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

An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

crypto.junod.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 170 posts

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#161

Post by reillyse »

dnautics wrote: post #103
reillyse wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with the taxpayer funds aspect. Why can we not agree that employing people to perform research is a good thing? There are lots of things that are taken as good investments by governments based on the fact that it will be useful in future years. Take for example teaching people to read and write, preventative healthcare, disaster planning, Sex education (it's a long list when you think about it). My poin…

I'm not sure "it being a good thing" is sufficient rationale for government to pay for any given thing. For starters, you'll have arguments about what's good and what's not. Why do you decide to fund telescopes pointing at distant galaxies, versus anthropological expeditions to the Andaman islands? Or do we fund it all? If it's so obviously good , then why aren't people paying out of their own pockets to help out? I'…

In most democracies we elect politicians to decide if things are good and worth funding.

Please don't anticipate my answers :) at present people are paying out of their own pockets for 3rd and 4th level education. So this is happening.

Taxes are not yours. They belong to the state. There is a fallacy that exists that you own your taxes and "pay them" to the state. This is not the reality. The reality is that the state has always owned the taxes and by virtue of the system they have created (which the taxes are used to fund) enable you to earn a living. You owe taxes because you have used the resources of the state. Be it the land, the security forces or the markets or transport networks.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#162

Post by miguelrochefort »

PeterisP wrote: post #144
rthomas6 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not claiming you're wrong, but why isn't it possible for the student to simply no longer place any value in getting a PhD? That is what they claim, and intelligent people often make decisions on principle that make little practical sense.

If you want to do research, then you either need funding (for which you need to work with the system being criticised, get the PhD and get a grad student workforce..) or you need to be independently wealthy from some other source so you can afford to.

Aren't there more alternatives? I'm in that particular situation, and I don't have formal education, nor money.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#163

Post by kennethcwilbur »

kazagistar wrote: post #131
takluyver wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting, because I've also seen the opposite problem in high impact journals, as in the Arsenic-based-life paper published in Science last year. The journal was keen to get a big dramatic story, and must have let it in with fairly minor peer review. Then it got roundly criticised after publication. I hate the way we have to 'sell' research to compete for funding and prestigious publications. But my impress…

I would say that publishing is a key point of research, but merely in the sense of "finding something worth conveying, and then conveying it to those who can build on it and use it". How many people cite you is not the best metric of success, but obviously you would want as many people to read your paper, and incorporate it in their own work; that is a very democratic measure of research value. In many cases, the pap…

I'm an academic who is 13 years into his career. I see my job as consisting of three phases: 1) find important, unsolved problems. 2) find convincing answers to these problems. 3) communicate the answers to people who can use them. I usually get to organize my day around these principles. I feel very satisfied with my career.

I'm also in a field that has low financial barriers to doing research. The lab model that is predominant in the natural sciences is very very different.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#164

Post by aaren »

lutusp wrote: post #142
aaren wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it in 5 minutes with spreeder: http://www.spreeder.com/app.php

I used Spreeder to read "War and Peace." It's about Russia.

I see your point :) but for short pieces like this I find I can store most of it in memory. I did jump into the full text a few times to refer back to things.

I probably couldn't tell you much about the article now, but I felt I got it at the time.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#165

Post by aaren »

dnautics wrote: post #160
aaren wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of us. The purpose of government is to marshal these selfish urges such that we benefit as a whole. Whether or not that happens is a political problem. That the political system can be captured by politically expedient interests is a political problem. Of course gradstudent should throw a hissyfit, if it is in their interest - would you expect anything less?

"The purpose of government is to marshal these selfish urges such that we benefit as a whole." I think a lot of people think that's what government should do, but you should really think hard about why that's a bad idea. Who is "we"? Who gets to really decide what is "benefit"? Who gets to decide what is "selfish"? And how can I be that person so that I can screw over gradstudent, and bring about benefits, which, oh…

> Who is "we"?

society

> Who gets to really decide what is "benefit"?

society

> Who gets to decide what is "selfish"?

individuals

> And how can I be that person ?

society is not one person.

> Some animals are just.... More equal than others.

Which is why the pigs need constant replacement, power must be diffusely held and the executive must be separate from the judiciary.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#166

Post by lutusp »

aaren wrote: post #164
lutusp wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used Spreeder to read "War and Peace." It's about Russia.

I see your point :) but for short pieces like this I find I can store most of it in memory. I did jump into the full text a few times to refer back to things. I probably couldn't tell you much about the article now, but I felt I got it at the time.

There are lots of theories about how we absorb printed information, but few of them are backed up by reliable science. Hopefully this will change in the future. But speed-reading schemes have a particularly spotty record in the cause-effect and repeatable evidence department.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#167

Post by andreasvc »

irollboozers wrote: post #101
andreasvc wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inefficient as compared to what?

Private funding, industrial innovation, etc. Subsidized infrastructure does not practically promote risky endeavors. It's created the side effects mentioned in the original article.

It may be more inefficient, but it funds basic research without a short-term payoff, or even a suggestion of long-term payoff.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#168

Post by aaren »

lutusp wrote: post #142
aaren wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it in 5 minutes with spreeder: http://www.spreeder.com/app.php

I used Spreeder to read "War and Peace." It's about Russia.

I'm interested - did you actually do this or was it a rhetorical statement?

@587,287 words and 400wpm, War and Peace would take just over 24 hours to read.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#169

Post by LordHumungous »

jurassic wrote: post #89
LordHumungous wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Science is not a business.

Running a research group is a lot like running a small business from the professor's point of view. You have employees (grad students, lab managers) and equipment/supply/rent(overhead) costs that you use to produce a product (research, in the form of papers). You produce these products on a kind of account basis (not a per-paper basis), but if you aren't producing enough when it's time to re-up with your funding agen…

Agreed, but having worked in both research labs and industry, they are very different animals despite the similarities.

Re: An Aspiring Scientist’s Frustration with Modern-Day Academia

#170

Post by nilkn »

marknutter wrote: post #154
nilkn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may just be an artifact of the expanding population. It wasn't too long ago that many young people also harbored an idealism about working for big companies: go to college, get a nearly guaranteed job at a corporation, work there for 25-30 years, retire with a pension. But we all know that each of these steps is less guaranteed today than it was for the previous generation, sometimes significantly so. It's the sam…

I don't think $50k back in 1960 bought you as much as $400k buys you today. Keep in mind how cheap many products and services have gotten due to automation, globalization, and technological advancements. Comparing cost of living in 1960 to cost of living in 2013 as if it's comparing apples to apples is a mistake.

Well, have you watched Mad Men? That's approximately what $50k in 1960 got you. Most people would probably describe Donald Draper as wealthy in the show. He started at $45k in season one if I remember correctly.
Post reply on HN