
The N=1 Guide to Grad School: Advice for Aspiring PhDs - eob
http://marcua.net/writing/gradschool-guide
======
batgaijin
It's what he's doing now that doesn't mesh with me... doesn't working at Locu
feel like a huge step down in terms of how interesting the problems are?

I've always been worried about being spoiled with ideal situations and
infinite time to read and catch up in CS.

~~~
fixxer
"infinite time to read"

Depending on what you do (and where you do it), the private sector can
actually be quite liberating. I find academia stifling.

~~~
_delirium
I've run into people with great private-sector positions, but they seem to
almost all be ex-academics who first established themselves in academia, and
then jumped to something high-level and researchy, like a position at
Microsoft Research, or a senior position at Google with considerable freedom
[1].

For a junior person, academia does have a lot of downsides, not least because
of the massive move towards rationalization, metrics-counting, and a focus on
how much grant money you bring in. But the junior people I know in the private
sector have even less freedom regarding what they spend their day doing, and
much less freedom when it comes to formal working conditions, such as choosing
to work from home or a coffee shop a few days a week.

Is there a way to find positions with research freedom in the private sector
_without_ first becoming established in academia?

[1] Matt Welsh is a good example of someone who did the senior-academic-to-
industry transition. He went into academia, got tenure, got promoted up the
ranks through to Full Professor at Harvard, and _then_ left for a senior
position at Google with considerable freedom: <http://matt-
welsh.blogspot.com/>

~~~
fixxer
"Is there a way to find positions with research freedom in the private sector
without first becoming established in academia?"

Define "established"?

~~~
_delirium
Most relevant to the hypotheticals here, one question is whether you can get a
position with research freedom in the private sector without going into
academia at all. If you choose industry rather than academia, is it possible?
Or do you need to first get that "professor" line on your resume to be able to
land those kinds of industry positions?

~~~
scott_s
I work for IBM Research. While I do not have complete freedom, I feel that my
research and development mandate is quite broad within my project. I came
straight from grad school. Most people that are hired into IBM Research were
not professors, but are coming from grad school or post-docs.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Didn't they just shutdown Hawthorne, move everyone in software to Yorktown,
and lose a lot of people to Google New York in the process? What's left?

~~~
scott_s
We moved, yes, but I'm not aware of anyone who left because of the move. I'm
actually happier up in Yorktown - it's a better building than Hawthorne.

------
jurassic
My N=1 advice for aspiring PhDs is: you probably shouldn't go. Outside of CS,
the prospects are shitty for all but the rockstars; might as well save
yourself 5-10 years of slave wages by not getting the degree.

~~~
jdotjdot
Can you talk more about this? I hear more and more PhDs aren't worth it, which
is really sad. What's a guy who wants to continue studying to do?

~~~
therobot24
there's lots of online resources to keep learning (coursera, udacity, mit open
courseware, etc), but the real benefit of the phd is the structured
environment and the experience of a mentor to help guide you. Getting a phd
just cause you want to learn more is like joining the army because you want to
get into shape.

If you are really self motivated and passionate you will enjoy your phd
experience, though at that point you probably don't need a phd to begin
with...

Despite these cons, going through a phd is amazing (in my experience). You're
surrounded by lots of smart people studying the same thing (or close to it),
which is significantly different than just relying on those who reply to your
forum posts. When i go into the office and talk shop with students/other
professors/my advisor i get to talk details (math, different approaches,
similar work, etc) as opposed to having to setup the problem over and over
again, simplifying the idea and methods... Ideas move fast, and with a good
advisor and research group it's easy to stop caring about who is on what
publication and be excited about contributing to a solution

Edit: there are a lot of people who take the stance that doing a phd is
working slave labor for a professor over the course of 4-5 years of your prime
- in a sense they're right, but then again, if money is all you care about
then by all means don't do a phd...you won't enjoy the experience...there are
lots of other ways to make money if that's what makes you happy

~~~
jurassic
> there are a lot of people who take the stance that doing a phd is working
> slave labor for a professor over the course of 4-5 years of your prime

There are many benefits of doing a PhD, but I couldn't get past the enormous
feeling of opportunity cost. I saw enough graduating students and multi-stint
postdocs failing to "make it" in academia and struggling to transition out
that I realized it wasn't a road I could afford to go down. Better to start a
new career at 26 by choice than at 36 out of desperation.

Also, the money issue does matter. You might think it's worth radically
diminished wages it to live the "life of the mind" (I certainly did at one
time), but be aware that it may have significant long-term impact on your
earnings. After a couple years of seeing the lifestyle and economic milestones
of friends who started careers after college I felt like I was being left
behind socially and economically in enough ways that I might never be able to
catch up. The contrast between successful college friends with my older
academic friends "aging out" of the academic system into financial chaos and
despair couldn't have been more clear.

The whole experience has made me somewhat anti-credentialist in my outlook.
Since leaving with a masters and changing fields I've met a lot of genuinely
smart people that I never would have run into while living in an academic
silo. Now I tell everyone to learn whatever they want, whenever they want, and
don't be intimidated by anyone's PhD in bullshitology. Because being an expert
in some tiny ultraniche does not make them smarter or better than you.

> When i go into the office and talk shop with students/other professors/my
> advisor i get to talk details (math, different approaches, similar work,
> etc) as opposed to having to setup the problem over and over again,
> simplifying the idea and methods... Ideas move fast, and with a good advisor
> and research group it's easy to stop caring about who is on what publication
> and be excited about contributing to a solution

It sounds like either your dept is a lot less cutthroat than mine was, or
you're early enough in the program that the novelty hasn't worn off yet.
Regardless, I'm glad it's going well for you so far.

------
thelittlelisper
The major problem with Academia (actually the Academia subset where I'm
unfortunately stuck in) is entirely different.

Here it is very rare that people above grad students and perhaps postdocs do
any research at all. They're just managers, except in rare occasions or in the
very best places. Naturally, it is extremely difficult that anything good
science-wise comes out of this.

The structure is frighteningly similar to a corporation, except that
corporations usually end up dying if they're inefficient, whereas research
institutions only need to produce papers to get funding—and that's an easy
game to play.

I can hardly think of Professors in say a Math dept. managing their students.
Yes, they're advisors, but they also conduct their own research.

~~~
acadien
You can often tell how much research a prof does by the size of their group.
If they have 2 grad students and no post docs, they're probably active in a
lot of research. If they have 45 grad students and 15 post docs, they're
probably sitting on committees, writing grants proposals or are travelling to
conference for 99% of their time. That's not necessarily a bad thing either,
there is plenty of good work done by profs in a management role.

~~~
pcrh
Not the same subject area, but this is why places such as Janellia Farms [1]
restrict the size of their research groups. A PI with more than 6 people under
her is considered a manager rather than a researcher.

[1] <http://www.hhmi.org/janelia/>

~~~
thelittlelisper
Well, Janellia is actually in my research area, so you pretty much nailed it.

------
mad44
Here is a guide to grad school from the advisor perspective:
[http://muratbuffalo.blogspot.com/2013/04/my-advice-to-my-
stu...](http://muratbuffalo.blogspot.com/2013/04/my-advice-to-my-
students.html)

------
arctangent
This was interesting to read. But I would have liked to have learned a bit
more about the "politics" involved in an academic career.

~~~
stevenbedrick
A properly-run academic department insulates its students as completely as
possible from politics. If, as a student, you're having to concern yourself
with departmental politics, it's a sign that your advisor isn't doing their
job.

~~~
stevenbedrick
That said, while your advisor's job is in part to protect you from whatever
politics are going on in your department, it is important that you not be
completely politically naïve when you finish.

So your advisor probably shouldn't try to keep you totally in the dark if
there are political shenanigans going on in your department or university...
but they should do what it takes to ensure that those shenanigans are "not
your problem." In other words, said shenanigans should be educational
(possibly even entertaining), but not distracting, stressful, or have any
other impact on your primary purpose in life: getting your dissertation out
the door.

