

Am I an academic? - hack_edu
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/08/25/am_i_an_academi.html

======
johnnybgoode
Let me summarize: The author works at MSR and is annoyed that he or she is
seen as being inferior to "real" academics in the university system.

The author points out that he or she is as much of a scholar as any professor,
but I'd argue this could (and should) be extended even to people who are not
called researchers.

The general problem here concerning a group of people with special state-
granted privileges is not new.

~~~
jonah
danah is a woman FWIW.

~~~
johnnybgoode
Thanks, that's what I thought but I wasn't 100% sure.

------
shalmanese
As a completely biased view of someone who's no longer in either academia or
industry, industrial research, at least in HCI, is a funny place. Sometimes, I
get the feeling that the major academic research labs try too hard to be
universities to their own detriment. There's a pretty steady flow between
universities and research labs, moreso than between product groups and
research labs. I feel like the industry researchers I meet seem more concerned
about impressing their academic peers than their bosses.

It seems like research in other fields of computer science are tied more
closely to practical applications: Systems, Compilers, Distributed Computation
etc. but it's rare to find that kind of work in HCI.

------
dspeyer
A defining characteristic of academia is publication. Everything an academic
discovers should be revealed to the public as soon as possible, and genuine
questions should be answered thoroughly. This ideal isn't 100% lived up to,
but it is the socially acknowledged goal and practice generally comes pretty
close.

This is where MSR is something different. Work there is published if and only
if it is in Microsoft's interest to do so. Often a bare outline is published:
enough to impress people but not enough for an outsider to duplicate the work.
This isn't academia.

Xerox PARC and Bell Labs back in their respective days did function like
academia.

~~~
neilc
_Work there is published if and only if it is in Microsoft's interest to do
so._

Do you have any evidence for that claim?

 _Often a bare outline is published: enough to impress people but not enough
for an outsider to duplicate the work. This isn't academia._

Actually, there are plenty of research papers that describe a system in some
detail, but not nearly enough detail to allow an "outsider to duplicate the
work". Both academics and industrial researchers sometimes accompany a
research paper with a working prototype; in both cases, they often do not.

------
mmt
This article seems more compelling in its criticism of academia than in its
defense of industry as a setting for pure research.

~~~
diN0bot
well noted by David Berry in the comments: """ >It is interesting to note that
regardless of your claims to be in a 'better' or 'similar' position to an
academic you continue to use academia as the anchor point of a frame of
reference. I don't see any need to make that claim - the work in a corporate R
& D environment is just different - it is based largely around performativity
(here I am thinking of Lyotard).

A conceptual framework that I think you might find helpful..<elided for
brevity>...

I personally think that there are important differences between universities
and corporations linked to their respective knowledge domain and notion of
contribution (e.g. to the public good vs private gain). To miss this is to
collapse all of social life into the market. """

------
livgiv
It must have been interesting to work for the biggest tech company's research
division.

------
livgiv
The entire world is full of academic that have been sedated by failing school
systems.

------
lionhearted
> At other times, there's a hint of condescension, as though the question is
> actually: "Couldn't make it in academia, eh? Stuck in industry, eh?"

Wow. Just wow.

If you're in academia, and you don't do original research, you've got to be an
_amazing_ lecturer/teacher to make yourself worth a damn to society. Most of
American education from middle school on is credentialing based on your
ability to follow instructions carefully.

You could say it "shows how well you'll fit in at a job" if you're being
charitable; you could call it "obedience school" if you're being less
charitable.

Without fail, _all_ of the wealthiest people I know didn't graduate college
and half of them didn't graduate high school. Engineering and programs that
follow a curriculum similar to engineering do okay. But most of the rest is
junk unless your goal is to be a moderately salaried reasonably secure
employee. High school and college never have and can't teach you what you need
to be perform on the highest levels.

Mark Twain said it pretty well: "I have never let my schooling interfere with
my education."

~~~
lionhearted
Someone just voted this down anonymously - please, come out and make yourself
known so we can have a discussion.

True story: A good Chinese-Canadian friend got a PhD and was offered a
professor's post. Then he jumped onto a part time project before taking his
professor's post that hit it big, found it enjoyable, and got quite wealthy
from it. He lectured one year before quitting to go private, and laments the
time and money he wasted in academia. Maybe 10 people on the planet read his
thesis.

So, anonymous downvoter, are you a graduate student? Or a high school teacher
or professor perhaps? I paid for all my school bills myself. I attended
university full time while running a company full time and putting 20+ hours
into a startup. And you know what? I estimate I'd be worth something like
$100,000 - $250,000 more if I'd put the efforts into work and getting paid for
it and had the tuition money for investments later. I had exactly three highly
useful university classes: Business law, project management, microeconomics.
Maybe 4 or 5 somewhat useful classes, and the rest were an epic waste of time
and money. So, please come out and discuss with me, especially if I've struck
a nerve. It's a nerve that should be struck, discussed, and worked out.
Society will be better and the would-be academic will be wealthier and more
productive.

Edit: It's funny watching the score of the parent go up and down. I'm hanging
around, waiting for a reply so we can get a discussion going if anyone would
like to. But people would not like to. They don't want to come and say, "You
said this, which I sort of agree, and you said that, which I think is wrong,
and here is why." No, they read the above and go, "OhmygoshnoIdon'tlikethat."
Or something like that - I don't know exactly, because they don't weigh in and
establish why they disagree.

I took time and wrote my take on American education and the fact that the
wealthiest people I know are not college graduates. Will there be dispute?
Discussion? A half dozen people or so have voted the comment up now, another
half dozen have voted it down _without explaining why_. If this were a less
civil environment, I would call those people cowards - not cowards for not
confronting my views, but cowards for not confronting themselves.

I know education/academia is a big part of identity for a lot of people.
Confront yourself if you are an academic, weigh in on this thread. Am I
mistaken? I would love to learn more. Please share your perspective. Maybe I
will disagree with you and discuss, maybe I will agree with you and learn and
amend my own perspective. But I've written candidly, thoughtfully, with real
observations I've had and some people have voted that down anonymously without
explaining why. Please join the conversation, if you can confront these
foreign ideas in your mind.

~~~
lionhearted
I will try one last time - I invite anyone who disagrees to share their
disagreement. Was there not enough civility? I've shared my experiences on the
American system, and my opinions, and I've taken time to write them and share
anecdotes. Something like 6-8 people found them useful and voted up. Something
like 7-9 people as of now found them upsetting/wrong/something and voted them
down. The comment score has been swinging. This is apparently quite polarizing
to people.

I'd really like to know why - agreement or disagreement, actually. I would
truly, respectfully like to hear it. I've shared my experience and opinion,
and would like to hear yours. Or your rationale for saying "this comment ought
not to have been made and/or is completely wrong", which is what a vote
against says.

Was it uninsightful? Misguided or inaccurate? Not enough politeness?
Certainly, there was some thought and introspection before writing. I am at a
loss to understand people's views on this - I will not speculate further, but
instead, again, humbly, ask for a reply so that we may have a discussion, if
you feel it worth your time to make known how you feel.

~~~
scott_s
I imagine some of your upvotes are like mine: I don't really agree with what
you said, but I still think it's a valid, civil comment. So I upvoted it from
-1 to 0. I consider that a correction upvote.

Personally, I'm not interested in engaging you in discussion because I think
you've painted a caricature of our educational system - recognizable features
are there, but greatly exaggerated. Addressing all of these would take more
time and effort than I want to invest in a discussion that I've seen and
participated in before.

Also keep in mind that people don't owe you a response. Scolding people into
talking to you is not a good tactic.

~~~
lionhearted
> Personally, I'm not interested in engaging you in discussion because I think
> you've painted a caricature of our educational system - recognizable
> features are there, but greatly exaggerated.

Interesting - that's fair. I suppose a lot of people's experience differs too,
so it's easy for people to talk past each other. I do know quite a lot of
people, including a lot of self made people, and it's a subject I've discussed
a lot. I've done teaching and training myself and I think our system is in
disrepair, but perhaps I should be more balanced and less caricaturizing.

> Also keep in mind that people don't owe you a response.

Owe? Well, certainly not, though perhaps it's considerate for someone to
explain why they downvoted a comment and it lets discussion get going. My own
sense of decorum is I'll downvote noise ("right on! lol!" type posts) without
explaining why, otherwise I won't unless there's already a good reply
explaining why the disagreement.

> Scolding people into talking to you is not a good tactic.

I'm torn by whether to make a joke or a serious reply to this. I'll go the
serious route: There's no scolding involved. I think people downvote identity-
held issues without writing a disagreement, and I think it means people's
worldviews don't evolve as quickly as they could, both mine and others'. I've
had some fantastic disagreements with my comments in the past that led to very
good discussion where I've learned a lot. For instance:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=723610>

So, I appreciate replies. Especially on an identity-level issue, yes, I'll
absolutely ask again if I think people might be kneejerk voting based on
identity. I want to learn on here, and want to be entertained, and I want
others to learn, and I want others to be entertained. With discussion, we can
do that. That's why I invite it. Thank you for your response.

~~~
anamax
> I'll go the serious route: There's no scolding involved.

Yes, there was.

You seem to think that downvotes are a bad thing. They're actually feedback
that you don't get in most circumstances.

You seem to think that you're owed feedback that you like. You're wrong.

