
The secret of academic success, or fun filled failure if you prefer - herodotus
https://billwadge.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/the-secret-of-academic-success-or-fun-filled-failure-if-you-prefer
======
deepaksurti
>> When they hire you, they’re convinced at first that they’ve made a great
choice. This honeymoon period lasts about six months at which point their
attitude flips and they become convinced that they hired a bozo

True of almost every job!!! There could be many reasons to why this happens, I
can only speculate given all the hiring strategies, the interviewing jujitsu
and what not, it might be an NP category problem.

~~~
idclip
Familiarity breeds contempt.

One thing to understand, from a meditative pov, society and its industry is
unconscious Ego dynamics. Its full of projection, and mostly people playing
out unresolved trauma.

The unconscious Ego is mostly good at choose(Like, Dislike) and has very
little regard for the human underneath, since, especially in form of an
Institution/Company, it cant see its own humanity.

This is why people sound authentic in person, but start to act out draconian
aggression fantasies as a collective, which starts with the creeping
disenchantment - Alot like many and most young human relationship.

~~~
rofo1
"Familiarity breeds contempt."

Maybe if you are aware of it, you can control it?

"Nobody is a prophet in their own land", is another thing that comes to mind.

Why did we evolve this way? I can't think of obvious reasons. I understand the
phenomenon and I've seen it in close families (people that are capable of
respecting others, are not respectful to their own blood family members).

~~~
kazinator
There are lots of counterexamples: we are familiar with plenty that we do not
regard with contempt.

For instance, ice cream, the fresh blue sky and panda bears.

I would revise that as "gradual discovery of the full extent of the
contemptible traits of something is predictably associated with a rise in
contempt".

------
epamonip
I can say firsthand how real & vicious local politics can be in academic
institutions.

I made the mistake of openly questioning the research funding of a new
professor I began working under in undergrad. It turned out he was the only
one who taught the last 2 courses I needed for my CS degree. He took it all
very personally. Nearly a 4.0 , success in math & programming competitions for
the college, research, none of it mattered. I never finished my CS degree
because of those 2 coursse. Years later I went to talk to him about it
candidly, hoping I could just keep my head down and finish. But it didn't
work.

~~~
londons_explore
Why not take the course, submit high quality assignments, and when bad marks
come back, appeal to a higher faculty member?

Comp sci is fairly objective - it would be very hard for him to give you a
failing mark for exceptionally high quality work in a way he wouldn't be
reprimanded for.

~~~
thrwaway69
Depending on where he lives or studies, that wouldn't even be a choice let
alone a realistic option to pursue.

For one, if there is a shortage of good professors (which there is and if he
is one), I can bet you some schools would trash the student without a thought
if professor threatens them.

Playing legal battles afterwards isn't something available for most poor
students.

Though, that's my experience here. Done a biting before and I won't again. I
will just secretly record everything and make it look really bad, then viral
it after leaving college. I have learnt to pretend to follow popular opinions,
thinking etc because otherwise it ends up as a disadvantage position for you.

What I would do now is ask a few open ended generic questions which will lead
to person expressing a lot of what they care about, make a profile and never
step on those. Be contradictory on issues the other person is unsure of, helps
stay authentic.

I noticed I can sow huge doubts in people when it comes to choosing clothing
even if I am the only person in a group of 5, they will start rethinking their
choices in the head but for something related to their work or moral dilemmas,
it's not easy.

~~~
watwut
Student has right to ask for commisional exam and result is a grade - they
don't decide on punishment to professor nor fairness. It is strictly test of
knowledge once you go this way.

You don't need to play massive legal battles and shortage of professors is
less of factor due to there not being a risk of professor being fired.

As for secretly recording everything, make sure it is legal where you live.

------
mr_gibbins
It's fine to offend in some contexts, but the author sounds like a douche. He
wouldn't like it much if another researcher wrote an article taking a massive
dump on his work, would he? It's basic manners.

Don't say the authors are wrong. Say they take a 'singular view'. Or 'it is
arguable that...'. Or 'their results contradict X'. It's fine to critique, but
no need to be an ass about it.

As for the seminar - most definitely the fault of the faculty. Anyone should
be able to attend a seminar. The clue is in the entymology - 'university' =
'universal'.

~~~
arkh
> no need to be an ass about it

I disagree. Sometimes people used to everyone walking eggshells around them
need a jolt of assholishness.

~~~
chrisseaton
Saying that some people need to be subjected to abuse is a _terrible_ point of
view.

~~~
exergy
Abuse is a heavily loaded word, and as an aside, I hate the cheapening of
language in modern times. Assault is another that's getting cheapened. Someone
bluntly telling another "you're dead wrong" isn't abuse IMO.

But to your main point, I've seen my share of the polite leading the polite.
If there is a general level of competence, fine, work can still proceed. But
often, workplaces _need_ an asshole who will voice their opinion in blunt
language. There are moments when diplomacy causes, at best, avoidable delays,
but at worst completely fucked projects.

~~~
watwut
There is massive difference between "you are wrong" and mocking someone. Both
deserve different response - when someone mocks you it is perfectly ok to mock
back or ignore that person. Which is what people do. Mocking makes you
asshole.

Workplaces don't need assholes. People who reasinably criticise are not
assholes.

~~~
unishark
Bluntness is considered rude in most societies I'm familiar with. Not good
either.

As another aside, I feel this is the problem with downvoting. It is a blunt
criticism in a society where criticism must be delivered cautiously to avoid
offense.

~~~
watwut
If you are talking about "pathetic inadequacy of the contributions" then the
contributions better really be inadequate and pathetic. Only then it is
bluntness or "telling it like it is".

And most often, those contributions were normal or even state of art when they
have been made - making accusation not so much blunt. Instead, it is appeal to
emotions, an attempt to leverage funy sounding expression for own goal.

And it is only fair when people respond to it in kind.

------
yodsanklai
This article doesn't reflect my experience in academia (but I was in a
different field/country). Success is highly corollated with the quality of
your publications (and your ability to gather money and students to write
them), not so much local politics. I found local politics to be important for
administrative careers.

> That’s it. Stay positive, never criticize. That’s the secret.

That applies to other fields too. Actually, I was an academic and switched to
the software industry. I feel that a somewhat sensitive part of the job is
trying not hurt anyone's feeling. Could be when reviewing code, or discussing
technical choices, or company orientation.

~~~
tkgally
> This article doesn't reflect my experience in academia...

Nor mine (also in a different field and country). It does, though, reflect how
some academics, especially younger ones, seem to view academia: as a
politicized, factionalized battle of personalities. More than once I've had a
junior colleague who perceived himself or herself to be a victim of such a
battle when in fact the reason for their failure to get a contract renewal,
promotion, tenure, or lighter teaching load was mere bureaucratic
inflexibility or budgetary constraints and had nothing to do with them
personally. The way the blogger hedges his account—“to my best guess,”
“probably,” “it appears”—suggests to me that he might have been reading too
much into his situation as well.

------
piotrkaminski
Heh, I took a couple classes from Bill back at UVic and, being young and full
of myself, I occasionally pointed out mistakes in his teaching in front of all
the other students. Luckily, unlike the faculty in his story, he never took
personal offense. :)

------
gaogao
The primary fun filled failure,
[https://billwadge.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/honest-wes-
just-f...](https://billwadge.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/honest-wes-just-funnin-
serious-work-viciously-parodied/), is a pretty neat excerpt I had never read
before, especially as one who toes that Wizard approach towards formal
verification.

~~~
dgreensp
Thanks for linking to this, it was a good read :)

The author seems like a cool (IMO) guy who is a bit insecure about whether
he’s supposed to be seeking people’s approval or what. I couldn’t handle the
status-seeking and other social dynamics of academia, so I became an
entrepreneur.

~~~
neonate
For those who don't know, he is an esteemed computer scientist who created the
Lucid dataflow language with Ed Ashcroft. Much praised by Alan Kay among
others.

------
watwut
Second story tries too much to read into minds of people who probably did not
liked the talk - and somehow finds worst possible interpretation despite there
not being much signal to lean that way.

For example, it is quite possible to not like talk that had too much beginner
content in it, without the issue being personal offense on graduate presence.
I find it pretty normal to not want to listen to beginner content - matching
content to primary audience is a thing.

And it is possible for some people to like talk and others dislike it without
anyone being massive asshole.

The "you can read another book" should probably be taken as feedback (even as
it was not the most direct or polite way to phrase it) rather then mortal
insult.

~~~
andai
I recently read something interesting about how to take insults:

> When we encounter insults from other people, we must deal with them with
> reason rather than anger. Either the insult is true, in which case we should
> be grateful for the insulter for pointing out this area in which we could
> improve, or it is false, in which case we should pity the insulter for his
> lack of accurate perception.

\- Pete Adeney

~~~
homonculus1
"If a person gave your body to any stranger he met on his way, you would
certainly be angry. And do you feel no shame in handing over your own mind to
be confused and mystified by anyone who happens to verbally attack you?"

-Epictetus

------
alimw
Sadly being a jerk can be a vicious cycle. With rising anger and bitterness
about how poorly your contributions are received, it may be virtually
impossible to present a smiling and upbeat facade to the world—when you're
tired, when you're stressed, in a job interview for example or after making a
presentation. So for all those here who think "don't be a jerk" is a valid
defence for their own unwillingness to brook criticism, just think how many
promising careers, then lives, are destroyed by this mechanism.

~~~
rofo1
It's true, but it's also a test of your inner strength.

Can you be a good person even after enduring pure evil?

I find that particularly puzzling and I hold people that are capable of good
(after being betrayed etc. by the world) in high esteem.

------
mxcrossb
> It took me a long while to figure out what (to my best guess) happened.
> Certain colleagues were offended that I’d encouraged a bunch of
> undergraduates to show up at a research seminar.

Is it not also possible that the author failed to emphasize which parts were
new in the talk? A lot of talks start by describing deficiencies in the state
of the art. But maybe he needed to give so much background that he couldn’t
make that clear, and the audience was left uncertain.

------
Rerarom
This is very weird (the seminar thing). In my university the professors would
be extremely happy to see a talk where undergraduates could and do attend.

~~~
siberianbear
I had the same thought. As an undergraduate, I went to some of the
interesting-sounding seminars given by grad students. It was a great way to
get to learn something interesting and also get to know your professors.

I have to admit, however, that I was usually the only undergrad in attendance.

------
bogdanoff_2
The takeaway from the first story is simple: don't be a jerk.

It's harder to find a takeaway from the second story. How do you in general
avoid making whatever mistakes Bill supposedly made with his seminar?

~~~
Traster
He was a new person being asked to do something new to him that literally
everyone else around him had previously done. It's not rocket science, ask the
opinion of the more experienced people around you. The message from the first
story is identical to the message from the first - recognise the value of
other people's work.

~~~
Archit3ch
> It's not rocket science, ask the opinion of the more experienced people
> around you.

You assume that being humble and acting in good faith will get you ahead in
academic politics. From firsthand (but not personal) experience, sometimes you
can do everything right and people will still get offended. You'll find no
evidence of what went wrong, trying to piece together the event sequence after
the fact, much like OP's experience. Of course, OP went out of their way to
offend, I don't recommend that.

Academics tend to minimize risk [1]. If you try to interpret their behavior
outside of that context, you will find it inscrutable, because not only are
they playing in a different league, they aren't even playing the same game
[1].

[1] much like C suites

------
virtuous_signal
My takeaway/tldr: Act in a way that makes your colleagues (potentially future
colleagues) feel smart.

~~~
unishark
The seminar story is sort of the opposite; dazzle and confuse them with your
genius by giving bad talks no one can understand, or else they won't respect
you. But both regard dealing with massive egos, a common problem in research.

~~~
antognini
A good seminar should have a lengthy introduction at a level somewhat below
the general level of knowledge in the room and then transition into showing
off how clever your approach is. The first part is critical because it makes
everyone feel smart. The second part is critical because it shows everyone
that you are smart.

------
robocat
Nice reference to being seen as a bozo, presumably a la "Don't flip the bozo
bit" from Jim McCarthy’s rule No. 4 in Dynamics of Software Development,
explained well here:
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/08/13/th...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/08/13/the-
endemic-bozo-bit/)

~~~
taneq
"Bozo" as a word for an incompetent person has been around for a long time:
"bozo _(slang)_ A stupid, foolish, or ridiculous person, especially a man.
[from 1910s]" (Source:
[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bozo](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bozo))

~~~
raister
I guess the obvious reference is Bozo, the clown...

------
mmhsieh
creating good will costs little but pays off a lot when you eventually F
something up and can draw from it for forgiveness

apart from that, not being an asshole is its own reward

------
cousin_it
I think there are two different issues. On one hand, if you haven't received
much blunt criticism in your life, you might not notice when your own
criticism comes across as blunt. On the other hand, if you're used to an
environment where blunt criticism is no big deal, and then move to an
environment where everyone walks on eggshells, it can be hard to adjust. But
if people gave and received more criticism in general, both of these issues
would go away, so that's what I would prefer.

~~~
watwut
The author found "yeah you can read another book" to be mortal insult, so
there is factor of asymetry in how he criticises others vs how he wants to be
talked to.

~~~
homonculus1
To the contrary, he didn't even realize what it meant when it was said to him.
It was only much later that he realized it was intended derogatorily.

------
werber
>> That’s it. Stay positive, never criticize. That’s the secret.

This seems to work in a lot of fields, optimism being confused competence
really fascinates me

------
AlexCoventry
Now I'm curious about the CLM he wouldn't go into.

------
riazrizvi
Great life lesson shared

in just eight paragraphs of blog.

Too easy to miss.

------
graycat
The OP is talking academic _secrets_ and essentially _office politics_. I've
had some experience with such secrets and getting around the politics so will
chip in!

(1) Some Academic Ground Rules

Some high end research universities state that the requirement for a Ph.D.
dissertation is "an original contribution to knowledge worthy of publication",
and the usual criteria for publication are "new, correct, and significant".

(2) Career Secret

In technical careers, say, based on math and computing, there is almost always
more money to be make in making valuable applications of such knowledge than
in research creating such knowledge. Moreover, for the goals of financial
security or even to be financially responsible and to be able to buy a house,
have two late model cars, support a wife and family, have a valuable IRA,
etc., it can be tough to meet these goals as a prof doing research and much
easier making valuable applications.

(3) A Career Success

I was a ugrad math major but by luck stumbled on to a cute fact: There was and
likely still is good money to be made applying math, physics, and computing to
problems in US national security around DC. So, at the time, some of the math
was numerical integration, root finding, numerical linear algebra, the fast
Fourier transform, power spectral estimation, digital filtering, lots of
applied statistics, numerical solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations, max-
min and game theory for the SSBN fleet, etc. My annual salary was six times
the cost of a new, high end Camaro.

The success was an example of (2) of more money from applications than
academic research.

So a lesson: With math and computing, to make more money, concentrate on
valuable applications and not academic research. Further, do this where there
are powerful customers with deep pockets for solutions to technical problems
-- e.g., US national security around DC.

(4) An Academic Success

I was getting paid so well for what I knew in math and computing that I wanted
to learn more so went for a Ph.D. Then right away, as in the OP, politics hit
me.

Then I stumbled onto a solution: I saw a math problem (a tricky issue in the
Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions), asked for a "reading course", maybe not to get
a solution but just _study_ the problem. Two weeks later I found a solution
that was clearly publishable (later did publish in _JOTA_ ).

Presto, bingo, _secret_ discovered: The original work gave me a shiny halo and
a Kevlar suit of armor against any and all obstacles, especially political.

Technically from (1), the work was enough for a Ph.D. dissertation.

Lesson: As a Ph.D. student, ASAP do some research that meets the criteria in
(1).

(5) Another Academic Secret

Get a Ph.D. in an engineering school and not in a school of arts and sciences.
I.e., get a Ph.D. in applied math for some engineering and not pure math
without clear applications.

So, for a dissertation, start with an important practical problem got likely
from outside academics. Then use some old pure and new applied math to get a
valuable solution. Then, since the practical problem has likely not already
been solved well, the work will be "new". Since the problem is important and
the solution valuable, get "significant". Since the core of the work is some
math with theorems and proofs, it is relatively easy to be check the work and,
then, be "correct". Since the problem is from outside academics, your profs
might not know about its practical details and, thus, can't easily criticize.
Also generally the university might like the idea that you are trying to make
money because otherwise they can't even hope that you will donate a lot of
money!

(6) Business Secret

Currently there is an historic business opportunity: E.g., for less than $2000
in parts, as a Web server I plugged together a mid-tower case computer with an
AMD FX-8350 processor with 64 bit addressing, eight cores, and a standard 4.0
GHz clock, an Asus motherboard, 16 GB of error correcting coding (ECC) main
memory (both the processor and the motherboard support ECC), several TB of
rotating disk, Windows 7 Professional, etc. So, computer hardware and software
for operating systems, middle-ware, utilities, etc. are cheap and powerful. In
addition the Internet spans nearly all the world, and data rates of 1 Gbps are
readily available in the US.

Since these cheap, powerful resources have not yet been fully exploited, there
should be opportunities to make significant bucks.

Next, one of the standard remarks is, for success, good problem selection is
important:

Well, then, broadly can provide new, valuable _information_. Using some pure
and new applied math can help get more valuable information.

Then with all of that, also pick a problem can solve as a sole, solo founder
funded from own checkbook. An example is the Canadian romantic matching Web
site Plenty of Fish -- one guy, two old Dell servers, Windows with .NET,
ASP.NET, and ADO.NET, ads just from Google, and $10 million a year in revenue.
Later he added staff and sold out for IIRC $575 million.

Points: Here we have an example of (2), valuable practical applications
instead of academic research. As a self-funded sole, solo founder, get to
avoid office politics, co-founder disputes, and venture capital firms and get
to own 100% of the company.

------
psudmant
To be sure... the main message here is don't be a jerk, treat people w/
respect, and try to be humble...EVEN if you're right and someone else is
wrong! These aren't tough principles and they're not exclusive to academia -
they are universal.

~~~
katzgrau
I think that the real message is that a little political finesse (some call
"social IQ") goes a long way, and the lack of it can hold you back.

If you're thinking to yourself, "but I was never the most socially capable,"
that's OK, here are some instructions for your logical-and-not-naturally-
social brain to execute: Try to be positive with others, give credit where
it's due (or will encourage someone else), withold criticism unless the
situation truly calls for it. We all want to feel good about ourselves - a
simple and easy way to be politically savvy is to be a source of positivity
for others.

------
admiralspoo
Stories like these confirm my experience that academia is in a sorry state and
ripe for disruption. I'm a firm believer that you are only as good as your
last recent work. Enough of these inflated egos that haven't published
anything interesting in a decade, or whose one claim to fame was a matter of
luck.

~~~
neonate
Wadge is retired and his stories are over 30 years old. So perhaps academia
used to be in a sorry state. It still is, and it used to be, too...?

~~~
stebann
As an undergrad in CS I can say that that politics limit your moves, at least
where I live. So the answer is YES.

