4 ms·

> but I spend the vast majority of my time working on things I'd probably be doing anyways But is it your project? Or is it your employers, and do they actuall

> but I spend the vast majority of my time working on things I'd probably be doing anyways But is it your project? Or is it your employers, and do they actually own it? If you’re fired, do you still get to work on that project? > what I'm working on is more interesting than what I'd almost certainly be doing if I had accepting one of my TT offers I’m curious, why wouldn’t you just decide to work on a project that was more interesting to you? > But isn't the goal to get off the bullshit ladder? The goal would be to do research. So my question is: who is doing such independent work? Who are these researchers and how are they disseminating their work? If there aren’t very many of these people, can we not conclude this mode of research is not a viable alternative to mainstream research? > What's wrong with this? Nothing is wrong with this. But the suggestion is that if someone wants to do research, they should amass wealth in industry and then do research. My point is that close to 0 people end up taking this route (at least from where I’m sitting, maybe there is a whole community of multimillionaire tech researchers I don’t know about). So I wonder how viable this path is? Do people just not consider it? Or do they lose interest in research over those two decades? Does life get in the way? I guess my overall point is that, most people who want to do research, just do it. Spending decades amassing resources just to get started seems backwards. > took Professor of Practice positions for their kids' college years. And so you’re saying they funded their own research with their wealth at that point? > you're spending some of the interest... I thought we were talking about funding a research agenda. From where I’m sitting, that costs millions. If you’re making millions in interest income, I think we’re talking about at different scales here. > IS an independently wealthy person... that's the whole point. My meager research agenda costs roughly $1 million per year (no special equipment or facilities). How long can a retired tech worker burn cash at that rate and still make it through retirement? Maybe the math works out but I don’t know.

thwayunion 4y ago
> But is it your project? Or is it your employers, and do they actually own it? If you’re fired, do you still get to work on that project? Varies. I optimize my employment situation for my personal ROI. But it turns out that making money off of even excellent scientific work is often very hard and involves insane amounts of slog. Like 1 hour of science to 10 hours of not-science. So usually employment and assignment has better risk-adjusted return. Not always, but usually. > So my question is: who is doing such independent work? Who are these researchers and how are they disseminating their work? If there aren’t very many of these people, can we not conclude this mode of research is not a viable alternative to mainstream research? I know there are several people like this in my field. They publish a paper every year or three, often in smaller venues. Or just throw things on arxiv. > So I wonder how viable this path is? Do people just not consider it? Or do they lose interest in research over those two decades? Does life get in the way? I think the middle and latter options happen quite a lot. I meet a lot of early retirees on Tuesday mid-morning lifts. I think a lot of people lose their passion for research in their 30s. This happens in the academy as well. Sometimes after amassing wealth you realize "hey, you know what I enjoy more than doing world-class mathematics? Chilling in my cabin with my family and skiing." > And so you’re saying they funded their own research with their wealth at that point? They took the PoP positions to pay for their kids' college without spending down savings. A sort of middle ground between working and retirement, and also a good way to build some collaboration opportunities. > I thought we were talking about funding a research agenda. From where I’m sitting, that costs millions. To be clear, the premise that started this thread is the "a guy and his laptop/occasional cloud spend" style of research that's prevalent in CS and Math. Yeah, if you need $1M/yr then you need an income stream or a different level of wealth. > I guess my overall point is that, most people who want to do research, just do it. Spending decades amassing resources just to get started seems backwards. I think this is reasonable advice for people who (1) need something more than a laptop and modest cloud compute, and (2) are absolutely sure that they would rather pursue that particular research as opposed to retiring early, and (3) are certain they they will be able to retain funding streams for the duration of their career.
- dkqmduems 4y ago
  How about those world class mathematicians working at subway?
  - thwayunion 4y ago
    What about them? There’s no way they would be able to get an academic position, which requires orders of magnitude more mental health fortitude than an industry position.
    - dkqmduems 4y ago
      Look up Zhang.
kelipso 4y ago
One big thing is it's basically impossible to start doing research when you are 40 or 50 after spending 10 to 20 years not doing research. You might imagine that you can, and I do know a few people who think they can, but no it's extremely difficult and basically not happening. Is there literally any highly cited journal paper with a first author who didn't do research for 20 years? Also, you have way more energy, drive, creativity when you are young and you just spent 10 to 20 years on other things instead of doing research during a time when you could have had the most impact.

thwayunion 4y ago

> But is it your project? Or is it your employers, and do they actually own it? If you’re fired, do you still get to work on that project? Varies. I optimize my employment situation for my personal ROI. But it turns out that making money off of even excellent scientific work is often very hard and involves insane amounts of slog. Like 1 hour of science to 10 hours of not-science. So usually employment and assignment has better risk-adjusted return. Not always, but usually. > So my question is: who is doing such independent work? Who are these researchers and how are they disseminating their work? If there aren’t very many of these people, can we not conclude this mode of research is not a viable alternative to mainstream research? I know there are several people like this in my field. They publish a paper every year or three, often in smaller venues. Or just throw things on arxiv. > So I wonder how viable this path is? Do people just not consider it? Or do they lose interest in research over those two decades? Does life get in the way? I think the middle and latter options happen quite a lot. I meet a lot of early retirees on Tuesday mid-morning lifts. I think a lot of people lose their passion for research in their 30s. This happens in the academy as well. Sometimes after amassing wealth you realize "hey, you know what I enjoy more than doing world-class mathematics? Chilling in my cabin with my family and skiing." > And so you’re saying they funded their own research with their wealth at that point? They took the PoP positions to pay for their kids' college without spending down savings. A sort of middle ground between working and retirement, and also a good way to build some collaboration opportunities. > I thought we were talking about funding a research agenda. From where I’m sitting, that costs millions. To be clear, the premise that started this thread is the "a guy and his laptop/occasional cloud spend" style of research that's prevalent in CS and Math. Yeah, if you need $1M/yr then you need an income stream or a different level of wealth. > I guess my overall point is that, most people who want to do research, just do it. Spending decades amassing resources just to get started seems backwards. I think this is reasonable advice for people who (1) need something more than a laptop and modest cloud compute, and (2) are absolutely sure that they would rather pursue that particular research as opposed to retiring early, and (3) are certain they they will be able to retain funding streams for the duration of their career.

dkqmduems 4y ago
How about those world class mathematicians working at subway?
- thwayunion 4y ago
  What about them? There’s no way they would be able to get an academic position, which requires orders of magnitude more mental health fortitude than an industry position.
  - dkqmduems 4y ago
    Look up Zhang.

kelipso 4y ago

One big thing is it's basically impossible to start doing research when you are 40 or 50 after spending 10 to 20 years not doing research. You might imagine that you can, and I do know a few people who think they can, but no it's extremely difficult and basically not happening. Is there literally any highly cited journal paper with a first author who didn't do research for 20 years? Also, you have way more energy, drive, creativity when you are young and you just spent 10 to 20 years on other things instead of doing research during a time when you could have had the most impact.