5 ms·

Haven't seen anyone mention a non-DOE lab, so figured I'd weigh in. I interned twice with MIT Lincoln Labs, which among other things, helped build and deploy R

by fryz 4y ago

Haven't seen anyone mention a non-DOE lab, so figured I'd weigh in. I interned twice with MIT Lincoln Labs, which among other things, helped build and deploy Radar for WWII which turned into building/managing the technology for Air-Traffic Control, and then turned towards space. They are primarily a DOD-associated research lab (even located on an US Air Force Base), and so most of the projects have some military-oriented mission. Their mission is entrepreneurial-minded (which I found cool), in that they do the "basic research" and prototyping to prove viability and then the DOD turns over the project to a contractor to make feasible. While I was there I worked in their GeoIntelligence and Natural Language groups, doing research which I'd ultimately come to understand as being relevant for Project Maven (year 1) and PRISM (year 2). While I'm sure as an intern my contributions weren't directly related to or otherwise leveraged for these programs, in hindsight it was clear that this was the bigger picture that the work was contributing to. Take from this what you will. Most of the anecdotes that I've read through in the comments mirrors my experience. However, one thing I see missing was how opportunity was "metered" out. Each group I was in was organized like a research lab and the level of your academic progression limited (or opened) your ability to get access to specific projects/work. Their pay scale was also dictated based on this as well. So if you have a BS, your ability to "move up", doesn't exist, but it does if you have PhD. Ultimately, I was given an offer to work there, but ended up taking a SWE position in the Bay Area because I wasn't interested in continuing my education and felt like my ability to have a career progression at MITLL would have necessitated that.

neilv 4y ago
The glass ceiling for non-PhDs sounds like a caste system, not the meritocracy that the broader MIT-ish community sometimes professes.
- defrost 4y ago
  I have no idea how this plays out in the US national lab system being discussed .. but a PhD is literally "my first independent solo original research project obsessed over and submitted to critical peer review". It's the apprenticeship for doing independant solo research and, in general, makes perfect sense that someone have demonstrated a capability for this work prior to being given the reins to resources on the scale of millions, tens of millions, etc. It's hardly a "glass ceiling" (ie. we profess equality but don't promote women or people of colour or not our religeon but never say why) when it's a stated requirement to, say, first pass an apprenticeship prior to becoming an certified electrician and hired to wire a nuclear weapon. It's an actual formal staging in a meritocracy, the only issue would be if those that might gain a PhD are denied the opportunity to do so ... (a somewhat tangential issue that might have more play in various places).
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    https://nypost.com/2023/01/17/astrophysicist-natalie-gosnell-accuses-field-of-being-riddled-with-white-supremacy/ https://nypost.com/2023/01/17/astrophysicist-natalie-gosnell... Not what this person says.
    - defrost 4y ago
      In that NYPost article Dr Natalie Gosnell isn't discussing the PhD requirement for advancement within the US National Labs .. so you may have to expand your point if you want to make one.
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        [flagged]
        defrost 4y ago
        I was specifically talking about a PhD requirement as a precursor step in a research career. > Academia is a shocking hive of nepotism and corruption wherever you are. Also isn't something discussed by Dr Natalie Gosnell who has her Dr. and a position. Her complaint (in the article you linked) is that " astrophysics .. is paralyzed by “systemic racism and white supremacy” ". There's no obvious mention of nepo babies in that link that you selected. My own preference is for astro tangential projects such as https://www.sarao.ac.za/media-releases/2022-africa-data-science-intensive-programme-projects-find-sustainable-solutions-to-real-world-problems/ https://www.sarao.ac.za/media-releases/2022-africa-data-scie... which are off shoots from the larger SKA project initiated here back in the 1980s.
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        It's largely part of the same rotten thing. You think rampant “systemic racism and white supremacy” and sexism has absolutely no relationship to the presence of nepotism or glass ceilings? Or that its presence in one part of academia has no bearing on whether or not its present in academic-adjacent industry, who could not be expected to have any idea about the problems in academia? Come on.
- doctorwho42 4y ago
  Work at MIT main, and had job offers at MITLL. MIT-LL is way more stringent on degrees no matter what your experience is. B.S is relegated to technician work for upwards of 90%+ of your time no matter how long you have been there. Masters is generally a step up from that, and in the engineering that could mean middle of the road in the hierarchy. But PhD is the only way to really move up beyond that except in the rare cases of the fabrication group. MIT main campus is slowly heading in the same direction over the past decade, at least in the science staff positions. There are three major titles, research specialist (B.S.), research engineer ( masters), and research scientist ( PhD). Unfortunately in the past 5 years, they changed the requirements of research engineer to require a PhD. And honestly, I have more recently been involved in the HR/hiring side of main campus, and though with the right department there is some wiggle room... There isn't that much you can do when the office of the VP of research says otherwise. So unfortunately to move up with Anything but a PhD, you need to shift into some type of admin or adjacent role. To exemplify this, I had a coworker who had worked in a research group as a research specialist for half a decade, coauthored like 15 papers while there, and had a BS in physics. And said he couldn't get a promotion no matter what he tried because VPR wouldn't let his boss do it without an advanced degree (PhD). So he left for a different department as some kind of lab manager of a large research group. Which to me is crazy, you have a dedicated and knowledgeable worker, who wants to stay and advanced the research and group... But because they didn't spend 6-8 years on a PhD, their only way to advance their career is to go into management of a lab - giving up on any research work...
  - neilv 4y ago
    That's sad. FWIW, I was a Research Scientist there, a bit over a decade ago, despite having only MS degrees, no PhD. I knew of a few Research Scientists there who didn't have PhDs, so I didn't think it that unusual at the time I was hired. At one point shortly after arriving, I did suddenly wonder whether some rule had been bent, or there was a hiccup in some process that was supposed to block that, but I still got an appointment renewal after a year. As the recipient of getting to work for a great PI, and of a title that sounded impressive to my parents, I can't complain about that. (I might've been lucky that time. I'm not a fan of degree/class/caste ceilings. For one one of many reasons... There's the tragic story of a dear friend, who was a lab tech at another research university, in a field that had a degree glass ceiling among the technician ranks. Her supervisor and lab director sounded very supportive, and said she was the best technician in the lab, but their hands were tied on promoting her to a higher technician rank. She couldn't stomach the doctorate-level degree debt load that the supervisor was encouraging (she was poor, already had debt, and no family safety net), though it would've leapfrogged her over the role she sought. So she tried earning affordable transferable credits, for the gatekeeping for the next rank for which she was already qualified, while working full-time and living in lousy conditions. It killed her at around 30. Her lab did a memorial service. I got invited, but I didn't go. Besides being devastated myself, I was sure the supervisor and director already felt awful, and I had nothing to say in a memorial service context to certain cliquish technicians who bullied her for being meticulous about science protocols, and perhaps for aspiring above her station.)
cushychicken 4y ago
LL are the best radar designers on earth, full stop. They do some neat cyber research, too. Don’t work there, but work very closely with them.
Symmetry 4y ago
One highlight of working at LL as a radar software contractor was getting to go to the regular lectures they had on various topics related to the lab's activities. But of course the big downside is not being able to talk about what all the lectures were on and having to avoid some of the topics they were on now.
- fryz 4y ago
  Yeah - and it wasn't even necessarily on the tech stuff either - the talks are definitely the things that have stuck with me the longest after working there (and it's been 10+ years!)

by fryz 4y ago

neilv 4y ago

The glass ceiling for non-PhDs sounds like a caste system, not the meritocracy that the broader MIT-ish community sometimes professes.

defrost 4y ago
I have no idea how this plays out in the US national lab system being discussed .. but a PhD is literally "my first independent solo original research project obsessed over and submitted to critical peer review". It's the apprenticeship for doing independant solo research and, in general, makes perfect sense that someone have demonstrated a capability for this work prior to being given the reins to resources on the scale of millions, tens of millions, etc. It's hardly a "glass ceiling" (ie. we profess equality but don't promote women or people of colour or not our religeon but never say why) when it's a stated requirement to, say, first pass an apprenticeship prior to becoming an certified electrician and hired to wire a nuclear weapon. It's an actual formal staging in a meritocracy, the only issue would be if those that might gain a PhD are denied the opportunity to do so ... (a somewhat tangential issue that might have more play in various places).
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  https://nypost.com/2023/01/17/astrophysicist-natalie-gosnell-accuses-field-of-being-riddled-with-white-supremacy/ https://nypost.com/2023/01/17/astrophysicist-natalie-gosnell... Not what this person says.
  - defrost 4y ago
    In that NYPost article Dr Natalie Gosnell isn't discussing the PhD requirement for advancement within the US National Labs .. so you may have to expand your point if you want to make one.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - defrost 4y ago
        I was specifically talking about a PhD requirement as a precursor step in a research career. > Academia is a shocking hive of nepotism and corruption wherever you are. Also isn't something discussed by Dr Natalie Gosnell who has her Dr. and a position. Her complaint (in the article you linked) is that " astrophysics .. is paralyzed by “systemic racism and white supremacy” ". There's no obvious mention of nepo babies in that link that you selected. My own preference is for astro tangential projects such as https://www.sarao.ac.za/media-releases/2022-africa-data-science-intensive-programme-projects-find-sustainable-solutions-to-real-world-problems/ https://www.sarao.ac.za/media-releases/2022-africa-data-scie... which are off shoots from the larger SKA project initiated here back in the 1980s.
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        It's largely part of the same rotten thing. You think rampant “systemic racism and white supremacy” and sexism has absolutely no relationship to the presence of nepotism or glass ceilings? Or that its presence in one part of academia has no bearing on whether or not its present in academic-adjacent industry, who could not be expected to have any idea about the problems in academia? Come on.
doctorwho42 4y ago
Work at MIT main, and had job offers at MITLL. MIT-LL is way more stringent on degrees no matter what your experience is. B.S is relegated to technician work for upwards of 90%+ of your time no matter how long you have been there. Masters is generally a step up from that, and in the engineering that could mean middle of the road in the hierarchy. But PhD is the only way to really move up beyond that except in the rare cases of the fabrication group. MIT main campus is slowly heading in the same direction over the past decade, at least in the science staff positions. There are three major titles, research specialist (B.S.), research engineer ( masters), and research scientist ( PhD). Unfortunately in the past 5 years, they changed the requirements of research engineer to require a PhD. And honestly, I have more recently been involved in the HR/hiring side of main campus, and though with the right department there is some wiggle room... There isn't that much you can do when the office of the VP of research says otherwise. So unfortunately to move up with Anything but a PhD, you need to shift into some type of admin or adjacent role. To exemplify this, I had a coworker who had worked in a research group as a research specialist for half a decade, coauthored like 15 papers while there, and had a BS in physics. And said he couldn't get a promotion no matter what he tried because VPR wouldn't let his boss do it without an advanced degree (PhD). So he left for a different department as some kind of lab manager of a large research group. Which to me is crazy, you have a dedicated and knowledgeable worker, who wants to stay and advanced the research and group... But because they didn't spend 6-8 years on a PhD, their only way to advance their career is to go into management of a lab - giving up on any research work...
- neilv 4y ago
  That's sad. FWIW, I was a Research Scientist there, a bit over a decade ago, despite having only MS degrees, no PhD. I knew of a few Research Scientists there who didn't have PhDs, so I didn't think it that unusual at the time I was hired. At one point shortly after arriving, I did suddenly wonder whether some rule had been bent, or there was a hiccup in some process that was supposed to block that, but I still got an appointment renewal after a year. As the recipient of getting to work for a great PI, and of a title that sounded impressive to my parents, I can't complain about that. (I might've been lucky that time. I'm not a fan of degree/class/caste ceilings. For one one of many reasons... There's the tragic story of a dear friend, who was a lab tech at another research university, in a field that had a degree glass ceiling among the technician ranks. Her supervisor and lab director sounded very supportive, and said she was the best technician in the lab, but their hands were tied on promoting her to a higher technician rank. She couldn't stomach the doctorate-level degree debt load that the supervisor was encouraging (she was poor, already had debt, and no family safety net), though it would've leapfrogged her over the role she sought. So she tried earning affordable transferable credits, for the gatekeeping for the next rank for which she was already qualified, while working full-time and living in lousy conditions. It killed her at around 30. Her lab did a memorial service. I got invited, but I didn't go. Besides being devastated myself, I was sure the supervisor and director already felt awful, and I had nothing to say in a memorial service context to certain cliquish technicians who bullied her for being meticulous about science protocols, and perhaps for aspiring above her station.)

cushychicken 4y ago

LL are the best radar designers on earth, full stop. They do some neat cyber research, too. Don’t work there, but work very closely with them.

Symmetry 4y ago

One highlight of working at LL as a radar software contractor was getting to go to the regular lectures they had on various topics related to the lab's activities. But of course the big downside is not being able to talk about what all the lectures were on and having to avoid some of the topics they were on now.

fryz 4y ago
Yeah - and it wasn't even necessarily on the tech stuff either - the talks are definitely the things that have stuck with me the longest after working there (and it's been 10+ years!)