Earlier quoted context omitted.
This right here is a perfect example of why this position is gatekeeped so much. Having a PhD doesn’t automatically mean you think like a scientist of a mathematician, and having a bachelor’s degree and 15 years of experience writing code and then putting in the effort to read Elements of Statistical Learning, compeleting several online courses in machine learning and data science, studying probability, combinatorics…
This comment reads as full of hubris. It is easy to say you can do what someone else does, but the fact is you haven't done it, don't have the evidence to show that you can, and are exasperated that others don't see in you what you see in yourself. Having a PhD in a relevant field is an objective signal - not proof - of capability. When these jobs are hot and candidates are plentiful, using signals to narrow the fiel…
Re: Data Science Is America’s Hottest Job
#221This is all very sensible as long as it's a buyers' market. What I get frustrated by is a sellers' market where the buyers gripe about how there are not enough qualified candidates. At that point, employers should be figuring out how to identify and cultivate inexperienced potential. I thought I had sensed some of this "there aren't enough qualified candidates!" hype in data science (for instance, that's the vibe I got from the article we're discussing), but the first-hand reports from people on this thread are making me think that probably isn't the case; that is, that people in the field feel that they can be very choosey and still fill their roles. If so, it seems to me that this is all working as intended.