How to leave academia (for science PhDs)

I left a PhD program a few years back (technically graduated, but I don't think of it that way). A year or so before I did, I remember very clearly being out to drinks with my professor and fellow students, and mentioning that I had no intention to continue a career in academia. In fact at the time I was thinking of translation (I've since drifted to web development, but languages and translation are still central to much of what I do).

The response (in Japanese, but I'll translate) was "what a waste" ("mottainai"). What a waste. All that potential I had, and now I was just going to waste it on "work", like everyone else. No doubt my supervisor, who said it with a genuinely disappointed look (echoed with a nod by a fellow student and friend sitting beside me, which only made it worse) meant it in a positive sense, but I never forgave him for it. It stuck with me, somewhere very deep inside me, first as something confusing and distressing, then as a kind of symbol, something emblematic of everything that is wrong with academia.

To anyone who is hesitating: if your only reason for staying in academia is the fear of what will happen if you leave, then it is time to leave.

Seriously? Learn web development? No one hires PhDs for web development skills. It is only useful if you want to be a pure software developer, not a quant or a data scientist. It might even be a negative when applying for some jobs.

> 100 passengers have queued up to board a plane, and are lined up in the order of the seats on the plane (n=1..100). However, the first person lost his ticket and selects a random seat. The remaining passengers will occupy their assigned seat if it is available, or a random seat otherwise. What is the probability that passenger 100 sits in seat 100?

It really worried me that I couldn't figure out how to work that out. I thought about what I'd do in an interview if I was asked that, and I figured (if I had my laptop) I'd write some code. So I gave myself 5 minutes by the clock, and wrote a little python program that simulated the situation and counted the results. I ran 5 million iterations, which with pypy took 59 seconds. The number I got out was a 97.335% chance of person 100 being in seat 100.

I have 3 questions:

1. Is that the right answer?

2. How are you supposed to work it out?

3. Would working it out the proper way take less than 6 minutes?

Edit: It seemed like too high a number, which is part of why I asked. I looked through my code and found a dumb error - I forgot to remove the seat from the 'available' list if the person finds their assigned seat. That's what happens when you write code on a 5 minute deadline. Now I'm consistently getting 49.9%, which seems more reasonable.

tele = far

machos = battle

Perhaps it means that he was far away from the battle or it means that he battles from afar? The latter would seem a better fit for Odysseus himself.

His name is usually taken to be a nod to his father's skill with a bow. You're right about the 'far' part, but the second part I think is different (the Ancient Greek word for man is anēr, andros - the root being andr):

tele means "far away" or "from afar" (think 'television' it sees things from afar).

The mach root comes from a word meaning "fight".

So "Telemachos" is a "far-fighter", i.e. a bowman. Odysseus is primarily famous as an archer (as opposed to Achilles who is primarily famous for fighting with a spear).

I think that etymology is pretty well accepted. It certainly was when I was a student. I'm not sure that there's a completely accepted explanation for how the name fits into his place in the epic. Here's my take: Telemachus must prove that he can grow up into as good a man as his father. He does that throughout the poem, as he goes from being a very immature teenager to eventually fighting alongside his father at the end of the poem. Before the trial of the bow (when all the suitors attempt to string Odysseus's bow and win Penelope), Telemachus tries to string his father's bow himself. Here's a translation of the scene I have in mind by Samuel Butler[1]. The 'he' refers to Telemachus:

> As he spoke he sprang from his seat, threw his crimson cloak from him, and took his sword from his shoulder. First he set the axes in a row, in a long groove which he had dug for them, and had made straight by line. Then he stamped the earth tight round them, and everyone was surprised when they saw him set up so orderly, though he had never seen anything of the kind before. This done, he went on to the pavement to make trial of the bow; thrice did he tug at it, trying with all his might to draw the string, and thrice he had to leave off, though he had hoped to string the bow and shoot through the iron. He was trying for the fourth time, and would have strung it had not Ulysses made a sign to check him in spite of all his eagerness. So he said:

> "Alas! I shall either be always feeble and of no prowess, or I am too young, and have not yet reached my full strength so as to be able to hold my own if any one attacks me. You others, therefore, who are stronger than I, make trial of the bow and get this contest settled."

In that scene, I've always thought that Telemachus proves he is capable of becoming his father (he might have strung the bow), but he is willing - as a good son should - to yield to his father while he is still alive. At the same time, he also proves he is a good liar - like his father - since the little speech he gives at the end helps to encourage the suitors and think he is nobody to fear. When the fighting begins, however, he proves otherwise and he helps his father kill the suitors.

[1]: http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/odyssey.21.xxi.html