4 ms·

> now where's my reward I was promised?" These people deserve more without question, but at the end of the day if this is their reaction they didn't look forwa

> now where's my reward I was promised?" These people deserve more without question, but at the end of the day if this is their reaction they didn't look forward far enough. It's a slightly less bad decision than people who decide to try to become professional athletes. You're subjecting yourself to getting treated like absolute shit for a half a chance at a mediocre job. I do not understand why anyone would ever choose to be an acedemic, at least one at any institution that has this sort of crazy imbalances of applicants and positions, because whenever that happens you don't get in on skill, you almost always get in based on some form of nepotism or politics, and that culture slowly destroys all organizations it's involved with.

lapcat 4y ago
> It's a slightly less bad decision than people who decide to try to become professional athletes. Tell that to the professional athletes. > at least one at any institution that has this sort of crazy imbalances of applicants and positions Every institution has that imbalance. That's not particularly relevant, because grad students don't typically get jobs at their alma mater.
- filoleg 4y ago
  >> It's a slightly less bad decision than people who decide to try to become professional athletes. > Tell that to the professional athletes. I think the point they were trying to make is that you should talk not to professional athletes, but to those who tried to become one. Those who became professional athletes is just a tiny subset of those who tried. And within that, there is an even smaller subset of those who actually made it worth it for them (in terms of career earnings, getting out without debilitating lifelong injuries, etc.). In a similar vein, you shouldn't be talking to Brad Pitt as a way to gauge your decision to become an actor, you should be talking to someone a bit more representative of the pool of those who tried to become actors (aka those who failed to get there, which is the vast majority).
  - lapcat 4y ago
    It's not a question of advice. Of course take a wide variety of advice. The question is whether it's a "bad decision" to pursue a highly competitive field, despite knowing the odds are against you, if you think you might have the talent to make it. I'm not convinced that it's a bad decision. Risky? Yes. Bad? That's debatable. Did Brad Pitt make a bad decision? According to the logic that a big risk is never worth it, then he made a bad decision. But I don't agree with that. And I don't agree that failed actors necessarily made a bad decision either. As I stated in another comment, there is no safe, guaranteed path in life. It's risk all the way down. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35196444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35196444 Should nobody ever become an actor? Nobody an athlete? Nobody a philosopher? Or are you going to say, only those kids born into wealth? In other words, non-wealthy kids don't ever get to have any ambition?
    - filoleg 4y ago
      Thanks for elaborating, I actually fully agree with the points you've made here. I am so tired of hearing people telling others "the safe ways" of moving forward. If you actually know the risk and knowingly take it, I respect it a lot, regardless off how it pans out. And I believe that optimizing for entirely "risk-minimizing" choices is a path to mediocrity and feeling unsatisfied in the long-term (and, often enough, limiting your overall potential heavily), as well as missing out on tons of opportunities. Mind you, there is nothing wrong with mediocrity, but a lot of people who end up going down that path end up there unwillingly and, commonly, due to having an almost zero-tolerance risk aversion.
signaru 4y ago
> I do not understand why anyone would ever choose to be an acedemic,... When you're young and don't know enough it's easy to look up to the "smartest" people you know at the time, which are often your teachers and other university celebrities. And while at college, if you don't have any serious plans, masters and so forth seems like easy options going forward. Your university mentors will even make you believe it is a good choice. Been there myself. I regret it. Surrounded by academics while my friends and relatives are just "normal", I had a very one-sided worldview. On the bright side, I think more are quitting the academe recently, realizing it is not worth it.

lapcat 4y ago

> It's a slightly less bad decision than people who decide to try to become professional athletes. Tell that to the professional athletes. > at least one at any institution that has this sort of crazy imbalances of applicants and positions Every institution has that imbalance. That's not particularly relevant, because grad students don't typically get jobs at their alma mater.

filoleg 4y ago
>> It's a slightly less bad decision than people who decide to try to become professional athletes. > Tell that to the professional athletes. I think the point they were trying to make is that you should talk not to professional athletes, but to those who tried to become one. Those who became professional athletes is just a tiny subset of those who tried. And within that, there is an even smaller subset of those who actually made it worth it for them (in terms of career earnings, getting out without debilitating lifelong injuries, etc.). In a similar vein, you shouldn't be talking to Brad Pitt as a way to gauge your decision to become an actor, you should be talking to someone a bit more representative of the pool of those who tried to become actors (aka those who failed to get there, which is the vast majority).
- lapcat 4y ago
  It's not a question of advice. Of course take a wide variety of advice. The question is whether it's a "bad decision" to pursue a highly competitive field, despite knowing the odds are against you, if you think you might have the talent to make it. I'm not convinced that it's a bad decision. Risky? Yes. Bad? That's debatable. Did Brad Pitt make a bad decision? According to the logic that a big risk is never worth it, then he made a bad decision. But I don't agree with that. And I don't agree that failed actors necessarily made a bad decision either. As I stated in another comment, there is no safe, guaranteed path in life. It's risk all the way down. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35196444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35196444 Should nobody ever become an actor? Nobody an athlete? Nobody a philosopher? Or are you going to say, only those kids born into wealth? In other words, non-wealthy kids don't ever get to have any ambition?
  - filoleg 4y ago
    Thanks for elaborating, I actually fully agree with the points you've made here. I am so tired of hearing people telling others "the safe ways" of moving forward. If you actually know the risk and knowingly take it, I respect it a lot, regardless off how it pans out. And I believe that optimizing for entirely "risk-minimizing" choices is a path to mediocrity and feeling unsatisfied in the long-term (and, often enough, limiting your overall potential heavily), as well as missing out on tons of opportunities. Mind you, there is nothing wrong with mediocrity, but a lot of people who end up going down that path end up there unwillingly and, commonly, due to having an almost zero-tolerance risk aversion.

signaru 4y ago

> I do not understand why anyone would ever choose to be an acedemic,... When you're young and don't know enough it's easy to look up to the "smartest" people you know at the time, which are often your teachers and other university celebrities. And while at college, if you don't have any serious plans, masters and so forth seems like easy options going forward. Your university mentors will even make you believe it is a good choice. Been there myself. I regret it. Surrounded by academics while my friends and relatives are just "normal", I had a very one-sided worldview. On the bright side, I think more are quitting the academe recently, realizing it is not worth it.