4 ms·

My takeaway/tldr: Act in a way that makes your colleagues (potentially future colleagues) feel smart.

scholaronroad 7y ago
And making people think that you're a wise-ass is better than making them think that you're stupid. P.S: Exile to UK seems lit fam.
ohbleek 7y ago
This lines up with my own experience and with advice I've read about "being successful." Essentially that, until you're at the top of the food chain, credit should always be deflected upward. Personally I bump up against the idea that it is good to do that in all situations, however, I have yet to find myself in one.
unishark 7y ago
The seminar story is sort of the opposite; dazzle and confuse them with your genius by giving bad talks no one can understand, or else they won't respect you. But both regard dealing with massive egos, a common problem in research.
- virtuous_signal 7y ago
  I can see that perspective too. I had interpeted it as "don't make it seem that our research (via seminar talks) can be understood by undergrads!"
- Fomite 7y ago
  I think the lesson is "Read the room". Different types of seminars have different purposes. For some, it is indeed desirable to dazzle and confuse. In others, to be approachable.
- antognini 7y ago
  A good seminar should have a lengthy introduction at a level somewhat below the general level of knowledge in the room and then transition into showing off how clever your approach is. The first part is critical because it makes everyone feel smart. The second part is critical because it shows everyone that you are smart.
- screye 7y ago
  This seems counter to almost every CS hiring job talk I have attended. The professors almost always seem to be receptive of people who lay down the basics for everyone in the room, and then systematically place their work using this newly situated academic landscape. I mean, how is a databases professor supposed to understand a SOTA CNN, if they don't understand CNNs to begin with. Maybe OP was simply stuck in the wrong (or right) kind of toxic workplace.

And making people think that you're a wise-ass is better than making them think that you're stupid. P.S: Exile to UK seems lit fam.

ohbleek 7y ago

This lines up with my own experience and with advice I've read about "being successful." Essentially that, until you're at the top of the food chain, credit should always be deflected upward. Personally I bump up against the idea that it is good to do that in all situations, however, I have yet to find myself in one.

unishark 7y ago

The seminar story is sort of the opposite; dazzle and confuse them with your genius by giving bad talks no one can understand, or else they won't respect you. But both regard dealing with massive egos, a common problem in research.

virtuous_signal 7y ago
I can see that perspective too. I had interpeted it as "don't make it seem that our research (via seminar talks) can be understood by undergrads!"
Fomite 7y ago
I think the lesson is "Read the room". Different types of seminars have different purposes. For some, it is indeed desirable to dazzle and confuse. In others, to be approachable.
antognini 7y ago
A good seminar should have a lengthy introduction at a level somewhat below the general level of knowledge in the room and then transition into showing off how clever your approach is. The first part is critical because it makes everyone feel smart. The second part is critical because it shows everyone that you are smart.
screye 7y ago
This seems counter to almost every CS hiring job talk I have attended. The professors almost always seem to be receptive of people who lay down the basics for everyone in the room, and then systematically place their work using this newly situated academic landscape. I mean, how is a databases professor supposed to understand a SOTA CNN, if they don't understand CNNs to begin with. Maybe OP was simply stuck in the wrong (or right) kind of toxic workplace.