3 ms·

On the other hand appending some piece of bullshit to your work so you can continue to get funded to do interesting research doesn't seem like the end of the wo

On the other hand appending some piece of bullshit to your work so you can continue to get funded to do interesting research doesn't seem like the end of the world. There's a lot worse that research scientists have to put up with.

sdwr 4y ago
That is how you get all the smart, lazy, and/or integrity-laden people to leave.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ravi-delia 4y ago
  Honestly, anyone who can't do the three sentence real world applications routine is either ambivalent enough about a life doing research that it wouldn't make sense to reorganize around retaining them or is so bad at politics (not even complicated politics! more than one friend at once politics!) that realistically the many many other social demands will have driven them away regardless. Smart has nothing to do with it.
  - MichaelZuo 4y ago
    > three sentence real world applications routine Sounds easy enough if they believe the applications are vaguely plausible. What if there are no vaguely plausible applications acceptable by reviewers?
    - ravi-delia 4y ago
      That's the key to the whole song and dance- the reviewers also know its bullshit. The actual hurdle is getting grant funding, which takes a more talented bullshitter. But of course you only need one sorry soul to write the application, and its not so difficult that, say, fewer than 1 in 5 can manage it.
- speedgoose 4y ago
  Where do they go? It’s not like the grass is greener in the industry, quite the opposite. I’m asking for a friend.
  - sdwr 4y ago
    Home to cry, mostly!
batmaniam 4y ago
Wonder if this study was also funded by the champagne industry. Wouldn't be surprised it was.
- kergonath 4y ago
  Half the authors are basically civil servants, their salary is paid by the French state. The other half are Americans. Whilst I am not sure what their motivation was, it seems unlikely that big champagne would funnel money to Brown University, of all places (they do it more publicly elsewhere). The main resource used in this study is CPU time, they give a grant number and the institution. So again, no private funding. A lot of people are keen to work on something like that on their own. I know someone who worked on the thermodynamics of chocolate mixtures for no precise reason whatsoever, and without external funding. These things are typically short one-offs. There are labs that have larger programs on carbonated liquids, including a well-known (in the field) lab in Reims. Those get some funding from industry in the usual form of money for post-docs or PhDs, funding for experiments, and the occasional in-kind contribution of samples. Nothing out of the ordinary.
OJFord 4y ago
It's not as bad as IC (integrated circuit) datasheets even really is it? i.e. where some bog standard voltage regulator or whatever will have a list of bizarrely specific niche 'applications' it's suitable for. (Not that it isn't, just, yes? Of course? Why would IoT-connected humanoid robot vacuum cleaners categorically require a specialist voltage regulator?)

sdwr 4y ago

That is how you get all the smart, lazy, and/or integrity-laden people to leave.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ravi-delia 4y ago
Honestly, anyone who can't do the three sentence real world applications routine is either ambivalent enough about a life doing research that it wouldn't make sense to reorganize around retaining them or is so bad at politics (not even complicated politics! more than one friend at once politics!) that realistically the many many other social demands will have driven them away regardless. Smart has nothing to do with it.
- MichaelZuo 4y ago
  > three sentence real world applications routine Sounds easy enough if they believe the applications are vaguely plausible. What if there are no vaguely plausible applications acceptable by reviewers?
  - ravi-delia 4y ago
    That's the key to the whole song and dance- the reviewers also know its bullshit. The actual hurdle is getting grant funding, which takes a more talented bullshitter. But of course you only need one sorry soul to write the application, and its not so difficult that, say, fewer than 1 in 5 can manage it.
speedgoose 4y ago
Where do they go? It’s not like the grass is greener in the industry, quite the opposite. I’m asking for a friend.
- sdwr 4y ago
  Home to cry, mostly!

batmaniam 4y ago

Wonder if this study was also funded by the champagne industry. Wouldn't be surprised it was.

kergonath 4y ago
Half the authors are basically civil servants, their salary is paid by the French state. The other half are Americans. Whilst I am not sure what their motivation was, it seems unlikely that big champagne would funnel money to Brown University, of all places (they do it more publicly elsewhere). The main resource used in this study is CPU time, they give a grant number and the institution. So again, no private funding. A lot of people are keen to work on something like that on their own. I know someone who worked on the thermodynamics of chocolate mixtures for no precise reason whatsoever, and without external funding. These things are typically short one-offs. There are labs that have larger programs on carbonated liquids, including a well-known (in the field) lab in Reims. Those get some funding from industry in the usual form of money for post-docs or PhDs, funding for experiments, and the occasional in-kind contribution of samples. Nothing out of the ordinary.

OJFord 4y ago

It's not as bad as IC (integrated circuit) datasheets even really is it? i.e. where some bog standard voltage regulator or whatever will have a list of bizarrely specific niche 'applications' it's suitable for. (Not that it isn't, just, yes? Of course? Why would IoT-connected humanoid robot vacuum cleaners categorically require a specialist voltage regulator?)