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

Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

yangxiao.cs.ua.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 119 posts

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#31

Post by lisper »

tehjoker wrote: post #29
williamDafoe wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The oversupply has extended from phds down to bachelor's degrees. With 37% of Americans getting bachelor's degrees it doesn't mean anything anymore and is wasteful overtraining. I'm no Trumper but somebody has to stop the greedy life-wasting that academics have created by overfunding a lot of stupid duplicate research and excessive college educations by people who never have an impact...

Some would say you educate people to cultivate an engaged citizenry

Very few people say that. Overwhelmingly the rhetoric one hears is that the purpose of higher education is to get a better job.

Personally, I think it would be great if we educated people to cultivate an engaged citizenry. But if we're going to do that we have to be up-front about it an work on an economic model that supports it. So, for example, you can't have student loans that are predicated on being able to obtain a certain level of income on graduation, and you certainly can't make those loans impossible to discharge even in bankruptcy. If you lie about it, as we have been for decades now, it all unravels sooner or later.

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#32

Post by next_xibalba »

neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #10

I wonder if this is a parallel trap for people who study PoliSci and want to go into government to make a difference. Regardless, each career has a disillusionment curve — although yes in this case the financial reality of it (still is) is super unfortunate. If I had to guess, probably mostly because it doesn’t fit in a nice capitalist box of money in / money out.

The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse.

It may also be worth pointing out that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history were either achieved before institutional science existed in a modern form, or were achieved outside the formal system. We may have been better off with a system in which science was left to a tiny elite of eccentric geniuses with academic freedom. It certainly doesn't seem as though society is bettered by cranking out 1,000 government funded PoliSci Phds each year.

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#33

Post by blooalien »

btrettel wrote: post #8
bluSCALE4 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels to me a combination of old web with new web tricks is the key. People used to update obscure hobby details but there really was no way to donate. Creators didn't even think to bother to ask. All this democratization talk seems to be the solution.

I don't think crowdfunding is a good funding source for science in general. Crowdfunding's going to overemphasize already popular and easy to explain science at the expense of everything else. Boring sounding and unfamiliar stuff like the research I'd like to do would not succeed.

> "Boring sounding and unfamiliar stuff like the research I'd like to do would not succeed."

"Boring sounding" to anyone who don't have a "passion" for that particular area of science as you must if you're wanting to research it. The (hard) trick is to get your crowdfunding request in front of the specific eyeballs that will understand (and be excited by) your motivations and interests enough to want to finance advancing that research.

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#35

Post by blooalien »

next_xibalba wrote: post #32
neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #10

I wonder if this is a parallel trap for people who study PoliSci and want to go into government to make a difference. Regardless, each career has a disillusionment curve — although yes in this case the financial reality of it (still is) is super unfortunate. If I had to guess, probably mostly because it doesn’t fit in a nice capitalist box of money in / money out.

The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse. It may also be worth pointing out that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history were either achieved before institutional science existed in a modern form, or were achieved outside the formal system. We may have been better off with a system in which science was left to a tiny elite of eccentric geniuses with academic freedom. It…

> "The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse."

Only because on the whole we've been utterly resistant to every attempt to try any other way since inventing "". Bottomless greed is a real thing, and it's deeply dangerous to us all...

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#36

Post by dr_dshiv »

LarsDu88 wrote: post #20

I can retrospectively look back at folks in my (non computer science) PhD cohort, and say that this bearish outlook is only true for folks who stay in science too long or pursue actual academic careers. The vast majority of folks I know flipped into more lucrative careers in industry... some of which require PhDs or Masters degrees. Furthermore, it really depends on your track. You can wind up in a lab studying somet…

> Sadly the most well funded scientific research right now is actually being bankrolled by techbro oligarchs for tax deduction purposes

What’s an example?

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#37

Post by cortesoft »

a1pulley wrote: post #15

"I have known more people whose lives have been ruined by getting a Ph.D. in physics than by drugs." This seems a bit hyperbolic. In the mid to late 2000s, only 5 of the 15 close grad student friends I had at Caltech didn't get a tenure track position somewhere. Four of the five work in tech, and the fifth is a government electrical engineer. 4/5 were homegrown, the fifth is an immigrant, and all ten tenure track (no…

Maybe he just doesn’t know many people whose life was ruined by drugs.

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#38

Post by harimau777 »

next_xibalba wrote: post #32
neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #10

I wonder if this is a parallel trap for people who study PoliSci and want to go into government to make a difference. Regardless, each career has a disillusionment curve — although yes in this case the financial reality of it (still is) is super unfortunate. If I had to guess, probably mostly because it doesn’t fit in a nice capitalist box of money in / money out.

The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse. It may also be worth pointing out that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history were either achieved before institutional science existed in a modern form, or were achieved outside the formal system. We may have been better off with a system in which science was left to a tiny elite of eccentric geniuses with academic freedom. It…

Capitalism has created a hell world where anything that makes life worth living has long since been stripped for profit.

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#39

Post by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF »

next_xibalba wrote: post #32
neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #10

I wonder if this is a parallel trap for people who study PoliSci and want to go into government to make a difference. Regardless, each career has a disillusionment curve — although yes in this case the financial reality of it (still is) is super unfortunate. If I had to guess, probably mostly because it doesn’t fit in a nice capitalist box of money in / money out.

The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse. It may also be worth pointing out that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history were either achieved before institutional science existed in a modern form, or were achieved outside the formal system. We may have been better off with a system in which science was left to a tiny elite of eccentric geniuses with academic freedom. It…

It's certainly an effective lawnmower, I just wish it didn't run over so many feet!

Re: Don't Become a Scientist (1999)

#40

Post by next_xibalba »

harimau777 wrote: post #38
next_xibalba wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The capitalist box is the best box there is, for better or worse. It may also be worth pointing out that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history were either achieved before institutional science existed in a modern form, or were achieved outside the formal system. We may have been better off with a system in which science was left to a tiny elite of eccentric geniuses with academic freedom. It…

Capitalism has created a hell world where anything that makes life worth living has long since been stripped for profit.

You should read about the history of communism. Until you do, you have no idea how utterly horrible life can get.
Post reply on HN