4 ms·

In his introduction you can replace the word "Academia" with "the majority of programming jobs" and it would still be true. If you're a merely average programm

In his introduction you can replace the word "Academia" with "the majority of programming jobs" and it would still be true. If you're a merely average programmer, you're going to get stuck in a crappy corporate cube farm. You should either have the passion or genius to dive into startups and/or be hired by cutting edge companies, or you should not think that a CS degree is some kind of ticket to paradise.

asciilifeform 17y ago
> You should either have the passion or genius to dive into startups For that, you also need some degree of extraversion, and a willingness to put up with mountains of bullshit and to work on problems of zero long-term consequence and of scarcely any deep intellectual interest. > be hired by cutting edge companies And if you simply want to work on your own creative ideas, instead of being a servant (whether to established companies or to fickle startup customers), academia is the only remaining ticket. And when it spits you out, you're screwed. Industrial research (say, at Google) mostly hires those with a Ph.D. Thus the gatekeeper is the same.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  > And if you simply want to work on your own creative ideas I think that it's more a question of redefining "your own creative ideas" to have a narrower scope. There're plenty of opportunities for creativity even in large organizations, they just have to fit into the overall framework of the organization's goals. If you look at truly world-changing, creative "big ideas", they often grew out of very limited, narrowly-scoped ideas that someone started exploring. Microsoft came from a BASIC interpreter for the Altair. Google Search came from the idea of downloading the web and just keeping the links - they weren't even thinking of a search engine at that point. GMail came from sticking PB's email into the groups indexing engine. Linux came from printing out ABABA on the terminal. Then they attracted lots of people interested in ironing out the details, and that's what made them world-changing products. I'd wager that about 99% of the people working on their own creative ideas in big research labs or tenured professorships will never have anything come of those ideas. That's the nature of research: almost all new ideas are crap. But in the process, they explore lots of little ideas in related spaces, and some of those may prove useful.
  - asciilifeform 17y ago
    > If you look at truly world-changing, creative "big ideas" ... Microsoft ... Google Search ... GMail ... Linux I don't consider any of these things "big ideas." Major enterprises, yes, but not ideas. Do you consider the Egyptian Pyramids an "idea"? With the exception of Google's search algorithm (a work originally intended as mathematical, I might add) there is not a single whiff of originality in any of them. If you want to understand what I mean by ideas, think of, say, "Green's Theorem." I do not yearn to work on "world-changing products." I am simply looking for a path to actual intellectual freedom. I understand that my chances are cosmically slim, but it bothers me that most people are entirely unwilling to even acknowledge that the problem exists. It is almost like some psychological defense mechanism is at work. Nobody seems willing to admit that they are a servant - and a Porsche-driving and McMansion-occupying servant is still a servant, in that his time is not his own to dispose of and his livelihood is at the mercy of others.
    - nostrademons 17y ago
      It absolutely is a psychological defense mechanism at work. Most people want to be happy, so they choose to think about what they have and not dwell on what they don't have. Anyway, I don't really consider it a problem, because the ability to work on ideas of your own choosing already exists. Simply spend far less money than you make, and bank the rest as time. So if you make $60K/year and live on $20k/year, then for each year you work you get 2 years to do what you want. I did this and used the excess time to start my own company, which failed miserably but was still an excellent experience, one that I'd recommend anyone take. (Plus, it led to getting a job with enough of a raise that I could still save 75-80% of my take-home pay, yet do so without having to live with my parents.) A few of my friends from college have done so as well - that physics Ph.D baker managed to save roughly 40% of his income on a grad school stipend, which I think is pretty impressive. Best of all, you're not a servant to anyone - you're trading your time for time to pursue your own interests, and nobody's forcing you to make the trade if you find it objectionable. You can't get something for nothing, though.
      - asciilifeform 17y ago

asciilifeform 17y ago

> You should either have the passion or genius to dive into startups For that, you also need some degree of extraversion, and a willingness to put up with mountains of bullshit and to work on problems of zero long-term consequence and of scarcely any deep intellectual interest. > be hired by cutting edge companies And if you simply want to work on your own creative ideas, instead of being a servant (whether to established companies or to fickle startup customers), academia is the only remaining ticket. And when it spits you out, you're screwed. Industrial research (say, at Google) mostly hires those with a Ph.D. Thus the gatekeeper is the same.

nostrademons 17y ago
> And if you simply want to work on your own creative ideas I think that it's more a question of redefining "your own creative ideas" to have a narrower scope. There're plenty of opportunities for creativity even in large organizations, they just have to fit into the overall framework of the organization's goals. If you look at truly world-changing, creative "big ideas", they often grew out of very limited, narrowly-scoped ideas that someone started exploring. Microsoft came from a BASIC interpreter for the Altair. Google Search came from the idea of downloading the web and just keeping the links - they weren't even thinking of a search engine at that point. GMail came from sticking PB's email into the groups indexing engine. Linux came from printing out ABABA on the terminal. Then they attracted lots of people interested in ironing out the details, and that's what made them world-changing products. I'd wager that about 99% of the people working on their own creative ideas in big research labs or tenured professorships will never have anything come of those ideas. That's the nature of research: almost all new ideas are crap. But in the process, they explore lots of little ideas in related spaces, and some of those may prove useful.
- asciilifeform 17y ago
  > If you look at truly world-changing, creative "big ideas" ... Microsoft ... Google Search ... GMail ... Linux I don't consider any of these things "big ideas." Major enterprises, yes, but not ideas. Do you consider the Egyptian Pyramids an "idea"? With the exception of Google's search algorithm (a work originally intended as mathematical, I might add) there is not a single whiff of originality in any of them. If you want to understand what I mean by ideas, think of, say, "Green's Theorem." I do not yearn to work on "world-changing products." I am simply looking for a path to actual intellectual freedom. I understand that my chances are cosmically slim, but it bothers me that most people are entirely unwilling to even acknowledge that the problem exists. It is almost like some psychological defense mechanism is at work. Nobody seems willing to admit that they are a servant - and a Porsche-driving and McMansion-occupying servant is still a servant, in that his time is not his own to dispose of and his livelihood is at the mercy of others.
  - nostrademons 17y ago
    It absolutely is a psychological defense mechanism at work. Most people want to be happy, so they choose to think about what they have and not dwell on what they don't have. Anyway, I don't really consider it a problem, because the ability to work on ideas of your own choosing already exists. Simply spend far less money than you make, and bank the rest as time. So if you make $60K/year and live on $20k/year, then for each year you work you get 2 years to do what you want. I did this and used the excess time to start my own company, which failed miserably but was still an excellent experience, one that I'd recommend anyone take. (Plus, it led to getting a job with enough of a raise that I could still save 75-80% of my take-home pay, yet do so without having to live with my parents.) A few of my friends from college have done so as well - that physics Ph.D baker managed to save roughly 40% of his income on a grad school stipend, which I think is pretty impressive. Best of all, you're not a servant to anyone - you're trading your time for time to pursue your own interests, and nobody's forcing you to make the trade if you find it objectionable. You can't get something for nothing, though.
    - asciilifeform 17y ago