5 ms·

This perspective IMO is informed by a slow-burning (like, career-scale) FOMO where if you're not as successful as the person getting $200k+ offers from FAANG ri

by uoaei 6y ago

This perspective IMO is informed by a slow-burning (like, career-scale) FOMO where if you're not as successful as the person getting $200k+ offers from FAANG right out of university then you are behind and a failure. This is a persistent sentiment in CS and adjacent circles, I've noticed, and a serious hindrance to finding fulfillment in life and career. It's not a race, it's an Iron Man, and for the vast majority of people just finishing somewhere they feel proud of is (should be) enough.

jrott 6y ago
There is a real trap in always feeling like you need more career wise or comparing how you are doing to other people. It's way too easy to shift the goal to being a little bit more successful then you currently are and it makes people miserable even if they are doing well by most people's standards.
ghaff 6y ago
Big tech comp numbers that get thrown around--and that are often inflated and have been at least partly driven by stock market gains--lead a lot of people to set them as the bar. And to feel that's what they need to achieve even if they don't especially like the work given that they can't imagine doing something that "only" pays $100K or $150K or whatever.
- bumby 6y ago
  >they can't imagine doing something that "only" pays $100K or $150K or whatever. “Comparison is the thief of joy” I saw research from a few years back that indicated happiness peaked a little over $100k in salary and actually tended downward above that. It’s been my experience that people who are solely focused on salary tend to do so because they don’t know what else to optimize their life around.
  - willis936 6y ago
    $100k is close to twice what you make in academia unless you’re a professor.
    - bumby 6y ago
      You’re pretty close, onet says median wage is about $65k. Would you say most of the people there are hustling for the chance at a professorship, early career, or just love the environment/work?
      - rsfern 6y ago
        Depends on the population you’re asking about. The postdocs are generally there to pursue a faculty position or to broaden their skillset and springboard to the next thing. 65k seems high for a postdoc in most fields though. My academic postdoc salary a few years ago was 50k, and that was considered generous. Staff, research scientists, lab techs, and other non-postdoc, non-faculty technical roles in academia are not generally in the career path to a tenured position, so I’d guess environment/work would be primary motivators.
      - willis936 6y ago
        That’s why I said “close to”. I work in a group that has about 30-50 students, 2-3 professors, 3 scientists, 2 postdocs, and 5 techs/engineers (depending on how you draw the lines). Professors make $200k. Scientists make $80k. Techs make $60k. Every single person is highly competent and could easily fetch a higher wage for their skillset. Nobody’s here because they think it’s a path to a cushy life. Working among exclusively smart people, having good conversations, not being in a nasty corporate framework, and doing work with purpose are all top reasons to stay in academia. The list of reasons not to is long (and easy to come by).
        bumby 6y ago
        >Working among exclusively smart people, having good conversations, not being in a nasty corporate framework This is a really interesting take to me because my experience was quite different. I thought many were smart in a vary narrow field but at times lost outside of it, prone to ego-based biases, and much more concerned with publication and funding than really intellectually curious. There’s definitely pragmatic reasons for the latter but it seemed to water down the pure intentions people have brought up in this thread. Of course there were wonderful people as well, but I’ve found that in the private sector too. I guess it goes to show mileage may vary and perspective is a key component

by uoaei 6y ago

jrott 6y ago

There is a real trap in always feeling like you need more career wise or comparing how you are doing to other people. It's way too easy to shift the goal to being a little bit more successful then you currently are and it makes people miserable even if they are doing well by most people's standards.

ghaff 6y ago

Big tech comp numbers that get thrown around--and that are often inflated and have been at least partly driven by stock market gains--lead a lot of people to set them as the bar. And to feel that's what they need to achieve even if they don't especially like the work given that they can't imagine doing something that "only" pays $100K or $150K or whatever.

bumby 6y ago
>they can't imagine doing something that "only" pays $100K or $150K or whatever. “Comparison is the thief of joy” I saw research from a few years back that indicated happiness peaked a little over $100k in salary and actually tended downward above that. It’s been my experience that people who are solely focused on salary tend to do so because they don’t know what else to optimize their life around.
- willis936 6y ago
  $100k is close to twice what you make in academia unless you’re a professor.
  - bumby 6y ago
    You’re pretty close, onet says median wage is about $65k. Would you say most of the people there are hustling for the chance at a professorship, early career, or just love the environment/work?
    - rsfern 6y ago
      Depends on the population you’re asking about. The postdocs are generally there to pursue a faculty position or to broaden their skillset and springboard to the next thing. 65k seems high for a postdoc in most fields though. My academic postdoc salary a few years ago was 50k, and that was considered generous. Staff, research scientists, lab techs, and other non-postdoc, non-faculty technical roles in academia are not generally in the career path to a tenured position, so I’d guess environment/work would be primary motivators.
    - willis936 6y ago
      That’s why I said “close to”. I work in a group that has about 30-50 students, 2-3 professors, 3 scientists, 2 postdocs, and 5 techs/engineers (depending on how you draw the lines). Professors make $200k. Scientists make $80k. Techs make $60k. Every single person is highly competent and could easily fetch a higher wage for their skillset. Nobody’s here because they think it’s a path to a cushy life. Working among exclusively smart people, having good conversations, not being in a nasty corporate framework, and doing work with purpose are all top reasons to stay in academia. The list of reasons not to is long (and easy to come by).
      - bumby 6y ago
        >Working among exclusively smart people, having good conversations, not being in a nasty corporate framework This is a really interesting take to me because my experience was quite different. I thought many were smart in a vary narrow field but at times lost outside of it, prone to ego-based biases, and much more concerned with publication and funding than really intellectually curious. There’s definitely pragmatic reasons for the latter but it seemed to water down the pure intentions people have brought up in this thread. Of course there were wonderful people as well, but I’ve found that in the private sector too. I guess it goes to show mileage may vary and perspective is a key component