
Ask HN: Academia or Startup/Industry? - davrosthedalek
The title pretty much says it all. At some point in the life of a phd student or postdoc, one has to decide whether one wants to follow the academic path, or switch gears and work in the private sector.<p>I am a postdoc in nuclear physics at an renowned US institute, but my time there runs out. So I am in the same spot. It is easy enough to ask people who choose the academic path, but that is certainly one-sided. Since I, personally, wouldn't want to work for a big company but rather at a startup where I have some impact, I hope this is a good forum to get some insights.<p>So, who here had the same decision to make? What made you decide? Money? The possibility to create something by yourself?
Did you feel a "calling" to start or work at a startup? 
Did anybody regret it?<p>The other question would be: Is there actually interest in physicists?
======
thappycrop
Hey davrosthedalek, I'm facing a similar decision as well. I can't speak for
everyone, but I'm definitely leaning towards startups because there are simply
more opportunities for me in that direction. That will be different for
everyone but one way to figure this out is to contact both sides and see how
much interests you get from them.

I'm a biostatistician and my switch to data analytics comes rather naturally
but my biology background does cause some organizations / people to do a
double take (generally a negative one), but still I'm getting more interest in
industry than in academia because the academic landscape in general is
contracting, some fields like mine more severe than others.

I've chatted with a whole bunch of startups and folks in the industry and it
seems people with quantitative degrees plus coding skills tend to be welcomed.
Of course job specific skills varies a ton, but chances are if you're coming
from nuclear physics you'll find a good fit somewhere.

My decision was not just motivated by the number of opportunities and levels
of interest expressed by both sides, but also the chance to work on project
that has fairly immediate impact on people's lives. That search for relevance
(academic work can be buried deep in obscurity) is a big motivating factor for
me.

Good luck on your hunt. I'll be needing a bit of that too.

------
abozi
I finished my PhD in Comp. Sci. three years ago, majored in data mining - was
tough, but enjoyed every bit of it.

Soon as I finished, I wanted a job that wasn't fully research-based (I was a
little bit tired of experimenting, coding and writing paper cycle), and I
stumbled upon my current job. We are a start-up doing a fraud detection. It
was all quite fortunate, since towards the end of my PhD, I got caught up in
all the startup hype.

Having said that, I think one of the main reason why I enjoy my current work
environment was not because of the initial reasons of why I joined (I actually
had to get this job, because it was in a different city where my fiancee
lived, so job was just a good excuse to move) but the things that I have been
able to do at work.

When I joined it was quite terrible - writing Java 1.2 based applet on the
browser with old Swing components ( _shudder_ ).

But I decided to scrap the entire platform and do the entire re-design and re-
development of the platform during my spare time. I was able to get the
prototype ready, using the latest Web stack and I presented to my CEO, which
he loved.

And ever since then, I've slowly implemented my "hacker" way of development
into my work place.

I do think about going back and researching some time in the future - I also
just finished a journal paper with my previous supervisor and realised I
missed it.

I also sometimes think I'm 'wasting' my research or skillset I've acquired.

But, I try to read up on research papers here and there, compete in data
mining competitions here and there, enter hackathons, try to work with
different people.

Anyway, sorry for extending this story, but all in all, I'm happy, not
necessarily because of the decision I've made, but what actually happened
AFTER I've made the decision.

French designer Pierre Cardin used to toss a coin to make a really really big
decision and when someone said "why do you leave that to a chance?" and he
replied - "so long as I commit to my decision, I'll be ok". (I think that's
roughly how the story goes).

I'm not sure if I helped. :)

~~~
davrosthedalek
That was very interesting, thank you!

You mention this "wasting" thought, which I have too. But it's good to know
that despite this, you are still very happy with your choice. I always wonder
whether this thought is real, or implanted by interaction with all the people
in academia. For them, of course, academia is "better". At least I hope it is
:)

------
6paramitas
I was a physicist, with a Ph.D. in condensed matter. Industry is more fun, at
least you have more options to experience different things. And you can still
read physics books for fun, if you like, at your free time.

------
manglav
if you intend to work for a startup, I would go for FLiBe Energy, a startup
devoted to developing a thorium reactor. That's where I'm hopefully headed
after I graduate with a Chemical Eng. degree. To learn more about thorium
reactors, you can go here <http://energyfromthorium.com/>. The story of
thorium reactors could be made into a movie, it's that amazing.

~~~
davrosthedalek
Oh yeah, this is great! Also interesting: Traveling Wave Reactors
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor>). Bill Gates invested
quite a lot in TerraPower.

~~~
manglav
Yes, both are super interesting, but it's a shame it's taken so long to pursue
these technologies. Mind if we exchange email addresses? It's rare to meet
someone who's knowledgeable about these technologies and also on HN. My
professors don't even care about these, and I supposedly go to a very good
school. My email is in my profile.

------
davrosthedalek
Follow up question: Anybody here managed to have both? That is, a career in
academia, and some participation in startups?

~~~
CyberFonic
There are several. Probably the most famous of them is David Cheriton:
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2012/08/01/professor-
bil...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2012/08/01/professor-billionaire-
david-cheriton/)

------
CyberFonic
For some people money is the primary motivator. But you have completed your
PhD so I would guess that you are less motivated by money than the boyz on
Wall St.

My experiences range from working in multinationals to startups and then
returning to do my PhD. So I think my perceptions might be of some value to
you.

Academia is all about money as well. You need to acquire grants to do more
research. If you chose to teach then the tuition fees are part of the revenue
that you help the institution acquire. If you want to be very successful in
academia then you need to bring in lots of money which in turn means getting
lots of publications, etc. In effect you run a startup within an institution
and they take their share for providing the facilities, support, etc.

If you choose to create a startup, then you are in control but with that
control comes the responsibility for making it work. You have more freedom to
choose the path. Sooner or later you need to look at monetising your work and
that requires marketing, sales, admin, etc.

You ask whether there is much interest in physicists. Yes and No. Depends on
what specific skills you bring to the prospective employer. Due to your skill
set it is probably some large corporation. So until you prove yourself, you
are but a cog in a machine. Your PhD proves that you can perform original
research and that you can effectively communicate the fruits of your labours.
So it is how you plan to apply those skills that matter more than exactly what
you are an expert in. In the past people with your skills found much demand on
Wall St for their quantitative and reasoning abilities. These days, I think
Wall St is not a good option.

Although I'm a serial startup person, I've never made it big. Was able to
create comfortable living and enjoy the freedom of not working for The Man.
But clients are The Man in disguise - so you still need to be wary about
becoming a non-indentured slave. To answer your question, I don't regret it.
But you have to be comfortable with insecurity - both financial and emotional.
And it does limit the choices in relationships to those who too can cope with
the ups and downs of entrepreneurship.

This is becoming a rather long answer. So to wrap up: I believe you need to
feel "being called". You absolutely need to take stock of what your strengths
and interests are and how and where they can be applied. If you can't create
value in the eyes of others, then sooner or later you'll crash and burn. But
that is pretty much par for the course on all three paths you are considering.
So the bottom line question is how you cope when facing uncertain outcomes.
Considering your background in nuclear physics you might already be at home
with chaos and lack of certainity.

Good Luck !

~~~
davrosthedalek
Thanks for your long answer! I agree that Wall St. is not an option. I
wouldn't want to develop risk analyses or the next ultra fast trading bot
anyway. Not that I don't like thinking about finance, but not all day :)

I don't want to make this a "please hire me" post. But since you mentioned
specific skills: I would say that I have a higher affinity to software
development than most of my colleagues. For example, I am currently the
"offline analysis coordinator", and it that role I wrote pretty much the
entire analysis framework. I also dabbled into web applications: Our slow
control, i.e. the experimental control software, is a web application with
postgresql backend written in Python (Flask). I kind of liked that, and I
think I will wrap this up and put it on github.

But I digress. You made an interesting comment about relationships, and you
are certainly right there. On the other hand, academia doesn't make it easy
there too. You are guaranteed to move a lot, and especially in experimental
nuclear science, a lot of the places are in less than stellar areas.

What made you come back to make your PhD?

~~~
CyberFonic
Thanks for asking: I started my career as a "real" engineer - safety boots,
hard hat, big SUV, million dollar a day decisions. I morphed into financial
engineering guy (with engineering skills you can model and understand any
complex system) and I've always been involved with ICT - SCADA & telemetry
along with concrete footings and steelworks.

Over the years I became very frustrated about the lack of real engineering in
what passes for software engineering - obviously by this time my exposure was
to fund managers, insurance companies, merchant bankers and the software based
systems there. So I decided to make a mark in that corner of the universe. I'm
still working on my PhD, but also do consulting, involved in a startup and
teaching SE courses at postgrad level.

I guess my point is that I really wanted to do something about a problem that
wasn't being well addressed. Typical engineer personality - see problem - go
about fixing it. Try to not make it worse!

