361–370 of 382 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like monks??
In academia. If you have religious fervor, that's another thing entirely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for replying. I think I would push back a bit on the idea that research generally only commences after a PhD. Maybe in academia, but in industry (engineering at least, I don't know on the CS side), an awful lot of research is done at masters or even bachelors levels. The people I know who've gone for a PhD later in life were already doing research and generally took the path because the credential opened profe…
If you didn’t need a PhD to do research then why do one at all? You can’t convince me people are taking four years out of their professional lives at their prime to get a simple promotion?
Let's face it, PhD is a social signal as much as it is a vocational toolset. And it also signals a specific value system, like putting a high value on educational credentials. So if the selection board for a lab director is made of similar directors who have PhDs, you've already got a self-selecting pool of people who value PhDs, regardless if they provide much value in practice. Cognitive bias is strong and it would be tough for someone who's put in the work for a PhD to admit it's of little value, even if it were the case. Occasionally, people will get promoted who do not have a "proper" PhD, and they are (rightly or wrongly) derided for it behind closed doors, even if it has no bearing on their research competence. As a side note of irony, in many cases that I've worked with, getting a PhD makes someone do less research, not more. Because of the status signaling, they get more administrative leadership duties, not unlike a dean at a university.
And the PhDs that I know, who do it for a "simple" promotion, don't leave their job. (simple in quotes, because in my experience, they are rather large promotions).They complete their PhD as part of their job, in addition to their normal duties. It sounds like you are stuck in an academic mindset, where there is only one way to skin the PhD cat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Complaining about flaws in a few papers is like saying “I found a piece of software with a bug” and then claiming software engineering is a broken field based on those examples. My point wasn't a complaint about a few papers, rather, important papers that presumably have had a lot of eyeballs go over them in addition to being peer reviewed. If those papers have serious flaws, then I think that does say something ab…
I think tarring the entire field of scientific research by saying "I claim I found serious flaws in a few unnamed papers" is pretty meaningless. Provide specifics!
The most effective thing I can do is encourage you to find problems in published papers yourself.
Another factor in my reluctance is that explaining each case would take a significant amount of time. (Brandolini's law, basically.) I can point you to places where I already explained problems I've found, for example: https://pubpeer.com/publications/95455FA4147A9CBD5EAA5185D21...
That paper has over 300 forward citations over about 25 years. It was published first in a conference, and later in the top specialized journal in my sub-field. I went through a large fraction of the forward citations and could not find anyone who noticed the major error I point out. And it's not difficult to spot if one does basic spot checks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you didn’t need a PhD to do research then why do one at all? You can’t convince me people are taking four years out of their professional lives at their prime to get a simple promotion?
Because of the signal it provides. Let's face it, PhD is a social signal as much as it is a vocational toolset. And it also signals a specific value system, like putting a high value on educational credentials. So if the selection board for a lab director is made of similar directors who have PhDs, you've already got a self-selecting pool of people who value PhDs, regardless if they provide much value in practice. Co…
Well you’re mistaken because I also did my PhD after working for a few years, and while employed for an industrial lab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because of the signal it provides. Let's face it, PhD is a social signal as much as it is a vocational toolset. And it also signals a specific value system, like putting a high value on educational credentials. So if the selection board for a lab director is made of similar directors who have PhDs, you've already got a self-selecting pool of people who value PhDs, regardless if they provide much value in practice. Co…
> It sounds like you are stuck in an academic mindset, where there is only one way to skin the PhD cat. Well you’re mistaken because I also did my PhD after working for a few years, and while employed for an industrial lab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It sounds like you are stuck in an academic mindset, where there is only one way to skin the PhD cat. Well you’re mistaken because I also did my PhD after working for a few years, and while employed for an industrial lab.
Why would you then assume people have to forsake their prime working years to pursue a PhD? Why propose that false dichotomy when you know firsthand that's not the case?
And I recommend things because of my experience not despite it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you then assume people have to forsake their prime working years to pursue a PhD? Why propose that false dichotomy when you know firsthand that's not the case?
I still did it very early in my career. If I’d left it another ten years I’d have wasted a lot of time, and wouldn’t have been able to get the career I have. And I recommend things because of my experience not despite it.
That may be where we're talking from two different angles. Much of this discussion seems predicated on the idea that you need a PhD to do research (i.e., it's vocational in nature). My claim is that you do not, but that it's possible people will pursue a PhD for other reasons (because it's more about signaling than many realize).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still did it very early in my career. If I’d left it another ten years I’d have wasted a lot of time, and wouldn’t have been able to get the career I have. And I recommend things because of my experience not despite it.
I'm assuming this recommendation comes because you were not doing research prior to your PhD and you wanted to? In other words, you think PhD is about building a skillset and not signaling? That may be where we're talking from two different angles. Much of this discussion seems predicated on the idea that you need a PhD to do research (i.e., it's vocational in nature). My claim is that you do not, but that it's possi…
Yes, some people are naturally talented enough to do research without training, or with training other than a PhD.
But if you aren't exceptional, then promoting this is not realistic and is setting people up for disappointment. Some people can learn to play an instrument without a teacher... most would be better served with some structure and guidance for an experienced tutor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming this recommendation comes because you were not doing research prior to your PhD and you wanted to? In other words, you think PhD is about building a skillset and not signaling? That may be where we're talking from two different angles. Much of this discussion seems predicated on the idea that you need a PhD to do research (i.e., it's vocational in nature). My claim is that you do not, but that it's possi…
> My claim is that you do not Yes, some people are naturally talented enough to do research without training, or with training other than a PhD. But if you aren't exceptional, then promoting this is not realistic and is setting people up for disappointment. Some people can learn to play an instrument without a teacher... most would be better served with some structure and guidance for an experienced tutor.
I think the idea that a PhD program is the only adequate training for research is flawed. Most of the researchers (PhD and otherwise) have a fairly methodical approach to the endeavor. If there's a method/process, it can be taught. The non-PhDs that I know doing research did not have some innate talent for research, but were taught by other more senior researchers.
IMO, most research is borne from the combination of a solid grasp of a problem that needs to be solved, taking the time to build deep understanding of the topic, and then following a methodical approach to testing a hypothesis. None of that takes exceptional talent or half a decade in a PhD program to learn. (I say this as somebody who's been through a PhD program that I enjoyed. It's not from any bitterness). The biggest hurdle for many seems to be funding and resources, rather than some exceptional talent. And to that end, I'd concede that a PhD credential can open up doors for resources, but I hold that as distinct from the skills required from research.
If you're talking about the exceptional, once-in-a-generation breakthroughs, sure, I can see why a PhD program with an exceptional advisor may be necessary. The the vast, vast majority of research is small and incremental.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NotOscarWilde, I'd appreciate if you removed info regarding other people. The article was supposed about me, my feelings and the process of handling a personal crisis. My intention was that people read this post in a self-contained way, without relation to any other people (whose names I didn't mention on purpose), and I feel like most people here did. Maybe I could have expected folks spending time googling this typ…
I doubt they can edit their comment at this point. If you really want it removed, reach out to hn@ycombinator.com for (accidental) doxxing.
I was careful not to include names or places, and all this information is easily searchable starting from the author's username on HN or the website name.
So while I maintain that I made my comment in good faith, I hereby acknowledge that it is okay if it gets deleted, should HN moderators be requested to do so.
Update: I will contact the HN moderators myself, as I feel it is the right thing to do here.