4 ms·

I could not disagree more with the author - in fact at the moment I feel sorry for her. TLDR: PhD is not for whimps Yes it has the potential to break you, yes

by guylhem 14y ago

I could not disagree more with the author - in fact at the moment I feel sorry for her. TLDR: PhD is not for whimps Yes it has the potential to break you, yes you will have very or little feedback loop and almost no money, and yes more people look forward being in academia for the freedom to pursue whatever research they fancy. But this whole interpretation is very very wrong. A PhD is a life changing experience - you learn how to learn and discover new knowledge - a process that can be extended to other disciplines and topics (it's not unusual to find someone with a PhD in something doing research in something very different). It's the single best investment in yourself you can make - if you do value your capacity to work and create value, not just being paid to do stuff other people tell you to do, or what everybody has done in a given way for ages, and so you keep it doing that way for tradition/lack of creativity/no reason whatsoever. Also, the biggest difference between the work you do during your PhD and the other work is that you work effectively without any precise objective. You learn to find inward motivation - which is the best replacement there is to outward reward. The work you do is its own reward. With that, and the kind of commitment you showed in the research-work you did alone for years, you can take any challenge you want. Certainly, you work will be dissected by the best experts in the domain, and they will criticize it in any way they can - basically, you can't cheat. You have to actually do something outstanding, for which you will be judged. It seems to me that's what most people on HN love and value : being judged on the merit of your work. At least that's why I love and value. The only problem with all this is IMHO that many (most?) who do a PhD want to work in academia afterwards, to have the freedom to work on the topics they enjoy. I had the same failings - guilty as charged. I wanted to do something great and then to keep improving it in ways I saw fit. But I changed my ways (and got out of a tenure track in late 2012 - it's not for me) I believe this is wrong, because anyone who wants to do that believes that its own interests are for some reason better than what the market values. It's good and all, do whatever you fancy, but not on my dime - not on public money. Get a real job. I learnt a lot during my PhD - but more importantly I bootstrapped unknown capabilities to create knowledge - something that's bringing value in many things I do. EDIT: for anyone interested, my last post on the topic and how my PhD in CS is currently coming into the real world 5 years later : http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4871888 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4871888

ricw 14y ago
Sums it up beautifully! Though one should not underestimate the downfalls most encounter on the way, or the very real possibility of failure. I have never encountered higher highs and lower lows than during my phd. Though it has made me a better person. You learn how to think (something no undergrad could ever do so rigorously). You learn how to motivate yourself. Invaluable lessons..
tripzilch 14y ago
> I believe this is wrong, because anyone who wants to do that believes that its own interests are for some reason better than what the market values. It's good and all, do whatever you fancy, but not on my dime - not on public money. Get a real job. If that's your chosen frame of reference, then that's not your dime. Or the public's dime. At that point it's the market's dime. And the market doesn't particularly care if you believe it's wrong or not, or whether its goals are in fact better than this particular individual's interests.
- guylhem 14y ago
  True, the market doesn't care. However, I do. I just believe any given individual is less likely to be right that the market, as an emanation of the will of many many people (at least on a statistical basis) Traditionally, academia wants to work on the problems it deems worth its time. I don't like that - it's working on a fancy, on the public dime. My dime. Working on the market dime on something the market fancies is totally different. Sure, sometimes it may not be the most ambitious for the long term worth of the human race (so many social networks and ads placements out there), and sometimes the plans of specific individuals are better. But if such individuals can be rewarded by the market for their previous efforts, they can then use their own money to work on their projects and ideas. They will even be rewarded again if they did something the market needed but didn't know it wanted. Basically, I see that as doing real work (not in academia), and if this is successful, using the surplus you made to work on your fancies - because then, the kind of ideas you have and the kind of work you do have been validated by the market. In any case, you are not spending the public money, and you are redeemable (you can be fired or run out of your own money) which discourages waste.

by guylhem 14y ago

ricw 14y ago

Sums it up beautifully! Though one should not underestimate the downfalls most encounter on the way, or the very real possibility of failure. I have never encountered higher highs and lower lows than during my phd. Though it has made me a better person. You learn how to think (something no undergrad could ever do so rigorously). You learn how to motivate yourself. Invaluable lessons..

tripzilch 14y ago

> I believe this is wrong, because anyone who wants to do that believes that its own interests are for some reason better than what the market values. It's good and all, do whatever you fancy, but not on my dime - not on public money. Get a real job. If that's your chosen frame of reference, then that's not your dime. Or the public's dime. At that point it's the market's dime. And the market doesn't particularly care if you believe it's wrong or not, or whether its goals are in fact better than this particular individual's interests.

guylhem 14y ago
True, the market doesn't care. However, I do. I just believe any given individual is less likely to be right that the market, as an emanation of the will of many many people (at least on a statistical basis) Traditionally, academia wants to work on the problems it deems worth its time. I don't like that - it's working on a fancy, on the public dime. My dime. Working on the market dime on something the market fancies is totally different. Sure, sometimes it may not be the most ambitious for the long term worth of the human race (so many social networks and ads placements out there), and sometimes the plans of specific individuals are better. But if such individuals can be rewarded by the market for their previous efforts, they can then use their own money to work on their projects and ideas. They will even be rewarded again if they did something the market needed but didn't know it wanted. Basically, I see that as doing real work (not in academia), and if this is successful, using the surplus you made to work on your fancies - because then, the kind of ideas you have and the kind of work you do have been validated by the market. In any case, you are not spending the public money, and you are redeemable (you can be fired or run out of your own money) which discourages waste.