Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 150 posts

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#81

Post by goatlover »

mindcrime wrote: post #75
dekhn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that many PhDs you worked with are idiots says more about you, than it does about the PhDs. PhD process is only one path, but it has a number of useful attributes, such as being very close to the active state of the art research, feedback from experts in the field, handholding through the paper and grant process, and introduction to a large social network. Those are all very hard to do with home labs and bioha…

Saying that most PhDs you worked with are idiots The person you are replying to did not say that.

But they did say "many of them are idiots", which is similar and rather arrogant. I don't trust people who claim their colleagues and classmates are idiots. Dunning-Kruger effect and hubris being what they are.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#82

Post by esel2k »

Odenwaelder wrote: post #23
codingdave wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are going to need a PhD if you want to truly understand all of the background of the field Is that the need, though? Few SaaS CEOs truly understand all the background of computer science. They do understand the problem space, but they leave it to the experts in the organization to get into the details of applying computer science to the problem. Is biology different, where the level of expertise needs to be at…

In biology, the problem space is extremely vast and very hard to understand. I have a PhD in biology and find computer science relatively logical and simple. You can just look things up. Looking things up for a specific topic is not even easy in biology.

Funny how you find comp science is simple and logic. Of course on a if else method level yes. But how to have a running system, dependencies, fail safe operations all coupled with tousand / millions lines of code is easily more complicated than a simply thesis about a mode of action of a protein.

I think we need to stop this useless debate as clearly one side has often no clue about the other. This behavior has led to massive failure in my career to successfully launch IVD devices or have a successfully bioinfo software for physicians - talking from experience here.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#83

Post by cryoshon »

unearthed wrote: post #67
cryoshon wrote: post #38

my background is in biotech and i've worked at a small handful of biotech startups in a scientific capacity. here's my advice: unless you have friends who can set you up with the right VCs and ensure that they will be willing to overlook your lack of experience and IP, don't bother. you're not going to get up to speed working in the lab on your own in any short amount of time. learning the theoretical stuff that you…

Why are Phds so cheap to hire if their skills are so valueable?

they're used to working at slavery wages (sub 30k) to get their phd, so even a low salary will feel like a big bump to them.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#84

Post by mindcrime »

derekja wrote: post #58

Where are you located? A lot of places now have community biology labs in makerspaces that are doing really fun things. Start here: https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Hackerspaces Not all of the places on that list will have biology labs, but some will! It's a good way to get some experience at the bench without going the degree route.

The hackerspaces.org link is good, but to add to that, here is a list that is specifically "biohacker" groups/spaces.

https://diybio.org/local/

For anybody in/near the Research Triangle Park area of NC, there is Tri-DIY-Bio, a pretty active DIY bio group. http://www.tridiybio.org/

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#85

Post by mindcrime »

goatlover wrote: post #81
mindcrime wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that most PhDs you worked with are idiots The person you are replying to did not say that.

But they did say "many of them are idiots", which is similar and rather arrogant. I don't trust people who claim their colleagues and classmates are idiots. Dunning-Kruger effect and hubris being what they are.

But they did say "many of them are idiots", which is similar

Similar, yes. But, at least to my mind, there's a pretty big jump from "many" to "most". But maybe that's just me. shrug

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#86

Post by dekhn »

mindcrime wrote: post #75
dekhn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that many PhDs you worked with are idiots says more about you, than it does about the PhDs. PhD process is only one path, but it has a number of useful attributes, such as being very close to the active state of the art research, feedback from experts in the field, handholding through the paper and grant process, and introduction to a large social network. Those are all very hard to do with home labs and bioha…

Saying that most PhDs you worked with are idiots The person you are replying to did not say that.

I think that's what they said, slightly paraphrased: "I've published papers in bio and worked with many PhDs. Many of them were idiots"

I have no interest in arguing about the interpretation of that sentence.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#87

Post by mindcrime »

dekhn wrote: post #86
mindcrime wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that most PhDs you worked with are idiots The person you are replying to did not say that.

I think that's what they said, slightly paraphrased: "I've published papers in bio and worked with many PhDs. Many of them were idiots" I have no interest in arguing about the interpretation of that sentence.

I have no interest in arguing about the interpretation of that sentence.

Then don't "interpret" anything. The person who wrote that sentence explicitly said "many" and not "most". Barring some evidence to the contrary, the sensible thing to do is take it literally, no interpretation necessary.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#88

Post by tikej »

hprotagonist wrote: post #53

Mostly, my advice as a biomedical researcher and modeler/software user is this, which is not skills based at all and is instead just a reminder that you're going to need a really fundamental shift in thinking. Get the notion that "biology is a computer that we can fundamentally and totally understand at the level that we understand Church-Turing" out of your head as soon as possible because it is incorrect. Biologica…

So much this. I think the most difficult thing about transition from hard sciences such as cs/physics/math to wet science such as biology/sociology/psychology is to get used to the fact that sometimes things don't work and behave as expected and it takes enormous amount of work to get it right.

Therefore you can't really go and design things form the first principles, since first principles are not really that well known. Of course you can try, and get some successes but that is rare. Add extremely complicated AND nonlinear dependences between the systems you are working with and you may get idea why we still don't have cure for most cancers yet.

Re: Ask HN: Getting started in biology with a software background

#89

Post by goatlover »

esel2k wrote: post #82
Odenwaelder wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In biology, the problem space is extremely vast and very hard to understand. I have a PhD in biology and find computer science relatively logical and simple. You can just look things up. Looking things up for a specific topic is not even easy in biology.

Funny how you find comp science is simple and logic. Of course on a if else method level yes. But how to have a running system, dependencies, fail safe operations all coupled with tousand / millions lines of code is easily more complicated than a simply thesis about a mode of action of a protein. I think we need to stop this useless debate as clearly one side has often no clue about the other. This behavior has led t…

The point is that a computer system can be entirely understood from the chips on up. Sure, it gets complex with millions of LOC. But we humans designed computers and wrote the code. Biology is not like that, and there is lack of a completed understanding form the proteins on up. So you get the complexity amplified on all fronts.
Post reply on HN