EPTgod damit math...
Don't become a scientist - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
zealing
Canada806 Posts
god damit math... | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On May 17 2010 02:46 love1another wrote: Well... I'm at least in CS. Programming, though, is not a science. It's quite literally engineering. Programming is a mathematical discipline. Don't mess up "writing up neat shitty code" with "relational database research". Well, maybe relational databases are not a good example because the current research in that field has come to a stall, but there are other fields where you can do purely scientific works without ever touching your keyboard. Such as language design, OO databases, formal grammars etc. If anything that's pure mathematics because like mathematics it studies the relations between abstract objects with arbitraty laws of interaction. If you think about it twice, there's no real difference between studying the behavior of symmetry groups (science) and studying the behavior of symbol groups (which is voila, parser theory and thus, according to you, not science). Speaking on applicability with a physics degree, well, physics can be so different that your results may vary drastically. Getting a Ph.D. with something like string theory (pretty much any field of modern theoretical physics) will make you absolutely useless for any kind of a real application, but you're still pretty much guaranteed to get some kind of well-paid job just because it's obvious that if a man can understand theoretical physics, he is quite likely to understand whatever else. On the other hand, having a practical specialization can really be a win-or-lose situation. Being familiar with the theoretical basis of an emerging technology will make you a wanted person in every HR's list. If tomorrow Apple or Intel will focus on growing crystals and you're, by chance, a pro in crystal growth, gratz, you're one step from being a rich and successful person. However, if you're good in developing something not as popular, such as, maybe (taken as example, I don't have the up-to-date full picture on that), epitaxy, well, it literally sucks to be you, because there will be exactly 0 non-academic career options. Anyway, if you're picky about your academic development, nothing is lost. Just try to follow the market, try to predict, and work in a field that is likely to be needed in the industry. Unless you're dedicated in researching something that noone needs, you will get some options eventually. Why am writing all this? Well, I have a masters degree in physics and a job in game development. Many of my friends whom I studied with are about to become Ph.D's in the coming year. The article is very true. You cannot just get a degree and hope for a better life. You need to carefully plan your career just like in any other field. And FFS you need to be in some place other than Russia. The stupidity of the situation with science here is unimaginable. Examples: 1) Official salary of an experienced scientist (not a postdoc, but with 5-10 years of experience) should be around 300-400$ a month depending on the place. 2) There are three sources of money: a) foreign grants. 1 such grant for 10-20 science groups. Chances are you won't see the shit, and even then there are very strange policies concerning taxing which usually leads to you seeing about 30% of the original sum after it comes through various instances. b) domestic grants. Famous for colossal amounts of bureaucracy and literally non-existent amounts of money. Usually having some of these leads to a total income of about 500-600$ which is better, but still a tad above the survivability margin (just for comparison, renting a shitty 1-person apartment in Moscow will cost you no less than 600$ a month, unless you, of course, don't mind living with a vietnamese family, so it's 300$ if you live with a friend). c) government programs. c) requires a deeper explanation. Most government programs in Russia exist solely for one reason - to transfer money from the state to someone's pocket. The funniest thing is that the organizers of the programs have nothing to do with science, so the distribution of money is essentially random. When year 1 expires and half of the money is stolen, they fall in panic because the money is "spent", but they need some kind of results (in science huh?), so they immediately start giving money to completely random projects that are either led by known people or those incredibly lucky and cocky. The latest program (and a giant failure) was "Russian nanotechnology". Even with all the education I don't understand what this word means. Battle nanodroids? Cure for cancer? Nanosecond impulse lasers? So when the money started falling from the sky people were receiving it with projects like "thin polymer films", "semiconductor lasers" that emit nanometer-length waves and even nuclei research. It was just about finding whatever in your current work can be classified as "nano-" and then hope to pull the lottery ticket. Scientifical result of the program? Zero. When year 2 comes, rinse and repeat. Well, you might have thought that at least 50% of the money were spent into science, but don't get it wrong. Those money were mostly given to either people who "know the uncle of the brother's dad" of someone in the ministry or those who were able to present their useless work as something that is nano-driven. Literally speaking, the results of the program were nanoscopic. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
And my brother went from 28k working at Blue Cross to 65k in just 3 years. My mom makes 6 figures and has been working there a long time. Neither of them have college degrees. College is overrated, but it's not useless or unimportant, just it's not the ONLY way to be successful in life. | ||
|
SOB_Maj_Brian
United States522 Posts
| ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
I have known more people whose lives have been ruined by getting a Ph.D. in physics than by drugs. I stopped taking this article seriously about right there. Other than that it was an ok rant from a bitter professor. | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
On May 16 2010 08:19 manbot wrote: I am currently reaching the end of my PhD in chemistry The problem he is talking about seems to be focused on staying in acedamia, in which case he is completely accurate. However, if you go into industry or work at a national lab, the job prospects are much better (at least in chemistry), and the payscale is at least double that of academic appointments. The trade-off is that you are much less likely to be able to do independent research, and can be stuck working on an uninteresting project. i'll be starting my MS in bio next january and this post is spot on. It's difficult in ANY PhD program to get a tenured academia position, but if you are willing to 'sell out' to the private sectore PhD in hard sciences pay really well and you have a lot of job opportunites. | ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
On May 17 2010 01:24 Fraidnot wrote: That's because Computer Science isn't real science, 1s and 0s? please don't be ridiculous, everybody knows we only play video games and then just half-ass a few hours work and sell a program for way more then it's worth. Perhaps that's what you do. That's not what I do. Stop giving CompSci a bad name because you are one of the 'slacker nerds' who brags about doing his projects in the 3 hours before they are due. I am involved with research at the undergraduate level where I apply computer science to solve problems in biochemistry, it involves a FUCK of a lot of work and effort. Between this and classes I am occupied all day with university-related things. | ||
|
heyitsme
153 Posts
On May 18 2010 03:51 nath wrote: Perhaps that's what you do. That's not what I do. Stop giving CompSci a bad name because you are one of the 'slacker nerds' who brags about doing his projects in the 3 hours before they are due. I am involved with research at the undergraduate level where I apply computer science to solve problems in biochemistry, it involves a FUCK of a lot of work and effort. Between this and classes I am occupied all day with university-related things. It seems like there's a misunderstanding. What you're doing Nath sounds more like Bioinformatics and not Computer science. | ||
|
love1another
United States1844 Posts
Off topic, database research has NOT come to a stall. Check out H-store. It's pretty hawt  | ||
|
movmou
United States142 Posts
Also an interesting note: the author was recently chosen to be part of the expert team assembled to fix the BP oil spill. http://gizmodo.com/5539842/meet-the-team-of-all-star-scientists-obama-assembled-to-fix-the-oil-spill | ||
|
willeesmalls
United States477 Posts
Basic research is a very important part of society, but it takes a long time to pay off, The CD wasn't really used until 50 years after Bell labs invented it. If keeping an additional 50,000 researchers on government funding raises the possibilities of the next big discovery (think the laser) by just a little bit, it will be well worth it. I think the government needs to make wages a bit more substantial and hold researchers to a high standard (somehow?). Also, many academic in applied fields hold side jobs as consultants to supplement their income. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On May 18 2010 15:24 willeesmalls wrote: I think the Author is wrong. The solution to his problem isn't to decrease the amount of inspired researchers. They aren't getting more funding, no matter what anyone says. | ||
|
Gatsbi
United States1134 Posts
On May 17 2010 20:28 Luddite wrote: I think you can get even more specific and say that the ONLY fields you can study which lead directly to high paying jobs are engineering and medicine. Maybe law, but only if you're at a top law school and get great grades. Any other degree is not going to make much money for you. You can still get a high paying job with other degrees of course, but there's no direct link the way engineering and medicine have. 100% hit the nail on the head, absolutely NO other major is going to get you into a high paying job straight out of college but engineering or medicine. | ||
KwarK
United States42950 Posts
On May 18 2010 03:37 Baarn wrote: I stopped taking this article seriously about right there. Other than that it was an ok rant from a bitter professor. How many drug addicts do you think he personally knows? How many physics Ph.Ds do you think he knows? Complain about his sampling bias but it's probably true. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7902 Posts
On May 18 2010 16:31 KwarK wrote: How many drug addicts do you think he personally knows? How many physics Ph.Ds do you think he knows? Complain about his sampling bias but it's probably true. I met a Polish homeless who had gone into heroin yesterday, in London. For 16 years, he had had a job, some saving, a house. Then he met this girl who took him into heroin and he lost everything. He went to jail, all his friend disappeared, he lost his job, his house, his money, his health, and he was so fucking desperate that my heart was bleeding just by seeing him. Saying that making Phd ruins more lives than drug is not only ridiculous and gross, it is a bit obscene. I totally agree with Baarn. I don't take seriously someone who says things that stupid. EDIT: and if you want to know, I know a loooot of people who did a phd, most of them are happy with it and none of them fucked his life and became a homeless with no other future than robbing for having his heroin dose from time to time and dying soon or late in a street of London a morning of february. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24701 Posts
On May 18 2010 19:56 Biff The Understudy wrote: Saying that making Phd ruins more lives than drug is not only ridiculous and gross, it is a bit obscene. That's not what he said. He admitted it was only as per his personal experience... | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7902 Posts
On May 18 2010 20:04 micronesia wrote: That's not what he said. He admitted it was only as per his personal experience... Yes I know. Obviously a universty teacher knows countless people who have done phd and a couple of drug addicts maybe. The comparison is still obscene and makes even less sense. Horrible rethoric. | ||
|
rAize
Germany135 Posts
On May 18 2010 02:31 SOB_Maj_Brian wrote: Its funny he envys lawyers and doctors so much in his rant, but most lawyers complain about the same thing. Basically, too many law schools producing too many lawyers and not enough jobs. The best of the best get accepted to 'big law.' Then the best of that best, the ones that worked 6 days a week for a decade might make partner later in life, but not after they've sacrificed most of their life to get it. Making partner at 31, in this day and is a fluke, let alone the norm. Maybe coz "Jonathan Katz Thu May 13 12:39:11 CDT 1999", 11 years ago demand for lawyers were higher I suppose. | ||
|
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On May 18 2010 20:39 Biff The Understudy wrote: Yes I know. Obviously a universty teacher knows countless people who have done phd and a couple of drug addicts maybe. The comparison is still obscene and makes even less sense. Horrible rethoric. Who cares? Even if that is a bad comparison, what does it have to do with the rest of the article? | ||
| ||
