Thanks for the ptsd relapse.
PhD Simulator
51–60 of 285 posts
Re: PhD Simulator
#52I notice a lot of negativity and "do not recommend" regarding pursuing a PhD on HN recently. That raises the question: Why would you go for it?
Re: PhD Simulator
#53I notice a lot of negativity and "do not recommend" regarding pursuing a PhD on HN recently. That raises the question: Why would you go for it?
1. If you manage to get through it, you will be a world expert in a niche that can be valuable. $$$$$$$$
2. You will develop the invaluable skill of not giving up even when all the odds are against you
3. You will be able to swim by yourself, parsing enormous amount of literature, identifying what is useful and useless and solve problems that no one else before you has solved.
4. Access to academic positions that offer stability
5. Access to academic network that provide infinite talent
Re: PhD Simulator
#54This is great and exactly captures the PhD experience. Both in the simulator and in real life, I mostly survived until the end by slacking off frequently, and needed around 5 years. Some highlights: > INBOX: Based on the reviewers' comments, we regret to inform you that your manuscript has been REJECTED for publication. One of the reviewers pointed out that there is no comparison with a state-of-art method. > You cam…
One dynamic I experienced that also isn't in the simulation: if you focus too much on classwork early on in order to pass your RPE, it can actually be hard to find an advisor. Classwork is basically dead-end work and the more you focus on it the less you have to show for yourself when trying to convince an advisor to work with you. Your goal should be to optimize for doing just well enough to pass your classwork.
Also, random catalysmic events, like in year 4 your advisor accepts a job at a different university in another state.
Re: PhD Simulator
#55I notice a lot of negativity and "do not recommend" regarding pursuing a PhD on HN recently. That raises the question: Why would you go for it?
I wanted to go into academia to do research and teach, so I went for a Ph.D. and got it in 4 years in computer engineering without much burnout or issue. I was always cheerful and enjoyed my journey. I did have a great advisor and while I was at a top-100 university, it was outside the USA and maybe that makes a difference.
You should really only go into a Ph.D. because you really want to, which sounds tautological but basically you need to want to go into academia or get the kind of industry R&D job that requires one (several of my graduating colleagues). If you're on the fence about doing Ph.D. - don't. There's a very real opportunity cost.
Re: PhD Simulator
#56"The only winning move is not to play."
Re: PhD Simulator
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's been mostly like this for a long time, but it is slowly changing. Open data repositories and scientific software libraries/products are beginning to count more and more (at least many of us are pushing for this). It also depends on the target career past graduation. Papers matter a lot for tenure-track positions, and much less for science support (scientific software developers, data engineers, lab managers etc.…
In what fields is 3 papers expected? In my field, Psychology, 3 first-author papers sounds like a reasonable lower bound, but that seems like it would be a lot to expect out of Biologists or hard scientists.
Ah, good point. I'm in Earth sciences. 3 papers before PhD is reasonable here, just not a formal university requirement.
Re: PhD Simulator
#58This is great but it's missing one thing: having to apply for funding each year (time consuming!) with the statistical expectation of not receiving it. Then having to TA to help towards making-up the difference (it does not).
Then, spend egregious amounts of time each year filling out expense reports for conferences you attended. Also, take-up more part time work because it takes 4-6 months for the reports to get processed and you need to pay off your credit cards.
Re: PhD Simulator
#59Re: PhD Simulator
#60As a former PhD student who is now faculty, I have to say that the pace of the game is one of the most realistic aspects. Every small step forward takes about a month, it may or may not pan out, but it passes in the blink of an eye.
It's a game, so it can't model everything. But I thought the biggest missing thing was "leveling up." As you accomplish more, you should have a higher likelihood of future success, and your hope should increase as you gain confidence and experience.
That's how a PhD works -- those who can get early wins (or stick through a lot of bad bounces) can build on success will finish well.
To rip off Tolstoy, "Happy PhDs are all alike; each unhappy PhD is unhappy in its own way."