). Is it at all possible for a person doing Operations/MIS/Quant_marketing - whose main job is econometrics and ML - to not end up in academia after completing his Ph.D.?
- singhrac 9y ago
  Of course, there are plenty of jobs in the industry for PhDs. Another option you might want to consider if you don't enjoy doing research is a Master's program in the US - which gives you some extra training, access to recruiters, a network, etc.
- ForHackernews 9y ago
  Not just possible, extremely likely. That's the whole point of the article: even if you wanted to stay in academia, you would struggle to do so.
disinterred 9y ago
When you become a tenured professor, the amount of work you do is far less than the vast majority of other jobs with a similar salary. The only real commitments are the classes you have to teach and if you minimize the amount of teaching you do, you'll barely be working at all. I knew a history professor that would come into the university for his 1 or 2 classes per week and then would go home for the rest of the day(s). He made 100k+. Not to mention that there are some professors at my university who make close to or over 300k/year and do not teach, but they are much more rare and have fat CVs. The other side of the coin is that before you get tenure, you may be working a lot for very little and only when you're close to 40 (on average) will you be granted tenure.
- gaius 9y ago
  From that POV tenure could be considered deferred compensation, but it is more likely that it is a sinecure.
- chriskanan 9y ago
  I'm going to disagree with this for science and engineering. All of my tenured colleagues work very hard. You have to if you want to keep running a lab, which is the main reason why people choose to become professors. If you stop working hard, you will stop getting funding and PhD students. The department will make you teach more and can make your life difficult if you are being a drag on the department, even if they can't fire you. That said, for the liberal arts, history, etc., things may be different. They don't tend to have large labs and their goals are different. I honestly don't know.
  - ptero 9y ago
    Things are different for those doing theoretical science where the main instruments are pen and paper. External funding is often not required at all. This might not please the department, but the tenured professor would be just fine. When I did my PhD I worked in Math and CS (plus had friends in Physics with similar observations): many professors on the theoretical side had no need for and were not interested in getting grants. They would get some minor travel money for conference expenses and pay themselves over summer so they would not have to teach then, but even if they got nothing they would be just fine on a base salary. And I am talking about reasonably well known full professors, not some young researcher at the end of a rope (career-wise). Things are different when you have experimental labs to run. That is when you need external funding and have to do all that is involved in getting it (proposals unlimited, etc.)
ageofwant 9y ago
'Professor' is a job description, you usually need a PhD to apply for the job, but it's not always a hard requirement. There are many more people with PhD's than Professor jobs. In my experience its the politically astute that get the job, its much less of a meritocracy than one would assume.
- jdpigeon 9y ago
  Absolutely my experience as well. The grad students I've seen make it to professorship positions are all the ones who: 1. Sacrifice all social life outside science. 2. Play the schmoozing and reputation management game very well (Twitter is taking off for this). 3. Mercilessly squeeze every last drop of productivity out of the undergrads assigned to them.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Nicholas7900 9y ago
COMPOSITE HACKS • If Truly you Are In Need Of A PROFESSIONAL LEGIT HACKER Who Will Get Your Job Done Efficiently With Swift Response, Congratulations, You Have Met the Right HACKERS We are a group Of Professional HACKERS , a product of the coming together of Legit Hackers from the Dark-Web, (pentaguard ,CyberBerkut , RedHack , Black Hat, Anonymous ) we have been existing for over 12 years, our system is a very loose and decentralized command structure that operates on ideas rather than directives. you can also find us on the dark web at :http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion (Tor Only) Frankly speaking, I always give a 100% guarantee on any job i am been asked to do, because we have always been successful in Almost all our jobs for over 12years and our clients can testify to that . To hack anything needs time though, but we can provide a swift response to your job depending on how fast and urgent you need. Time also depends on what exactly you want to hack and how serious you are. Enough time with social engineering is required for hacking. So if you want to bind us in a short time, then just don't contact us because We can't hack within one hour,sorry. Basically, time depends on your luck. If its good luck, then it is possible to hack within one hour but, if its in the other way round, it would take few hours. I have seen FAKE HACKERS claiming they can hack in 1hr , but there is no REAL HACKER who can say this (AVOID THEM). Please Note : we have only one contact email : compositehacks@gmail.com we will be happy to have you join over 2000 satisfied clients around the world to use our services. We provide prove of job before payment We offer services like: Hacking Whatsapp account giving you access to the person's whatsapp messages and history . Initiating Bank Wire Transfers at a resonable fee and completely untracable . Hacking any smart phone giving you access to all activities on the phone like , text messages , call logs , instant messenger chats and other information. Hacking Facebook , Instagram , Twitter and every other social network Accounts. Hacking Websites to deface , retrive information, edit information or give you admin access . Hacking into school's websites (server) to change grades without any trace . . Hacking any email service provider like Gmail , Yahoo, Comcast , Aol , Hotmail any others . Location Tracking. Hacking and selling credit cards , amazon , walmart , paypal , bank logs . Selling of untracable phones (even the pentagon can not track our phones). . Selling of Tutorial packs for Beginner Ethical Hackers You can also contact us for other Cyber Attacks And Hijackings, we do almost All. You can check out our Latest Whatsapp Hack video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY
hyperbovine 9y ago
> ... you work 80 hours per week and make less than ... I've read so many comments like yours, on HN and elsewhere, and invariably the argument hinges on some variation of the above sentiment. I've come to believe I just have fundamentally different values than the vast majority of people who work in industry. To answer your (friends') question, because the work is more interesting and I make plenty of money as it stands.
- ptero 9y ago
  I think work hours and salary have a bimodal distribution, driven by tenured / non-tenured status. My experience is in theoretical math/physics -- I got my PhD but decided not to stay in academia; there are pros and cons to both options. IME most tenured professors have to work significantly less than others for the same salary (those who work more mostly do it because they like working with grad students, not because they get financial benefits for it). Quality of life is good, good benefits, few and flexible work hours, sabbaticals, etc. Salary is lower than at the top of the industry, but sufficient for a comfortable life. Those who do good research can escape for the summer to interesting parts of the world to summer schools and visiting colleagues using grant money. However, non-tenured professors have it much harder. And postdocs are usually the underclass.
  - Qworg 9y ago
    Also, many tenured professors double dip into industry as well, leveraging their guaranteed position for minimized exposure if the startup goes poorly.
    - mathperson 9y ago
      Depends on field.
  - aswanson 9y ago
    Was your original plan to become a professor? If so, why did you change course?
Halladie7 9y ago
Grad school dropout here. I never wanted to be a professor. I have no interest in teaching. I just wanted to research. My degree would have been in CS/ML/NLP. When I realized that I would be out over half a million dollars in earnings over the time I was in grad school, I made the decision to leave. The fact that my advisor was a terrible researcher and a horrible person made it much easier.
- make3 9y ago
  wouldn't you have made more at the end?
  - ramy_d 9y ago
    500 thousand dollars is nothing to sneeze at. The thing about crushing debt is that ... it's absolutely crushing.
    - obmelvin 9y ago
      one shouldn't run up debt in a STEM graduate program. Sure, there is a big opportunity cost with regard to wages, but that's not crushing debt
      - Halladie7 9y ago
        My tuition was fully paid and I got a $1600/mo stipend for being a dedicated research assistant. So the opportunity cost wasn't worth it when I discovered I'd be earning the same on either career path.
    - Halladie7 9y ago
      Especially when you consider compound interest. :)
  - Halladie7 9y ago
    No. Because I'd have gone to private industry anyway. Starting research and engineering salaries are roughly equivalent. Their respective progressions are about the same too. You'd only make more money if you founded a company and it was successful. You don't make fuck you money as employee #5000.
turk184 9y ago
Yeah, mine hangs on the wall, unused. The pay would have been half what I made just doing software development. Oh well, I enjoyed my 20s and poverty was hard at times but didn't scar me.
Nicholas7900 9y ago
COMPOSITE HACKS • If Truly you Are In Need Of A PROFESSIONAL LEGIT HACKER Who Will Get Your Job Done Efficiently With Swift Response, Congratulations, You Have Met the Right HACKERS We are a group Of Professional HACKERS , a product of the coming together of Legit Hackers from the Dark-Web, (pentaguard ,CyberBerkut , RedHack , Black Hat, Anonymous ) we have been existing for over 12 years, our system is a very loose and decentralized command structure that operates on ideas rather than directives. you can also find us on the dark web at :http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion (Tor Only) Frankly speaking, I always give a 100% guarantee on any job i am been asked to do, because we have always been successful in Almost all our jobs for over 12years and our clients can testify to that . To hack anything needs time though, but we can provide a swift response to your job depending on how fast and urgent you need. Time also depends on what exactly you want to hack and how serious you are. Enough time with social engineering is required for hacking. So if you want to bind us in a short time, then just don't contact us because We can't hack within one hour,sorry. Basically, time depends on your luck. If its good luck, then it is possible to hack within one hour but, if its in the other way round, it would take few hours. I have seen FAKE HACKERS claiming they can hack in 1hr , but there is no REAL HACKER who can say this (AVOID THEM). Please Note : we have only one contact email : compositehacks@gmail.com we will be happy to have you join over 2000 satisfied clients around the world to use our services. We provide prove of job before payment We offer services like: Hacking Whatsapp account giving you access to the person's whatsapp messages and history . You can check out our Latest Whatsapp Hack video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY Initiating Bank Wire Transfers at a resonable fee and completely untracable . Hacking any smart phone giving you access to all activities on the phone like , text messages , call logs , instant messenger chats and other information. Hacking Facebook , Instagram , Twitter and every other social network Accounts. Hacking Websites to deface , retrive information, edit information or give you admin access . Hacking into school's websites (server) to change grades without any trace . . Hacking any email service provider like Gmail , Yahoo, Comcast , Aol , Hotmail any others . Location Tracking. Hacking and selling credit cards , amazon , walmart , paypal , bank logs . Selling of untracable phones (even the pentagon can not track our phones). . Selling of Tutorial packs for Beginner Ethical Hackers You can also contact us for other Cyber Attacks And Hijackings, we do almost All. Contact us: compositehacks@gmail.com
YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
>> Lastly, I want to add that a PhD is a degree in learning how to do research and in becoming one of the world's foremost experts on a particular topic. I think that also goes to answer the question about motivation despite long hours and low salaries. Knowledge is its own reward, I guess. Also, doing work that really satisfies you is a big privilege. Big big privilege. Not many people enjoy that, the world over.
- tertius 9y ago
  > doing work that really satisfies you is a big privilege This is also quite rare in Academia. Much of the work is still just as unenjoyable as a normal job.
RSchaeffer 9y ago
As someone thinking about pursuing a PhD to ultimately become a professor, can you link me to your talks or blog posts on the subject of what's required to be competitive?
- Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago
  I can give you my anecdotal perspective. Out of the 18 in my cohort, two are doing reasonable postdocs (i.e. positions that aren't just treading water, but should actually lead to a reasonable career) and one who has been remarkably successful (success being a 'young investigator' grant - basically an R1 - and just recently another million+, within two years of PhD). The rest (including me) are doing ... other stuff. Here are some traits of the successful PhD: * Mother is professor in a related-ish field. Sister is also a PI of a gov't lab. Has been steeped in research and academia (especially the interpersonal aspects of this!) for decades. His success is 100% merited, but without question this has aided him tremendously. * Reads papers constantly. I don't know anyone that's as familiar with the literature as he is, including all the faculty I've gotten to know. Has strong opinions about various labs, papers, and researchers, all of which are very well substantiated. TONS of 'soft' knowledge about how so-and-so got this or that funding, why such-and-such research is bunk, etc. If you don't think half the faculty in your doctoral program are trash, you're not being critical. * Not a terribly great bench scientist. Definitely competent, but not remarkable. He knows it, though. * Holds many unpopular opinions, and strategically focuses his research goals on the 'achievable'. In other words, he doesn't let being right get in the way of his career. Don't interpret this overly cynically; you can absolutely go against the flow in academia, but big claims require big evidence, and your time is limited. His research focus has shifted a lot depending on the landscape in front of him. I think this is commendable, as idealism in research is extremely fraught, even if some would criticize this. FWIW, he published a 'comment' in science that basically shits all over a garbage paper, which is more than most will do. * 10 'real' publications since starting PhD in 2010, 7 as first author. By this I mean actual original research in a journal of repute, not reviews or bottom-tier trash. And this covers what are easily considered 3 different topics/fields. * PhD advisor is Academy member, post-doc advisor is Academy member, institution is top-3 in field, arguably 1 or 2, etc. The core takeaway is that you need to understand your field (in a very wide sense of the term) and direct your research productively according to that. You certainly don't need all that to become a professor at Podunk-U, but I think that's a good archetype for a successful investigator. The other successful PhD (different cohort) I know has a very similar story; dad is a 'big dog' in an even more similar field as the son, similarly productive, similarly knowledgeable, etc. I feel pretty confident that this is what's needed for success at a major research university. Though, many unsuccessful faculty will be hired as well (through luck and, very often, nepotism), so YMMV. If you really like to read papers in your free time, I think that's a very good sign. Even better if what you like best is to read between the lines and really be critical of the work. Very few people, even in doctoral programs, are like this. Know and respect your weaknesses, as well, and you could be great.
dkural 9y ago
Having spent 7 years getting a PhD (and a year prior working at a top lab), and then at industry; one of the most amusing facts to me is the belief in academia that professors/postdocs have much longer hours and "work harder" than their "9-5" colleagues in industry. If you speak with recovering professors and post-docs who've joined industry, you'll quickly realize that one of their big surprises is the faster pace of work, and how much of it there is. Publishing of course is not sufficient, it actually has to work, at scale, reproducibly. I like the academic environment, because at its best, it allows you explore something very deeply. Efficiency and creativity are different goals. There is value to a meandering path. Even if industry may have a fast pace solving problems, academia at its best, makes you ask a better / different question.

chriskanan 9y ago

If anyone is interested, here are my old blog posts on the requirements for getting an interview for a professorship at a top-50 school: [1] http://www.chriskanan.com/planning-for-life-after-your-phd/ http://www.chriskanan.com/planning-for-life-after-your-phd/ [2] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-computer-science-professors-at-americas-best-universities/ http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-computer-science-pro... [3] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-ucsds-computer-science-faculty-candidates/ http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-ucsds-computer-scien...

nopinsight 9y ago
From your [3] above, do theory PhD graduates usually have more or fewer publications? What would be your guesstimates of the mean/median number of first author publications of faculty candidates at a top school? "Number First Author Publications (excluding theory folks) Mean: 12.8±6.5 Median: 14.5 Range: 2 – 25"
- chriskanan 9y ago
  In other areas of computer science, first author counts for a lot. It indicates a person did the majority of the implementation work, probably wrote the first draft of the paper, etc. Typically the last author is the PI that came up with the idea, mentored the first author, and funded the work. The contributions of those in the middle are less well defined. In CS theory (and math), they go by alphabetical author order, so none of the aforementioned rules work unless there is only a single author. So, I excluded the theory folks from the first author analysis.
  - nopinsight 9y ago
    Thank you for the explanation!
  - lbeltrame 9y ago
    This is true in life sciences as well although IIRC this is more of a tradition than something written and defined.
  - raister 9y ago
    This is changing, thankfully. First authors should be the ones leading the paper, according to contributions. Some journals are asking for the actual contributions performed by each author, which I think is very good. Alphabetical order should be banned, period.
    - SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
      You state your opinion, but don't justify it -- could you share why you think it is important we list first author by contribution? What does this accomplish? Obviously not everyone agrees (or you wouldn't have felt the need to post), so why not share why you think you're right, so we can discuss the issue? Edit: Well, we've proven that people feel very strongly about this, but I'm no closer to understanding why people care so much about it. (ie, what they think it accomplishes.) C'est la Internet, I suppose.
neuromantik8086 9y ago
Paul Litvak has also written a few interesting posts, both about moving into industry from academia and about the current academic job market: [1] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/05/16/why-social-science-grad-students-would-make-great-product-managers/ http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/05/16/why-social-science-grad... [2] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/02/18/simgradschool-a-study-in-new-faculty-hiring-practices/ http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/02/18/simgradschool-a-study-i...

bhnmmhmd 9y ago

I'm really interested in applications of technology (including AI, ML, etc.) in business. But the only way I can get into any US university is by doing a Ph.D. (I live abroad). Is it at all possible for a person doing Operations/MIS/Quant_marketing - whose main job is econometrics and ML - to not end up in academia after completing his Ph.D.?

singhrac 9y ago
Of course, there are plenty of jobs in the industry for PhDs. Another option you might want to consider if you don't enjoy doing research is a Master's program in the US - which gives you some extra training, access to recruiters, a network, etc.
ForHackernews 9y ago
Not just possible, extremely likely. That's the whole point of the article: even if you wanted to stay in academia, you would struggle to do so.

disinterred 9y ago

When you become a tenured professor, the amount of work you do is far less than the vast majority of other jobs with a similar salary. The only real commitments are the classes you have to teach and if you minimize the amount of teaching you do, you'll barely be working at all. I knew a history professor that would come into the university for his 1 or 2 classes per week and then would go home for the rest of the day(s). He made 100k+. Not to mention that there are some professors at my university who make close to or over 300k/year and do not teach, but they are much more rare and have fat CVs. The other side of the coin is that before you get tenure, you may be working a lot for very little and only when you're close to 40 (on average) will you be granted tenure.

gaius 9y ago
From that POV tenure could be considered deferred compensation, but it is more likely that it is a sinecure.
chriskanan 9y ago
I'm going to disagree with this for science and engineering. All of my tenured colleagues work very hard. You have to if you want to keep running a lab, which is the main reason why people choose to become professors. If you stop working hard, you will stop getting funding and PhD students. The department will make you teach more and can make your life difficult if you are being a drag on the department, even if they can't fire you. That said, for the liberal arts, history, etc., things may be different. They don't tend to have large labs and their goals are different. I honestly don't know.
- ptero 9y ago
  Things are different for those doing theoretical science where the main instruments are pen and paper. External funding is often not required at all. This might not please the department, but the tenured professor would be just fine. When I did my PhD I worked in Math and CS (plus had friends in Physics with similar observations): many professors on the theoretical side had no need for and were not interested in getting grants. They would get some minor travel money for conference expenses and pay themselves over summer so they would not have to teach then, but even if they got nothing they would be just fine on a base salary. And I am talking about reasonably well known full professors, not some young researcher at the end of a rope (career-wise). Things are different when you have experimental labs to run. That is when you need external funding and have to do all that is involved in getting it (proposals unlimited, etc.)

ageofwant 9y ago

'Professor' is a job description, you usually need a PhD to apply for the job, but it's not always a hard requirement. There are many more people with PhD's than Professor jobs. In my experience its the politically astute that get the job, its much less of a meritocracy than one would assume.

jdpigeon 9y ago
Absolutely my experience as well. The grad students I've seen make it to professorship positions are all the ones who: 1. Sacrifice all social life outside science. 2. Play the schmoozing and reputation management game very well (Twitter is taking off for this). 3. Mercilessly squeeze every last drop of productivity out of the undergrads assigned to them.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Nicholas7900 9y ago

COMPOSITE HACKS • If Truly you Are In Need Of A PROFESSIONAL LEGIT HACKER Who Will Get Your Job Done Efficiently With Swift Response, Congratulations, You Have Met the Right HACKERS We are a group Of Professional HACKERS , a product of the coming together of Legit Hackers from the Dark-Web, (pentaguard ,CyberBerkut , RedHack , Black Hat, Anonymous ) we have been existing for over 12 years, our system is a very loose and decentralized command structure that operates on ideas rather than directives. you can also find us on the dark web at :http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion (Tor Only) Frankly speaking, I always give a 100% guarantee on any job i am been asked to do, because we have always been successful in Almost all our jobs for over 12years and our clients can testify to that . To hack anything needs time though, but we can provide a swift response to your job depending on how fast and urgent you need. Time also depends on what exactly you want to hack and how serious you are. Enough time with social engineering is required for hacking. So if you want to bind us in a short time, then just don't contact us because We can't hack within one hour,sorry. Basically, time depends on your luck. If its good luck, then it is possible to hack within one hour but, if its in the other way round, it would take few hours. I have seen FAKE HACKERS claiming they can hack in 1hr , but there is no REAL HACKER who can say this (AVOID THEM). Please Note : we have only one contact email : compositehacks@gmail.com we will be happy to have you join over 2000 satisfied clients around the world to use our services. We provide prove of job before payment We offer services like: Hacking Whatsapp account giving you access to the person's whatsapp messages and history . Initiating Bank Wire Transfers at a resonable fee and completely untracable . Hacking any smart phone giving you access to all activities on the phone like , text messages , call logs , instant messenger chats and other information. Hacking Facebook , Instagram , Twitter and every other social network Accounts. Hacking Websites to deface , retrive information, edit information or give you admin access . Hacking into school's websites (server) to change grades without any trace . . Hacking any email service provider like Gmail , Yahoo, Comcast , Aol , Hotmail any others . Location Tracking. Hacking and selling credit cards , amazon , walmart , paypal , bank logs . Selling of untracable phones (even the pentagon can not track our phones). . Selling of Tutorial packs for Beginner Ethical Hackers You can also contact us for other Cyber Attacks And Hijackings, we do almost All. You can check out our Latest Whatsapp Hack video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY

hyperbovine 9y ago

> ... you work 80 hours per week and make less than ... I've read so many comments like yours, on HN and elsewhere, and invariably the argument hinges on some variation of the above sentiment. I've come to believe I just have fundamentally different values than the vast majority of people who work in industry. To answer your (friends') question, because the work is more interesting and I make plenty of money as it stands.

ptero 9y ago
I think work hours and salary have a bimodal distribution, driven by tenured / non-tenured status. My experience is in theoretical math/physics -- I got my PhD but decided not to stay in academia; there are pros and cons to both options. IME most tenured professors have to work significantly less than others for the same salary (those who work more mostly do it because they like working with grad students, not because they get financial benefits for it). Quality of life is good, good benefits, few and flexible work hours, sabbaticals, etc. Salary is lower than at the top of the industry, but sufficient for a comfortable life. Those who do good research can escape for the summer to interesting parts of the world to summer schools and visiting colleagues using grant money. However, non-tenured professors have it much harder. And postdocs are usually the underclass.
- Qworg 9y ago
  Also, many tenured professors double dip into industry as well, leveraging their guaranteed position for minimized exposure if the startup goes poorly.
  - mathperson 9y ago
    Depends on field.
- aswanson 9y ago
  Was your original plan to become a professor? If so, why did you change course?

Halladie7 9y ago

Grad school dropout here. I never wanted to be a professor. I have no interest in teaching. I just wanted to research. My degree would have been in CS/ML/NLP. When I realized that I would be out over half a million dollars in earnings over the time I was in grad school, I made the decision to leave. The fact that my advisor was a terrible researcher and a horrible person made it much easier.

make3 9y ago
wouldn't you have made more at the end?
- ramy_d 9y ago
  500 thousand dollars is nothing to sneeze at. The thing about crushing debt is that ... it's absolutely crushing.
  - obmelvin 9y ago
    one shouldn't run up debt in a STEM graduate program. Sure, there is a big opportunity cost with regard to wages, but that's not crushing debt
    - Halladie7 9y ago
      My tuition was fully paid and I got a $1600/mo stipend for being a dedicated research assistant. So the opportunity cost wasn't worth it when I discovered I'd be earning the same on either career path.
  - Halladie7 9y ago
    Especially when you consider compound interest. :)
- Halladie7 9y ago
  No. Because I'd have gone to private industry anyway. Starting research and engineering salaries are roughly equivalent. Their respective progressions are about the same too. You'd only make more money if you founded a company and it was successful. You don't make fuck you money as employee #5000.

turk184 9y ago

Yeah, mine hangs on the wall, unused. The pay would have been half what I made just doing software development. Oh well, I enjoyed my 20s and poverty was hard at times but didn't scar me.

Nicholas7900 9y ago

COMPOSITE HACKS • If Truly you Are In Need Of A PROFESSIONAL LEGIT HACKER Who Will Get Your Job Done Efficiently With Swift Response, Congratulations, You Have Met the Right HACKERS We are a group Of Professional HACKERS , a product of the coming together of Legit Hackers from the Dark-Web, (pentaguard ,CyberBerkut , RedHack , Black Hat, Anonymous ) we have been existing for over 12 years, our system is a very loose and decentralized command structure that operates on ideas rather than directives. you can also find us on the dark web at :http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion http://my7cic3ax7oznkvu.onion (Tor Only) Frankly speaking, I always give a 100% guarantee on any job i am been asked to do, because we have always been successful in Almost all our jobs for over 12years and our clients can testify to that . To hack anything needs time though, but we can provide a swift response to your job depending on how fast and urgent you need. Time also depends on what exactly you want to hack and how serious you are. Enough time with social engineering is required for hacking. So if you want to bind us in a short time, then just don't contact us because We can't hack within one hour,sorry. Basically, time depends on your luck. If its good luck, then it is possible to hack within one hour but, if its in the other way round, it would take few hours. I have seen FAKE HACKERS claiming they can hack in 1hr , but there is no REAL HACKER who can say this (AVOID THEM). Please Note : we have only one contact email : compositehacks@gmail.com we will be happy to have you join over 2000 satisfied clients around the world to use our services. We provide prove of job before payment We offer services like: Hacking Whatsapp account giving you access to the person's whatsapp messages and history . You can check out our Latest Whatsapp Hack video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_LtFUVMcxY Initiating Bank Wire Transfers at a resonable fee and completely untracable . Hacking any smart phone giving you access to all activities on the phone like , text messages , call logs , instant messenger chats and other information. Hacking Facebook , Instagram , Twitter and every other social network Accounts. Hacking Websites to deface , retrive information, edit information or give you admin access . Hacking into school's websites (server) to change grades without any trace . . Hacking any email service provider like Gmail , Yahoo, Comcast , Aol , Hotmail any others . Location Tracking. Hacking and selling credit cards , amazon , walmart , paypal , bank logs . Selling of untracable phones (even the pentagon can not track our phones). . Selling of Tutorial packs for Beginner Ethical Hackers You can also contact us for other Cyber Attacks And Hijackings, we do almost All. Contact us: compositehacks@gmail.com

YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago

>> Lastly, I want to add that a PhD is a degree in learning how to do research and in becoming one of the world's foremost experts on a particular topic. I think that also goes to answer the question about motivation despite long hours and low salaries. Knowledge is its own reward, I guess. Also, doing work that really satisfies you is a big privilege. Big big privilege. Not many people enjoy that, the world over.

tertius 9y ago
> doing work that really satisfies you is a big privilege This is also quite rare in Academia. Much of the work is still just as unenjoyable as a normal job.

RSchaeffer 9y ago

As someone thinking about pursuing a PhD to ultimately become a professor, can you link me to your talks or blog posts on the subject of what's required to be competitive?

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago
I can give you my anecdotal perspective. Out of the 18 in my cohort, two are doing reasonable postdocs (i.e. positions that aren't just treading water, but should actually lead to a reasonable career) and one who has been remarkably successful (success being a 'young investigator' grant - basically an R1 - and just recently another million+, within two years of PhD). The rest (including me) are doing ... other stuff. Here are some traits of the successful PhD: * Mother is professor in a related-ish field. Sister is also a PI of a gov't lab. Has been steeped in research and academia (especially the interpersonal aspects of this!) for decades. His success is 100% merited, but without question this has aided him tremendously. * Reads papers constantly. I don't know anyone that's as familiar with the literature as he is, including all the faculty I've gotten to know. Has strong opinions about various labs, papers, and researchers, all of which are very well substantiated. TONS of 'soft' knowledge about how so-and-so got this or that funding, why such-and-such research is bunk, etc. If you don't think half the faculty in your doctoral program are trash, you're not being critical. * Not a terribly great bench scientist. Definitely competent, but not remarkable. He knows it, though. * Holds many unpopular opinions, and strategically focuses his research goals on the 'achievable'. In other words, he doesn't let being right get in the way of his career. Don't interpret this overly cynically; you can absolutely go against the flow in academia, but big claims require big evidence, and your time is limited. His research focus has shifted a lot depending on the landscape in front of him. I think this is commendable, as idealism in research is extremely fraught, even if some would criticize this. FWIW, he published a 'comment' in science that basically shits all over a garbage paper, which is more than most will do. * 10 'real' publications since starting PhD in 2010, 7 as first author. By this I mean actual original research in a journal of repute, not reviews or bottom-tier trash. And this covers what are easily considered 3 different topics/fields. * PhD advisor is Academy member, post-doc advisor is Academy member, institution is top-3 in field, arguably 1 or 2, etc. The core takeaway is that you need to understand your field (in a very wide sense of the term) and direct your research productively according to that. You certainly don't need all that to become a professor at Podunk-U, but I think that's a good archetype for a successful investigator. The other successful PhD (different cohort) I know has a very similar story; dad is a 'big dog' in an even more similar field as the son, similarly productive, similarly knowledgeable, etc. I feel pretty confident that this is what's needed for success at a major research university. Though, many unsuccessful faculty will be hired as well (through luck and, very often, nepotism), so YMMV. If you really like to read papers in your free time, I think that's a very good sign. Even better if what you like best is to read between the lines and really be critical of the work. Very few people, even in doctoral programs, are like this. Know and respect your weaknesses, as well, and you could be great.

dkural 9y ago

Having spent 7 years getting a PhD (and a year prior working at a top lab), and then at industry; one of the most amusing facts to me is the belief in academia that professors/postdocs have much longer hours and "work harder" than their "9-5" colleagues in industry. If you speak with recovering professors and post-docs who've joined industry, you'll quickly realize that one of their big surprises is the faster pace of work, and how much of it there is. Publishing of course is not sufficient, it actually has to work, at scale, reproducibly. I like the academic environment, because at its best, it allows you explore something very deeply. Efficiency and creativity are different goals. There is value to a meandering path. Even if industry may have a fast pace solving problems, academia at its best, makes you ask a better / different question.