6 ms·

Then raise the wages, and raise the budgets for that research. Do people that write this drivel think college students read it? And even if they did, do they t

Then raise the wages, and raise the budgets for that research. Do people that write this drivel think college students read it? And even if they did, do they think the students will just turn their lives around into doing something else just because someone online is complaining about not enough people doing it? I think these pieces miss a crucial point about skepticism. In a highly competitive capitalist landscape, if there’s not a lot of people entering then it’s safe to assume there’s a good enough reason. Without googling, I’d be willing to bet there’s fewer people becoming librarians lately, and fewer becoming actuaries, etc. These jobs are often passion-related and I think collectively the young people are realizing that following your passion leads to an increased risk of poverty and hardship. The last time I heard someone talk about botany was when *I* was in college several decades ago. Back then, there wasn’t people around me talking about machine learning very much either but that’s probably half of what I hear recent graduates in my industry talking about.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
This is exactly the issue, but the solution will not be easy. Over the past 25 years some careers have become exponentially more lucrative, with much less risk, than other careers, even though they require and use the same skill set. A data scientist working for a big tech company is making gobs more than a botany post-doc, even though their skills and required education are similar. Back 25-30 years ago, the chasm in pay wasn't as wide, and that was because pre-Internet (or pre-widely utilized Internet I should say), software just wasn't as lucrative. Now, though, I think you're seeing lots of challenges hiring in many professions because tech has become so monstrously dominant. You can say "just pay these folks more", but the money has to come from somewhere, and when big tech can easily afford 300k plus salaries for a position where other industries can't afford half that, it's difficult to see how this will improve.
- scottLobster 4y ago
  It's not just a matter of salaries and funding, the economic environment has changed a lot in the few decades. Individual incomes don't go as far as they used to, inflation is through the roof. Even the high paying jobs are suffering, they just have further to fall. The jobs that were on the margin (like Botany probably) have been pushed over the economic cliff and are no longer viable given the cost of entry. We need a fundamental reassessment of science funding and our economic priorities, sadly I imagine things will have to get a lot worse before that conversation happens, and frankly the people who got us into this mess have to leave office/die off, as a class they've proven unwilling/unable to adapt to uncomfortable realities.
- mncharity 4y ago
  Alternately, consider the 1970's US oversupply of physics phds, with associated "near collapse" of graduate programs. With a risk and pay gap - "Q: How can I talk with a physics PhD? A: Hail a cab." Programs and market restructured, with more flow into industry. But retargetability of science PhDs to match market need remains a challenge. And today, science programs depend on tech absorbing lots of graduates. With acceptable career opportunity cost, both absolute and relative to other education paths. So what happens if/when tech no longer provides that opportunity? No longer mitigates oversupply back-pressure? Especially with teaching career paths collapsing. The 1970's oversupply shakeup did some good. Perhaps another might too - perhaps science education might finally get the intensive focus needed to become less of a disaster. But... > some careers have become exponentially more lucrative, with much less risk, than other careers, even though they require and use the same skill set. Absent which, studying the sciences might become far less viable, rather than more. Tech is currently allowing society to avoid a great deal of "have a degree, can't find work" difficulty.
woweoe 4y ago
As someone who is a passion-related IT person, I often meet a lot of IT people who surprise me with their fixation on making money. Generally it is a hard time to be young anywhere in the world with unemployment and underemployment rates being high among young people from the US to China. In this situation the problem is more likely to be over specialization. If botany is a topic that you could somehow pick-up after university with little ease then it would be something more people would do. If there is a programming language that has too few people who know it, why not replace it with a code more easy to pick up by other programmers?
- teddyh 4y ago
  > I often meet a lot of IT people who surprise me with their fixation on making money. I think it’s the other way around. Ever since the late 1990’s IT boom, a lot of money-hungry people have flocked to IT.
  - woweoe 4y ago
    I think we are saying the same thing here. The work ethic is based on different bases for both - you would never be needlessly harming your health if you are passion driven for example.
- nibbleshifter 4y ago
  > If botany is a topic that you could somehow pick-up after university with little ease then it would be something more people would do You can, but much like anything else most of the work in botany that pays well requires an accredited qualification in the form of a degree.
theoldlove 4y ago
People become actuaries out of passion? I thought that was the definition of a stable, boring career. It’s what the dad does in Boyhood after giving up his dreams of a music career. Librarians I grant you, though I think the market for librarians continues to be oversaturated with supply. Lots of people like the idea of a career adjacent to reading books.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

This is exactly the issue, but the solution will not be easy. Over the past 25 years some careers have become exponentially more lucrative, with much less risk, than other careers, even though they require and use the same skill set. A data scientist working for a big tech company is making gobs more than a botany post-doc, even though their skills and required education are similar. Back 25-30 years ago, the chasm in pay wasn't as wide, and that was because pre-Internet (or pre-widely utilized Internet I should say), software just wasn't as lucrative. Now, though, I think you're seeing lots of challenges hiring in many professions because tech has become so monstrously dominant. You can say "just pay these folks more", but the money has to come from somewhere, and when big tech can easily afford 300k plus salaries for a position where other industries can't afford half that, it's difficult to see how this will improve.

scottLobster 4y ago
It's not just a matter of salaries and funding, the economic environment has changed a lot in the few decades. Individual incomes don't go as far as they used to, inflation is through the roof. Even the high paying jobs are suffering, they just have further to fall. The jobs that were on the margin (like Botany probably) have been pushed over the economic cliff and are no longer viable given the cost of entry. We need a fundamental reassessment of science funding and our economic priorities, sadly I imagine things will have to get a lot worse before that conversation happens, and frankly the people who got us into this mess have to leave office/die off, as a class they've proven unwilling/unable to adapt to uncomfortable realities.
mncharity 4y ago
Alternately, consider the 1970's US oversupply of physics phds, with associated "near collapse" of graduate programs. With a risk and pay gap - "Q: How can I talk with a physics PhD? A: Hail a cab." Programs and market restructured, with more flow into industry. But retargetability of science PhDs to match market need remains a challenge. And today, science programs depend on tech absorbing lots of graduates. With acceptable career opportunity cost, both absolute and relative to other education paths. So what happens if/when tech no longer provides that opportunity? No longer mitigates oversupply back-pressure? Especially with teaching career paths collapsing. The 1970's oversupply shakeup did some good. Perhaps another might too - perhaps science education might finally get the intensive focus needed to become less of a disaster. But... > some careers have become exponentially more lucrative, with much less risk, than other careers, even though they require and use the same skill set. Absent which, studying the sciences might become far less viable, rather than more. Tech is currently allowing society to avoid a great deal of "have a degree, can't find work" difficulty.

woweoe 4y ago

As someone who is a passion-related IT person, I often meet a lot of IT people who surprise me with their fixation on making money. Generally it is a hard time to be young anywhere in the world with unemployment and underemployment rates being high among young people from the US to China. In this situation the problem is more likely to be over specialization. If botany is a topic that you could somehow pick-up after university with little ease then it would be something more people would do. If there is a programming language that has too few people who know it, why not replace it with a code more easy to pick up by other programmers?

teddyh 4y ago
> I often meet a lot of IT people who surprise me with their fixation on making money. I think it’s the other way around. Ever since the late 1990’s IT boom, a lot of money-hungry people have flocked to IT.
- woweoe 4y ago
  I think we are saying the same thing here. The work ethic is based on different bases for both - you would never be needlessly harming your health if you are passion driven for example.
nibbleshifter 4y ago
> If botany is a topic that you could somehow pick-up after university with little ease then it would be something more people would do You can, but much like anything else most of the work in botany that pays well requires an accredited qualification in the form of a degree.

theoldlove 4y ago

People become actuaries out of passion? I thought that was the definition of a stable, boring career. It’s what the dad does in Boyhood after giving up his dreams of a music career. Librarians I grant you, though I think the market for librarians continues to be oversaturated with supply. Lots of people like the idea of a career adjacent to reading books.