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

The collapse of the econ PhD job market

chrisbrunet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 386 posts

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#241

Post by [deleted] »

elevation wrote: post #233
pempem wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is some long horizon impact. Really just wildly unfortunate to see a disruption that feels unique. It's not due to war, even if academics could 'flee' to another institution, its a discarding of the prioritization of knowledge generation. The thing humanity has been built on.

Oddly, the actual threat to knowledge generation? Institutions that absorb societal-scale science budgets while perpetuating systemic fraud. Institutional administrators confiscate 50, 60, 70% of every research grant. Institutions demand published work even when results do not warrant it, and demote professors honest enough to document a null result. The peer review system then rubber stamps papers with no actual rev…

[deleted]

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#242

Post by corimaith »

quantumgarbage wrote: post #240
corimaith wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But, economists will just assume it is, because they assume everything is a free market, and then apply free market dynamics. Basically, they skip step 1, and go to step 1000. Which economist are you referring to here? It's hard to even see what specific policy conclusions you're critiquing here, beyond a vague strawman against "free market assumptions".

That isn't a vague strawman, that's a great point. Economists work from assumptions, which can be flawed in two ways: they can be blatantly wrong (see the work Kahneman and Tversky did on the rational individual hypothesis) and they can be unfalsifiable (you can't always gather data about the assumption itself). There is a good essay on this from Tirole (yet a very mainstream economist) here: https://www.tse-fr.eu/si…

You're pointing to a critique of an assumption, what I'm saying can you name a specific economic policy or position given by an economist that is used in real public policy and then we can measure the merits of those policies and their assumptions as opposed to the counterfactuals. I'd bet 9/10 times the chosen policy likely would have been the most logical option.

After all, it's not like the epistemologies of the other humanities stands on far more shakier grounds...

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#243

Post by michaelt »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #235
array_key_first wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The payout is very, very long term and honestly you probably don't come out ahead. Starting your career 10 years earlier (effectively) and immediately progressing in your career probably gets you further. Especially if you look towards management, which is where the money is (usually, million dollar AI research salaries is a new thing).

I don't think this is always true. AI research big payouts aren't even a new thing. It was common 10 years ago for big name professors to get hired by Google etc. and bring the whole lab with them. Also a PHD is not 10 years long? You start your career 4-5 years after a typical BS in CS

Well, the big money is in becoming a leader in a field before it's hot - making the big payoffs very speculative.

In the mid 2000s, natural language modelling was a joke and the best performing ML systems for sentiment analysis would lose in benchmarks to emoji counters. Today, people with a PhD in ML language modelling and years of experience delivering projects in industry are finding the PhD in ML really pays off.

But what about someone who spent the mid 2000s working on formal methods for static analysis? Or a compiler responding to the challenges created by Intel's Itanium architecture? Or trying to fit FPGA accelerator boards into the niche CUDA fills today?

Well, honestly their career's probably still going fine, they're a smart person and there's been many years of high demand for competent programmers. But industry isn't beating their door down; the beneficial effects of the PhD will be a lot less obvious.

Honestly a lot of PhDs go to people from cultures that prize education; and to people from upper-middle-class backgrounds who've been brought up to do well in school, follow their passions, no need to worry too much about money.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#244

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

corimaith wrote: post #242
quantumgarbage wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't a vague strawman, that's a great point. Economists work from assumptions, which can be flawed in two ways: they can be blatantly wrong (see the work Kahneman and Tversky did on the rational individual hypothesis) and they can be unfalsifiable (you can't always gather data about the assumption itself). There is a good essay on this from Tirole (yet a very mainstream economist) here: https://www.tse-fr.eu/si…

You're pointing to a critique of an assumption, what I'm saying can you name a specific economic policy or position given by an economist that is used in real public policy and then we can measure the merits of those policies and their assumptions as opposed to the counterfactuals. I'd bet 9/10 times the chosen policy likely would have been the most logical option. After all, it's not like the epistemologies of the o…

> the most logical option

Well for whom? Another aspect of this problem is an economic solution can have winners and losers. An economic policy that invokes slavery as solution to labor issues may actually be 'logical' but clearly puts the interests of one group over another. Economics is just the science resource allocation after all. People have some serious biases when it comes to deciding policy on who gets what and how.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#245

Post by corimaith »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #244
corimaith wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're pointing to a critique of an assumption, what I'm saying can you name a specific economic policy or position given by an economist that is used in real public policy and then we can measure the merits of those policies and their assumptions as opposed to the counterfactuals. I'd bet 9/10 times the chosen policy likely would have been the most logical option. After all, it's not like the epistemologies of the o…

> the most logical option Well for whom? Another aspect of this problem is an economic solution can have winners and losers. An economic policy that invokes slavery as solution to labor issues may actually be 'logical' but clearly puts the interests of one group over another. Economics is just the science resource allocation after all. People have some serious biases when it comes to deciding policy on who gets what…

I've asking multiple posters to give a specific policy example to critique and so far all of you have been unable to do so, instead dancing around and critiquing vague notions of a possibility of bias without giving concrete examples. Very postmodern, but this is why actual policymakers don't listen to critique like this.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#246

Post by kenjackson »

colechristensen wrote: post #230
kenjackson wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You could cut university admin costs by 75% and lose nothing." People say that, but could you really? I'd love to see a breakdown on how you pull this off.

Cut the top 20 salaries in half and fire 10% of the staff who are not directly involved in academics (must teach, learn, or research) for starters. Sever any major athletics organization (i.e. football, basketball, etc) into a separate legal entity with something like a license fee to the university based on team revenue as a percentage so funds flow exclusively in one direction. University admin work expands to the…

I mean actually breakdown exactly where the spending is going and then show the cuts.

You can say “cut salaries in half” about any industry. You could say it about software engineers. But just because you say that doesn’t mean it’ll work out well for the industry. Non-minimum wage salaries should be market driven. I doubt you could just cut salaries in half and keep a reasonable work force.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#247

Post by Findeton »

cyberax wrote: post #222
Findeton wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is, the part about using math for economics is highly debatable and that's why Austrian School of economics doesn't use it. From that perspective, we use ranking systems for our preferences, at the individual level, so using math for aggregate behaviour is just not well substantiated. This point of view comes from Carl Menger, which started the whole marginalist revolution.

> Austrian School of economics doesn't use it Well, yeah. They're basically a cult with three rules: 1. The market is perfect. 2. If the market is not perfect, then it's the fault of the government. 3. If you have any questions, see 1.

No, they don't say that the market is perfect. And if you want a cult, that's the current keynesian economics.

Anyway, I don't see any way around not using math. Because value is subjective and that means it's a ranking system of preferences, not based in nominal values.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#249

Post by reactordev »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #244
corimaith wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're pointing to a critique of an assumption, what I'm saying can you name a specific economic policy or position given by an economist that is used in real public policy and then we can measure the merits of those policies and their assumptions as opposed to the counterfactuals. I'd bet 9/10 times the chosen policy likely would have been the most logical option. After all, it's not like the epistemologies of the o…

> the most logical option Well for whom? Another aspect of this problem is an economic solution can have winners and losers. An economic policy that invokes slavery as solution to labor issues may actually be 'logical' but clearly puts the interests of one group over another. Economics is just the science resource allocation after all. People have some serious biases when it comes to deciding policy on who gets what…

There is no economics that involves enslaving other humans. Not slavery. Not ever. However, in debt in perpetuity is a thing. So you have to work to pay, so you can live, so you can work, so you can pay…

Debt crisis is a real problem. We have borrowed more than we can ever repay, all nations, for the last 30 years. Both sides. Just drove right off the cliff.

Re: The collapse of the econ PhD job market

#250

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

corimaith wrote: post #245
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the most logical option Well for whom? Another aspect of this problem is an economic solution can have winners and losers. An economic policy that invokes slavery as solution to labor issues may actually be 'logical' but clearly puts the interests of one group over another. Economics is just the science resource allocation after all. People have some serious biases when it comes to deciding policy on who gets what…

I've asking multiple posters to give a specific policy example to critique and so far all of you have been unable to do so, instead dancing around and critiquing vague notions of a possibility of bias without giving concrete examples. Very postmodern, but this is why actual policymakers don't listen to critique like this.

Ok, cutting taxes to the very rich while raising them on middle and lower classes and cutting services. This was part of the big beautiful bill. This is 'logical' from the point of view of the billionaire class, but in terms of the economy that everyone else lives in, things will be worse for them.
Post reply on HN