Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science?

#41

Post by jamesrcole » Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 4:32 PM UTC

wjnc wrote: post #3

Never do a PhD for the money. Ever. It's not worth it, compared to using your skills to get a good education BSc / MSc and then start your career. You miss so many years of good income, plus income growth and will always stand out as the theoretical type. That being said: it's all about curiosity and people. So if you're curious and have the time / money... go for a PhD!

It doesn't have to be just about curiosity. It can be about wanting to make a useful or even important contribution to society.

Re: Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science?

#42

Post by sc0rb » Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 5:15 PM UTC

wjnc wrote: post #37

sc0rb wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know of three PhD's in comp sci that went straight into Goldman Sachs (and one hedge fund) where they immediately started earning far more than those of us that left Uni with our Bachelors. They work in high frequency trading mainly using Java.

True. My point was a bit more subtle: those of my (former) co-workers with PhD's in physics or maths were extra extra smart and really great programmers... But they didn't start their PhD wanting to go into finance! You start because you want and love to do real research. As a bonus there are skills that can (also) make you big money. But there are quicker ways to the Goldman Buffet.

Just like I didn't start my Computer Science degree thinking I would end up working with large ecommerce platforms that power some of the worlds most recognisable brands websites.

But here I am.

Most PhD people I've met (selection bias) don't do work that's too closely related to their degree (just like I don't, Enterprise Java dev != comp sci). They do all make a lot of money though.

Re: Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science?

#43

Post by sc0rb » Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 5:19 PM UTC

jheriko wrote: post #34

... because you will learn more by working in the wild, including why many real-world engineers have a vague disdain of academia - especially in the genuinely difficult fields. Maybe it differs away from software engineering - but my experience of grads, even Oxbridge PhDs is that I will code circles around them with what I learned off my own back in my spare time... and mainly because I learned it off my own back -…

Some of the best software engineers I've ever worked with have PhD's (selection bias).

Just like mine, your experience is not necessarily indicative of the world at large. There's a reason google love hiring PhD's, there's a reason why a well known startup in London (dealing with high performance java tooling) prefer PhD candidate, there's a reason Jane Street is full of PhD's and there's a reason why half the hedge funds in London are full of math and comp sci PhD's

Take your Node and RoR skills home kid.

Re: Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science?

#44

Post by rdl » Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 7:30 PM UTC

If I could get into a PhD program in trusted computing/tamper resistance (which basically consists of...Cambridge University; nowhere else is doing worthwhile academic work), I'd seriously consider it, but since I dropped out of undergrad, not so much risk of that.

Re: Why (Not) Do a PhD in Computer Science?

#45

Post by barry-cotter » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 12:38 AM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #36

barry-cotter wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Professional degree does not need scare quotes. 2. US professional degrees have dropout rates of 3%, approximately. The Ph.D. with lowest dropout rate, engineering, has a 35% dropout rate. Pretty much everyone who can be admitted to a Ph.D., funded is a guaranteed admit to a pro programme that will on average make them more money. One should do a Ph.D. if one will not regret it even if one never holds a faculty po…

> Professional degree does not need scare quotes. That wasn't meant to attract undue attention to it, only because the term has no universal definition. Apart from economic issues I agree with your points. If someone expects the Ph.D. to pay off in straight economic terms, different story. > ... guaranteed admit to a pro programme that will on average make them more money. By "pro" did you mean Ph.D.? If so, not any…

My lack of communication skills strike again. Pro programme meant professional degree programme. Doing a Ph.D. for the money is a terrible idea. Anyone who can get into a Ph.D. programme can do another 2/3/4 years of undergrad (MBA/JD/MD) and even ignoring the time spent getting ones degrees all of those will have better pecuniary outcomes than getting a Ph.D. for the kind of person who can get into a programme and especially for the kind of person who can actually graduate with a Ph.D.