3 ms·

I think this is solid proof that the bedrock of academia is deeply motivated by money and still defaults to optimizing where it impacts its bottom line. If prof

I think this is solid proof that the bedrock of academia is deeply motivated by money and still defaults to optimizing where it impacts its bottom line. If professors can get more grants and more publications in less time with less spending, of course they are going to be doing that. This isn't just because of AI, but also because of how this system is designed in the first place.

mathisfun123 8mo ago
> I think this is solid proof that the bedrock of academia is deeply motivated by money and still defaults to optimizing where it impacts its bottom line. no shit - could've asked literally anyone that's finished their phd to save yourself the conjecturing/hypothesizing about this fact.
Certhas 8mo ago
This is stupid. Nobody motivated by money is in academia. Academics are motivated by curiosity, but also prestige, vanity and the wish to hire students and collaborators. And on top of human vanity working it's magic, the ideology that everything should be a market and competition is the final form of social organisation, has pervaded academia just as much as everything else. I agree that the system of publishing papers to gain prestige to gain resources to publish papers was already broken pre AI.
- jasperry 8mo ago
  You're right that being a scientist is unlikely to result in personal wealth and so that's not the primary drive for those who seek faculty or research positions. However, it's not just curiosity, prestige and vanity either, because a big factor for promotion and tenure is how much grant money you bring in. That money is what keeps the university's lights on and buys the lab equipment and pays the grad students, so it's still money as a primary driver in the background.
  - tombert 8mo ago
    My dad said he stopped being a professor because of that. He liked the research, and he even liked teaching, but he absolutely hated having to constantly try and find grant money. He said he ended up seeing everyone as "potential funders" and less like "people" because his job kind of depended on it, and it ended up burning him out. He lasted four years and went into engineering. I don't know that "motivation" is the right word for it, because I don't think professors like having to find grant money all the time. I think most people who get PhDs and try to go to academia do it for a genuine love for the subject, and they find the grant-searching to be a necessary evil part of the job; it's more "survival" than regular motivation, though I am admittedly splitting hairs here.
- noslenwerdna 8mo ago
  just replace "money" with "prestige" and I think the above comment works just fine
- dang 8mo ago
  > This is stupid. Can you please make your substantive points without swipes or calling names? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Your comment would be fine without that first bit.

mathisfun123 8mo ago

> I think this is solid proof that the bedrock of academia is deeply motivated by money and still defaults to optimizing where it impacts its bottom line. no shit - could've asked literally anyone that's finished their phd to save yourself the conjecturing/hypothesizing about this fact.

Certhas 8mo ago

This is stupid. Nobody motivated by money is in academia. Academics are motivated by curiosity, but also prestige, vanity and the wish to hire students and collaborators. And on top of human vanity working it's magic, the ideology that everything should be a market and competition is the final form of social organisation, has pervaded academia just as much as everything else. I agree that the system of publishing papers to gain prestige to gain resources to publish papers was already broken pre AI.

jasperry 8mo ago
You're right that being a scientist is unlikely to result in personal wealth and so that's not the primary drive for those who seek faculty or research positions. However, it's not just curiosity, prestige and vanity either, because a big factor for promotion and tenure is how much grant money you bring in. That money is what keeps the university's lights on and buys the lab equipment and pays the grad students, so it's still money as a primary driver in the background.
- tombert 8mo ago
  My dad said he stopped being a professor because of that. He liked the research, and he even liked teaching, but he absolutely hated having to constantly try and find grant money. He said he ended up seeing everyone as "potential funders" and less like "people" because his job kind of depended on it, and it ended up burning him out. He lasted four years and went into engineering. I don't know that "motivation" is the right word for it, because I don't think professors like having to find grant money all the time. I think most people who get PhDs and try to go to academia do it for a genuine love for the subject, and they find the grant-searching to be a necessary evil part of the job; it's more "survival" than regular motivation, though I am admittedly splitting hairs here.
noslenwerdna 8mo ago
just replace "money" with "prestige" and I think the above comment works just fine
dang 8mo ago
> This is stupid. Can you please make your substantive points without swipes or calling names? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Your comment would be fine without that first bit.