
Ask HN: Will getting a PhD lead to a more interesting life? - foopdoopfoop
Hi there,<p>I&#x27;m at the end of my MSc. studies in CS. At the moment, I can choose to graduate in a month or two, or stay-on for another 9 months doing research in interactive theorem proving that will potentially lead to a PhD opportunity.<p>I&#x27;m doing my MSc in a foreign country and I&#x27;m very unhappy here. Another ~9 months seems like a huge hurdle to me. The current situation is if I choose to graduate soon, I will likely surrender my chance for a PhD.<p>I don&#x27;t particularly <i>love</i> studying. I think interactive theorem proving is quite cool, but the actual practice of studying&#x2F;research hasn&#x27;t been that enjoyable to me, but I enjoy having the knowledge once I&#x27;ve acquired it. In many ways it seems like &quot;the future&quot; to me, and it&#x27;d be really neat to be one of the first passengers on that train, so to say.<p>I have no desire to become a professor&#x2F;researcher. After I acquire my PhD, I surmise that I would go to industry.<p>The issue here is one of bad information: I don&#x27;t have industry experience and I don&#x27;t really know how any of this stuff plays out. I&#x27;m worried that if I chose to forego the PhD, I&#x27;ll really regret it in a number of years. I&#x27;m afraid I won&#x27;t be able to find interesting work with just a MSc, and I&#x27;m really afraid of getting a boring software engineering gig.<p>I&#x27;m concerned that without the expertise&#x2F;knowledge&#x2F;academic maturity that I would gain from a PhD, I&#x27;ll be stuck doing things that bore me after a number of years, with no room to grow to more interesting things. Equally concerning to me is that I think I&#x27;d likely be miserable during the PhD process. It seems very lonely, and I don&#x27;t find much enjoyment from, say, sitting in my office reading papers all day. I much prefer creating things. I also think I&#x27;m just not that bright and that a PhD would be a huge intellectual challenge for me. I&#x27;m also absolutely sick of living like a student with little financial freedom.<p>Does anyone have any guiding advice?
======
peterwoerner
I have a PhD (in mech engineering) and work in industry.

My experience was that I basically had to pick up a new physics set and tool
set every year as I jumped from algorithm development, to constitutive model
development, machine learning, and quantum computing. In all cases they were
tackling problems in different areas: new toolset to learn, new math to learn
and new physics to learn. I thoroughly enjoy working on research problems,
however I felt that there was a lot working on made up problems and forcing a
square pegs into round holes so we could declare success to the funding agency
when really it was a probably worse way to tackle the problem than industry
standard.

Pros: I was forced to ride a learning curve with a new skill set and new area
of expertise every year. I have learning to pick up skills very quickly.

I took a lot of cross discipline classes in physics, mechanical engineering,
mathematics, scientific computing, chemical engineering, and materials
engineering. I have a large amount of cross discipline knowledge.

I found the work fun and I basically had no boss which was nice.

The downside: I worked 60 hours a week for $20,000/year for 5 years. Lost
wages ~ $500,000

The tools and skills I developed for my PhD only peripherally translate to the
work I do in industry.

Advice: Get a job, the PhD will be waiting for you in 2 years if you decide
you want it then. Plus it sounds like you are thinking about getting a PhD
because looking for a job is hard.

~~~
chasedehan
> Advice: Get a job, the PhD will be waiting for you in 2 years if you decide
> you want it then. Plus it sounds like you are thinking about getting a PhD
> because looking for a job is hard.

Almost no one who takes that advice returns to get a PhD, the income is too
hard to give up and often life moves on which makes it hard to take the
financial hit and devote the time.

The only way it worked for me was to not need much money (tuition covered and
receive a stipend) and have 80+ hours a week to geek out over things that
interested me. Absolutely no way I could do that now with kids. That may be
one of the reasons almost everyone in my program was in their mid 20s, and the
hand full in their 50s after their kids went off to college.

~~~
nikkwong
Not sure. I'm in my 20's and have done well enough in industry (programming)
and with side projects to not have to worry about making money any more. Now
that basic needs are met, the question is how to spend my time in the ways
that are the most interesting to me.

As just someone with some business savvy and programming skills, I could go
work as a staff engineer somewhere—but that probably won't be that interesting
or impactful. If I go work at FAANG I'll probably work on ads or tweaking
existing systems—a cog in the wheel.

So the idea of going back to school to try for a PhD in some interesting field
is now something I'm considering seriously. I graduated from college 5 years
ago and I remember thinking about how badly I wanted to stop studying and
start making money in the 'real world'. Funny how retrospectively I can see
how that was all subliminally motivated by finances; and now that such
pressure has subsided, life is much more about fields of interest and
purposeful work.

The question is then, will a PhD always lead to meaningful work, or am I
digging myself into a hole, and I don't really know the answer to that.

------
yanokwa
I have a Ph.D. in CS from the University of Washington. I'm glad I did it, but
it's not for most people.

Academic research is like a marathon and the Ph.D. is like a marathon training
program. If you don't want to run a marathon, you probably don't need a
marathon training program. Yes, a marathon training program is an interesting
and rewarding way to improve your running, but it's very likely you can find
equally interesting and rewarding ways to improve your running that don't have
the grind of a marathon training program.

I'd strongly recommend you read The Ph.D Grind at [http://pgbovine.net/PhD-
memoir.htm](http://pgbovine.net/PhD-memoir.htm) before you consider starting a
Ph.D program. It's a good summary of what a Ph.D. experience at a top CS
university in the US is like.

~~~
blacksoil
4 years ago I cold emailed and phoned you to ask for advice regarding PhD
program. I followed your advice and ended up not pursuing a PhD. And yeah, I
think you're totally right :) so yeah, thanks again for answering my cold-
email and willing to have a phone call with me 4 years ago!

~~~
yanokwa
And I'm still answering cold emails to this day! Glad I could help and hope
you get a chance to pay it forward.

------
yodsanklai
An important point is that not all PhDs are equal. It varies a lot depending
on the advisor, the subject, and the lab where it takes place. Some topics are
quite "niche" and will not be useful in the industry. Some advisors don't
really supervise their students (can happen in the best schools, with
reputable professors). Check to see if you'll have the freedom to visit other
labs/companies during your PhD. It's good to see a variety of places to get
ideas from people, initiate collaborations, build a network. It's usually
possible, but requires initiative from your part. And you need to make sure
you will not get stuck in a never ending, boring PhD.

> I'm just not that bright and that a PhD would be a huge intellectual
> challenge for me

Don't think you need to be bright to complete a PhD. If you're able to get
accepted in a program with a decent advisor, you should have what it takes to
complete your PhD. It's also a matter of personality, perseverance.

I'm pretty happy that I completed a PhD. For one thing, it's great to have
more than one professional life. I did a variety of things. Worked in
academia, in several labs, several countries, and now in company. I had
friends who went straight working for a company after their Msc. They earned
more money, but I have the feeling I had a more diverse career, and that I
learned more things (even though some of them are pretty useless). On the
other hand, even in the industry, there are many opportunities to do
interesting things. It's up to you not to get stuck in a boring job.

There's no definite answer.

~~~
adrien-treuille
I agree with this. The choice of advisor makes a _huge_ difference in your PhD
experience. If you get along well with your advisor, have mutual respect, and
are working on interesting topics, getting a PhD is an exhilarating
experience.

TL;DR: Pick an advisor you're excited about.

------
benogorek
In 2011 I was buying a Ford Mustang and I had to make the decision whether to
upgrade to the V8 engine. It was $10K more (+ extra fuel) and the V6 already
had 300+ horsepower. I just couldn't justify it.

Eight years later, the car runs great, and it still even gets some
complements. I never once needed any extra power! But when someone asks me,
"Does it have the V8?" I have to tell them, "Naw, it's just the V6."

At the Ford dealership, you're paying $10K for nothing else than to be able to
tell people, for the next 8 years, that you bought the V8. And it might just
be worth it.

That's advice on whether to get your PhD, by the way, but it's a few more than
8 years.

~~~
m52go
For some people, the V8 means much more...the sound, the torque, and perhaps
most importantly, a stronger platform for tuning and power that a V6 simply
cannot offer.

Perhaps people doing PhDs also have different motives and intentions for how
to use them.

~~~
abawany
Also, for people into that sort of thing, a V8 has more value for a collector
than a V6 just by virtue of rarity.

------
fightme
CS PhD from Stanford in dynamic program analysis. Lost all my friends. Ghosted
by companies for jobs directly related to my research. Everyone I knew who
went directly into industry is doing way better than me. My salary has only
tracked inflation. I sorely regret the decision and consider it to have
fundamentally ruined my life beyond repair.

~~~
cujo
> Ghosted by companies for jobs directly related to my research

This is unexpected. What's going on there?

~~~
SkyPuncher
I have heard it anecdotally time and time again, "Overqualified".

Specialization only pays more when there's demand for the exact
specialization. Nobody wants to pay a PhD and risk them moving onto the
"perfect" position when the same job can be done by somebody more generalized.

~~~
cujo
Couldn't OP just not list that on the resume/application? This seems like a
solvable problem if it's as bad as they make it out.

~~~
SkyPuncher
This is the solution.

I once worked with a guy that had a law degree. He never listed that law
degree when applying to software engineering jobs. People figured he'd just go
back to law, even though he hated practicing law.

------
mcv
A PhD will probably make your life more "interesting" in the Chinese proverb
sense[0].

At least that's the impression I get from a lot of PhDs. I don't have one
myself, and I used to regret that, but not anymore. PhD work is hard,
thankless, underpaid work that has little to no value in industry. Although it
does open up opportunities to even more hard, thankless, underpaid work in
academia.

The one exception is Machine Learning. A PhD in ML can apparently get you paid
millions in the industry.

But if you already consider 9 months a huge hurdle, consider what a hurdle 4
years will be.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_ti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_times)
(It's apparently not based on any actual Chinese proverb or curse.)

~~~
fifnir
> has little to no value in industry.

So what ? It has great value to history and humankind.

~~~
falcor84
I find that to be a funny statement. Would you actually argue that every
single phd has "great value to history and humankind"?

~~~
fifnir
I find it sad when people have no other metric of value other than $$$. "I
can't sell this, what is this?"

~~~
vcavallo
I’ve always been curious about why people write “$$$” instead of “money”.
maybe you could elaborate

~~~
Stratoscope
I can't speak for the person you replied to, but sometimes this is done as a
way of disparaging money and the desire to have some, perhaps in the same vein
as writing "Micro$oft".

------
gwbas1c
I got my BS in CS 16 years ago. I always thought I'd go back for a PhD, but
every time I started looking, I quickly lost interest. (I don't think I'll
ever get one.)

But, here's the important quote:

> After I acquire my PhD, I surmise that I would go to industry.

Go into industry first. Why do I say this? I've been involved in hiring for
about 8 years, and I've only seen a very small amount of candidates with PhDs.
(They usually come from inexperienced recruiters who don't know how to hire
software engineers.) The candidates fresh from a PhD program usually have very
little experience in complicated software engineering, and thus will work at
the same level as a recent college grad. The only time they are useful is if
their field of study directly applies to the work we're doing; but I've never
seen a PhD candidate like that.

The thing to realize is this: (Computer Science) != (Software Engineering).
Industry mostly does software engineering; it only gets into "computer
science" if you're writing a compiler, a database, ect. So, unless you pick a
field of study that industry will need when you graduate, you'll end up being
as useful as an entry-level CS grad.

BTW: If you find something interesting, you can always leave industry to go
back to school. It's critical, however, that you set up your finances to do
that. Going back to school will be a huge paycut, so you need to make sure
that you don't have a big mortgage, large car payment, ect. (That being said,
assume that you'll work for 5-15 years before going for a PhD, so if you buy a
nice car now, and pay it off, you'll start your PhD program with a free used
car in good condition.)

~~~
rubicon33
> Industry mostly does software engineering

I would extend this thinking even further...

Most industry jobs aren't even practicing "Software Engineering". Algorithms,
data structures, discrete math... that's totally outside of the day to day
work for most "Software Engineers"

If you're building an app (web, mobile, desktop) it's largely plugging pieces
together nowadays. You're likely using libraries that were built using
"Software Engineering", but the end user practice of assembling those pieces
into a functional user-friendly application is more akin to a construction
worker assembling the 2x4s to build a house.

~~~
ariosto
What do you think a Civil, Mechanical, Industrial engineer does? Do you think
a Civil Engineer is going around re-working how buildings are designed?

------
blacksoil
I was thinking of getting a PhD 4 years ago. I applied and got accepted to CMU
master's program in robotic vision. I planned to go through the program and
worked my way to get into a good PhD program because I didn't have enough
credential to apply directly to good PhD programs. After thinking through it,
I decided not to even do the master's.

Throughout my thinking process, I spent everyday and lots of weekends sitting
at coffee shops crunching through research papers. And what I found was that a
lot of of the papers were not directly relevant to the industries, it's just
like what somebody said in the comments: a lot of research projects are like
trying to hammer a square peg into a circle hole. I'm sure some of them will
make great impact. For example, the research about neural network had been
done since the 80s, it just happens to take off nowadays because computers
back then weren't good enough. But when I asked myself: "What am I really
looking for?" I realized that I wanted to work on something that makes an
immediate impact. Especially because I grew up and raised in a developing
country, a lot of problems here are super immediate. (i.e. poverty, hunger,
lack of educations, etc) As so much as I'm genuinely curious and interested in
many of the research topics, I realized that my stamina didn't lie in
curiosity and interest alone, but more in the immediate impact I'm making. For
example, I learned that I'm much more fulfilled to work on something super
practical and can be immediately useful to people.

Even though I didn't end up doing a PhD, I still occasionally spend my time
reading conference papers. My curiosity and interest are pretty much satisfied
through that. I'm much more interested in exploring interesting applications
of such ingenious research rather than doing going super deep in a particular
topic and be the one doing the research. Magic Pony Technology is one of the
companies I look up to. I think it's a brilliant way of turning research into
something practical

------
chrisa
> "I don't particularly love studying"

> "I have no desire to become a professor/researcher"

I don't have a PhD, but my take is that if you don't like/want those things,
then a PhD will be a big waste of time.

It sounds like you're in a situation that you don't currently like, and are
hoping that a PhD will help solve that for you; but I suspect that you'll find
that being in a PhD program will feel like more of the same.

Also, if you have published papers, and keep up with current research and
publishing papers, then you _can_ go get a PhD after being in industry for
awhile if you think it was a big mistake. You don't have to do one right after
a masters.

I hope you figure out what you want to do - And good luck with whatever you
decide!

------
zhdc1
It looks like you're an American expat studying in Germany.

A lot of PhD's there go directly into industry, so much so that's from my
observation it's the norm instead of the outlier.

You would likely only surrender the chance for a PhD at your institution - and
even then, only with your Chair. Funded PhDs are treated like a job and you
more or less apply for them just like any other job opening. If you don't like
what you are researching, but you are interested in holding employment that
involves research, I would recommend looking for a funded PhD at another
institution. Applicants with a technical background are at a premium in other
fields, so you wouldn't even necessarily have to worry about sticking with CS.

So, here's my recommendation:

1.) Stick with your current research for the rest of the academic year. It
gives you something to do while you're looking for employment.

2.) Start browsing one of the many job boards for EU academic positions. Find
something you like.

3.) Start browsing any of the job boards for private employment - EU, US, or
otherwise.

4.) Do a couple of interviews. If you find something you like, whether in
academia or the private sector, go with it.

5.) If you don't find anything, and if you're offered the PhD position at your
university, think hard about whether or not you want to take it. Research as a
PhD is different (you're treated more like an employee).

Also think about what you don't like about your current research and where you
live. Are you dissatisfied because of cultural reasons - which is definitely
an issue in the expat community - or are you dissatisfied because of your line
or research or your academic environment?

~~~
onli
In Germany? Things to keep in mind:

1\. There is no time limit when doing a PhD. I know several colleagues who did
a PhD in Germany who took more than 10 years. Those were not pathological
cases.

2\. It's definitely useful to have the title when getting a job and it helps
to get some specific positions. And it opens the doors for interviews in this
country. Though, even in Germany: Compared to just starting to work and
getting experience that way you are likely to lose money, even in the long
run.

Doing a PhD is a job, one that is not very well paid. It can be pretty great
if you are okay with the money you earn and if you can enjoy the time. A good
PhD program: Not too much work (I recently passed by the university at 14:30
on a Friday, there was one single soul), interesting work, something specific
you get in the end. But for that to work positively it has to be something you
enjoy doing. If you'd see it as lost time, it will be lost time. It has to be
in a city and a country you like where you can be with people you like and
work on stuff you enjoy. OP, it sounds as nothing of that would be true for
you - and if not, a PhD is the best way to reach a burnout or a clinical
depression. Don't do it.

------
probably_wrong
Most of your post reads as if you really don't want to do a PhD, but are
looking for someone to convince you to stay. We can't really help you with
that.

If you really want to do a PhD, I thought I should add a clarification
regarding this:

> Equally concerning to me is that I think I'd likely be miserable during the
> PhD process. It seems very lonely, and I don't find much enjoyment from,
> say, sitting in my office reading papers all day.

My PhD was by far the most intellectually stimulant job I ever had, and now
that I'm in industry I find myself missing it. This is of course dependent of
your research group, but some of my weekly PhD activities included

* a weekly seminar where we would all read a new paper and discuss it

* a weekly course on specific research topics - first it was Neural Networks, then it was Reinforcement Learning. We made a point of having a programming part to it, in order not to remain purely theoretical.

* optional courses on topics that each one of us found interesting

* discussions with other researchers who would come to our offices and ask for input regarding a specific problem they had

* a weekly "meeting" in which we got together to have cookies and talk about life

Add the yearly sprint to get things ready for a conference and the random
tasks such as _organizing_ a conference, and the end result was that there was
always something new to keep myself busy.

Of course, not all PhDs are like mine and some people are truly miserable. But
it's not a given that all PhDs will be like that.

~~~
p1esk
_there was always something new to keep myself busy_

Doing phd research didn’t keep you busy?

------
abdullahkhalids
How is your mental health? A PhD takes a significant toll on the mental health
of a large chunk of the students. It is hard work, you are paid peanuts and
sometimes the completion joy is not worth it.

If you are not enjoying what you do, you are doubly at risk of developing
mental health issues. As someone with a PhD and who works in academia, a PhD
is just a degree. It is not worth the risk of depression.

------
umutisik
A lot of good advice here already. Here's something which may be a factor in
your thinking. This is what I've observed since I moved to industry post-PhD:
A PhD helps one gain scientific maturity simply by giving one full 'make-or-
break' ownership of a project. In industry, it is very rare, especially for a
junior person, to completely own a difficult and complicated project, in a way
that it just won't get done right if they don't do it right. And maybe after
the first successful project, you look for a new one, that experience will add
to your scientific maturity as well.

------
Gatsky
I think there are some people who really want to do research more than
anything else. They should do PhDs. People without this compulsion are
probably better off doing something else.

I was joking with a friend the other day about interview questions which pick
out the people most likely to succeed at research. The consensus was that this
is the best discriminator:

"Do you ever wish that all your friends and family would just vanish so you
could get more work done?"

~~~
jotakami
If my answer is “Yes, but only temporarily!” does that still count?

For real though, this comment confirms all of my intuition. I’m about to start
a PhD at the age of 36, with a spouse and child to support, and I know my bank
account will never forgive me for this. But... I can’t not do it.

~~~
SiempreViernes
I hope you have a good supervisor and I wish you good luck!

------
soumyadeb
I did a PhD in Computer Science but chose to go to industry (not research
lap). My PhD had zero effect on the job opportunities OR quality of job. Did a
couple of startups after and that gave me a lot more fulfilling experience.
PhD teaches you somethings like how to judge a problem but you can learn the
same thing in a much shorter timespan e.g. by trying to do a startup.

I would say, unless you are 100% sure you want to go to academia or research
lab, DON'T do a PhD. You will never regret it. Also, it is never a one way
street. After a year or two working somewhere if you find out that PhD is your
true calling, you can always go back to graduate school. You will get into a
better graduate school. The PhD you would then do will likely be better too.
Nothing against automated theorem proving (don't know what it is) but likely
your industry experience will give you a better perspective on how to pick a
better problem.

------
cossatot
Geology PhD here, caveat emptor:

If you don't find research compelling, then don't go for a PhD. It's not worth
it on any front--you'll be broke, stressed and miserable for years and then
quite possibly quit with little to show for it.

I think the concerns about a typical software engineering job not being
interesting or allowing for intellectual growth or exploration are also
overblown. Programming is pretty special in that there are a lot of different
ways to do things, and the barrier to entry is incredibly low. If you're bored
you can spend what work time you can get away with, and what personal time you
have, and explore side channels or new approaches to optimizing parts of what
you're already working on.

Interactive theorem proving is indeed cool, but it's not the only thing out
there, and if working on it comes with a certain lifestyle that you find
untenable, then don't feel bad about passing on it. There are lots of cool
things to do, and plenty of other trains to be one of the first aboard--just
keep a look out while you're doing whatever you end up doing.

Furthermore you can always go back and get a PhD unless other circumstances
(i.e. kids and the need for a higher income) get in the way.

That being said, I got a PhD and it definitely made my life more interesting,
but I'm a committed research scientist and would rather do nothing else, so
there weren't a lot of other options for me.

------
Dumblydorr
Don't do the PhD. They always take longer than the advisors' rosy estimates
and if you're unhappy, it will seriously harm your mental health. If you
dislike studying, getting a PhD isn't for you as that degree tells employers
"here is someone who studies and researches" and thus you may be on the hook
for more school- like work.

I'd say just go into industry now, if you truly want a PhD later on, do it
where you'll have a better chance of mental health and prosperity.

------
ska
Here is my general related advice for people thinking about a Ph.D. in STEM.
In no particular order

\- don't go to a program unless you are paid enough for it to at least cover
costs. Preferably an ok salary.

\- it will likely hurt your lifetime earnings, think about if that matters to
you.

\- done right, it's probably the most interesting work you will have for it's
own sake

\- ... but it probably wont' have any broad impact

\- absolutely do it if you think you want an academic career

\- ... but think about a plan B for when you decide you don't, or they decide
you won't

\- if you are going because you want a more "interesting" career in industry
you usually should have

a) worked in that industry before going and

b) have a precise idea of the degree program, topic(s), and then the jobs you
are targeting

\- it will be a lot of work, and a lot of fun. Sometimes on the same day but
not always. If it isn't both on average you should consider leaving.

\- the degree itself isn't going to do much for you in industry unless your
area of study overlaps with something in current demand. That's often a bit of
a crapshoot when you are looking 5+ years ahead.

\- if you are considering going because you can't think of what else to do at
the moment, don't.

\- some jobs will pass you over because they are worried you will be bored.
Sometimes they are right.

\- some jobs will pass you over because they are worried you are "too
academic". Sometimes they are right - you will have to prove you are practical
also. This will take time.

\- some jobs will pass you over because they don't value the education or
think you didn't gain anything useful from it. They are mostly wrong (but
consider if you want to work in that environment).

------
crispyambulance
There are plenty of PHD's who lead thoroughly uninteresting lives, there are
plenty that have exciting and meaningful lives.

Your degree isn't what makes your life interesting or not, nor is your job
title, nor is your job, nor is how much you get paid.

The premise of the question is wrong, IMHO.

If you're "not sure" about the PHD, take some time off and work for a couple
years in something challenging and then decide if the PHD is right for you.
You'll still be sharp enough to resume the studies and you'll have more
experience from which you can base your decision.

~~~
dominotw
> Your degree isn't what makes your life interesting or not, nor is your job
> title, nor is your job, nor is how much you get paid.

So a day laborer in India has equal chance at "interesting life" than a
researcher at google ?

~~~
debatem1
I have been a day laborer (not in India) and worked at Google (not as a
researcher) so I might be close enough to both worlds.

While my time at Google was very exciting for me, it didn't yield any stories
that friends or family ask me to retell. Compared to "the time my boss asked
me to catch running circular saws he would slide down a roof at me", "that
time I found a complicated XSS" just lacks pizzazz. And since I worked _hard_
, I had fewer off hours to generate stories like "the time <well-known
political figure> got so mad he called me an asshole in a room full of donors"
or "the time I got second place in a drunken knife-catching contest".

The net is that based on that coarse metric of how often retellings of stories
from various times in my life are requested, my life at Google was actually
one of the least interesting I led, and I suspect that will be generalizable
for most people without a straight-line path through life.

~~~
dominotw
> my life at Google was actually one of the least interesting

I am assuming, you don't really care about living an interesting life as you
traded an interesting life for one that insn't.

Also, when I say "day laborer" I am not talking about educated people who do
that for a while. I am talking about ppl stuck in that situation with no way
out.

~~~
debatem1
I was a day laborer before I went into tech or got an education. And (like
most people, I suspect) I do care about living an interesting life-- I just
didn't know that I was trading that away. Didn't figure it out for a long
time, actually.

~~~
dominotw
> I do care about living an interesting life

Why can't you simply reverse your course of action though. Now that you have
better understanding of both sides of it.

~~~
debatem1
I did. I left Google to take a job that is both more interesting and that
leaves me more time to do interesting things.

------
robotresearcher
> I don't particularly love studying. > I'm absolutely sick of living like a
> student > It seems very lonely

Then don't do it.

> I don't have industry experience

No one starts out with industry experience. Get started.

Choose your company position carefully for interesting scope. Change jobs if
you make a mistake.

Meta advice: choice is stressful and you sound stressed. Take a minute to
reflect on the strength of your position and long term outlook. Looking pretty
good! Now, take a breath, and tackle your choice problem as if you were
helping a close friend with it.

------
omginternets
I very much disagree with the general tenor of the comments. True, a Ph.D
won't _directly_ translate into more money, or more exciting job prospects.
Also true, a Ph.D isn't a golden key to life.

A Ph.D in a solid field gives you a new set of tools for solving problems, and
it gives you the luxury of digging very deeply into a subject you find
rich/stimulating/opportune. I walked out with:

\- deep knowledge of cutting edge techniques in my field \- a network of
world-class experts to whom I could turn when faced with interesting
business/engineering problems \- years of practice in solving _hard_ problems

> I much prefer creating things.

A good Ph.D _serves_ your ability to create.

> I'll be stuck doing things that bore me after a number of years, with no
> room to grow to more interesting things.

You don't have to stay in academia for your Ph.D to be valuable.

>I also think I'm just not that bright and that a PhD would be a huge
intellectual challenge for me.

None of us are "that bright". That's the whole point of the Ph.D.

------
rossdavidh
I got a MSc (in electrical engineering, thesis on neural networks in 1998) and
went into industry, switching into programming in mid-aughts. Absolutely no
regrets. Ph.D. is absolutely not necessary to get a good job in programming,
and at most employers not really even an advantage.

If you make the wrong choice of which job to take, you can fix that relatively
easily by switching employers, and your experience at the "wrong" place still
adds to your perceived value, status, and pay. If you make the wrong choice of
thesis, advisor, or university, I am led to believe it is much more difficult
to correct.

From your own description of your desires, skills, and interests, it does not
sound like you should be getting a PhD. You can leave industry and go back to
school later if you want to (I did to get my master's), but the reality is you
almost certainly will not want to, so you should be clear in your mind that
you're making a definite choice.

------
pjmic
I finished my PhD about a year ago (graduating in a month finally). First and
foremost, graduating won't stop you from doing a PhD later. I initially took
an industry job for a year and then chose to go back to academia.

I initially went back to academia with the perspective of either staying in
academia or going into research, but after those four years I basically lost
the will to stick in these fields.

Honestly if you don't have a particular subject or project you want to do for
your PhD it's not worth going through it. I initially felt like you, that if I
didn't do it I'd regret it, but now sometimes I wonder if the time I spent
doing it was worth it ( and I actually wanted to do a specific thing).

It's way more important to just find a job that fits what you currently find
interesting than it is to remain in academia hoping that a PhD is anywhere
near what you hope it is.

~~~
EmeraldMoon
I cannot agree more with your last paragraph.

I am finishing my PhD in a few months and while most people think I have a
good profile for and should stay in academia, I have lost the will honestly.

At the end of my PhD, I am basically still interested in the things I was
always interested in. But I keep questioning myself if PhD was really worth
it, and what would I really have missed out if I just joined a job that I
enjoyed doing.

------
tylerl
If we're talking about Computer Science, a PhD will generally not get you a
job. The good jobs all look for skills rather than credentials, and formal
education is mostly ignored, both during hiring and at work in general.

The case where a PhD will actually help is when your research topic is
relevant to the business, where the work you did to get your PhD actually
broke new ground in an way that makes you an expert on a problem the company
wants to solve.

------
glitchc
> I have no desire to become a professor/researcher. After I acquire my PhD, I
> surmise that I would go to industry.

Run. Join the workforce. You’ll be much happier.

~~~
randcraw
Agreed. In industry, if you want to work in R&D or climb the technical ladder,
the PhD is a clear win -- as long as your expertise area is regarded
favorably. If it's not, you've largely wasted 3-5 years of your life.

Worse, if you see yourself evolving into a management or business role, a PhD
may prove to be a liability. In many commercial settings, a doctorate is seen
as a biomarker for 'is too bookish' or 'prefers analysis over action' or
'lives in a dream world'. The more theoretical your thesis area, the more
likely this is to happen.

------
Beltiras
It sounds to me like you have a real passion for building things. That more
than anything else (including a Phd) will determine if you land an interesting
job. Remember that coders are hired on merit not accolades (well, supposedly,
modulo whiteboard interviewing and other such pleasantries). I'm working with
people with only community college degrees (no university) that are
phenomenally capable and people with multiple university degrees that have a
hard time thinking themselves out of a cardboard box. Your field of study is
interesting to me. Have you thought about a cross-discipline PhD (more than
one way to skin a cat)? Can you build a frontend that would look interesting
to someone in philosophy or economics (or pick any other field)? You will not
do yourself any favors by committing to several years of what you perceive
right now as hellish. Don't worry about what you would gain in academia.
Industry will challenge you to improve in other ways. I learned more in my
first year on my first post-graduation job than in all of my year at uni.

------
herodotus
Quick Answer: No it will not.

I have a Ph.D, and I have worked both as an academic and as a developer (at
Apple). More than half the people in my group at Apple had PhDs, but I would
say that their degree was irrelevant to their position and job. What mattered
was the skill and passion they brought to their work.

The people I met who were truly happy in their job (either in university of
industry) were the ones who loved what they did. If you love doing research,
and all that goes with it: reading articles, writing papers, advancing
knowledge, then, assuming you have talent too, you will be happy as an
academic, and you will need a PhD. If, on the other hand, you want to be
creative, contribute to a team effort, work with like minded others, then you
do not need a PhD. I do not believe that getting a PhD will give you
"expertise/knowledge/academic maturity".

Personally, I learned WAY more outside of university, and tackled much more
interesting problems after I left. My post-research life was much happier than
my research life.

Good luck.

------
BeetleB
I'll give the US perspective.

You don't forego anything if you choose not to do a PhD right now. You can
always do it at a later age - even in your 40's.

Red flags: You don't love studying. You don't love the _process_ of research.
You have loneliness concerns (loneliness is a reality for most PhD students).
You don't want to think about sitting in the office reading papers all day. I
can assure you - reading journal papers is boring - they're often not written
to be read easily.

Don't worry about not being bright and it being a huge intellectual challenge.
Many/most students feel they're not bright enough, and whether it will be a
huge challenge depends heavily on the topic and your advisor.

Worrying about not being able to do interesting work: While I do think a PhD
makes it easier to find interesting work, I think largely that's a separate
skill in itself. I would wager that most PhDs do not find particularly
interesting industry jobs if they do not learn the skills to find such jobs.
Merely going through the motions of acquiring a PhD will not help too much in
that regard. And if you do develop those skills, chances are good you'll be
able to get interesting jobs with your MSc.

If you have a view that academia is about doing fun problems, the truth is yes
and no. The "yes" is obvious. The "no" is that very, very often the reality is
papers/conferences are the currency of academia, and the typical professor
these days is more interested in optimizing that metric. So there's a good
chance you'll end up publishing work that is dubious, or end up doing hacks to
get more papers (e.g. republishing the same stuff with minor tweaks).

Definitely do not go into academia with the assumption that people there are
more intellectually honest or have more integrity than in industry.

------
mkl
Well, here are some thoughts:

1\. What is "interesting work" to you? _Everything_ depends on that. Would you
be going into industry as a researcher? If not, a PhD may not be useful, and
interactive theorem proving in particular doesn't seem relevant to industry.

2\. Many people get their PhD at a different institution than their previous
degree(s), so I don't understand the choice you think you're facing.

3\. It's perfectly possible to step away from university study and come back.
I had a ~2 year gap before starting my PhD.

4\. Some PhD research is very collaborative. Depends on what you're doing,
where, and with who. Look up authors of papers you think are great, especially
those with quite a few authors.

5\. Research success is often as much about persistence as intelligence. Yes,
sometimes you need to read papers all day, but it's with the goal of creating
new things.

6\. If you think you'd be miserable while doing a PhD, you'd be crazy to do
it.

------
geophile
"More interesting life". Not for you, from the sound of it. Yes, with a PhD
you could do things you wouldn't get the chance to as an MSc. But those are
things that you don't seem to enjoy -- reading papers, research. Some PhDs do
write software, but more often (I think) they do the research and delegate the
writing of any necessary software.

You don't want to do a PhD, you don't want to do the work that a PhD does, so
why do it?

An MSc who is excited about his work is going to be far more useful and happy
than an unmotivated PhD.

Source: I have a CS PhD, from many years ago. Like you, I preferred creating
things. I was fortunate to be able to make the transition to industry. But I
also saw contemporaries, with PhDs, who wanted to make that transition, but
waited too long and were then unable to.

------
adrien-treuille
Don't ask "will it lead to..." That question always ends in trading present
misery for an illusory brighter future.

Instead ask "is this how I want to spend my short time on earth?" If doing
research and writing papers sound exciting, then DO IT.

Follow that approach and your life will be interesting.

------
lonesword
I am in a similar situation as you - I'm currently doing my Msc (Computer
Science, in Germany) and cannot decide whether I would want to continue to a
Phd or head back to the industry. However, I had worked 3 years in the
industry _before_ I enrolled for the current masters program, and that gave me
a lot of perspective. Since you mentioned this:

> I don't have industry experience and I don't really know how any of this
> stuff plays out. I'm worried that if I chose to forego the PhD, I'll really
> regret it in a number of years. I'm afraid I won't be able to find
> interesting work with just a MSc, and I'm really afraid of getting a boring
> software engineering gig.

The trick is to find an engineering job in a domain/problem that you are
interested in. I would really recommend that you spend a few years in the
industry, since my time as a professional really really helped me in the long
run. I am able to prioritize things faster, and meta-learnings like "Validate
your hypothesis before investing resources" are true in both academia and
industry. It would also be a good opportunity to gain some software
engineering skills (academia has a bad rep when it comes to code quality) and
some people skills (eg: how to do code reviews without sounding like a jerk).
Also, the money would really cushion the blow if you end up deciding to do a
PhD later after all.

------
chasedehan
I have a PhD in Economics and was a Finance professor for a few years before
realizing that life in the academe wouldn't suit my skills. I now work in Data
Science and couldn't be happier.

The question of, "is it worth it?" is complex and only can be answered for
yourself.

Most people will say that if you don't plan on working in academia that the
PhD will lead to a suboptimal career income. You could spend that 4+ years
building your skills working for a company and end up earning considerably
more. The other side effect is that there is a definite bias against PhDs for
most jobs in industry.

For me, it was all about the journey and I wouldn't change any of it for the
world. Any decent PhD program will expand your horizons more than nearly
anything else. There is no way I would be in the same position now without my
previous experiences. I do have to say though that my "detour" through grad
school and being a professor means that I didn't start earning real money
until my mid 30s and puts me financially behind some friends of mine who
started earlier. Seriously though, the experience was amazing as it expanded
so much about how I think about the world.

If you do a PhD, you should be doing it for yourself and your own learning. If
you do it for the title/paycheck, there are far better ways to get there.

------
captainbland
It seems like you're kind of on the fence about it. I'd say try applying to a
few positions that seem interesting to you anyway, that are likely to give you
an interview, but don't lie about being super enthusiastic about reading
through stacks of paper or whatever while you're doing it. Just be honest
about the sorts of things you hope you'd get out of the programme while you're
there - maybe they'll consider you a good fit, maybe they won't or maybe
you'll figure out that you want to do it or not while you're doing that.

At least then you'll have explored your options fully even if you don't end up
going for it with the greatest amount of knowledge about it as you could have
- if nothing else you'll have informed regrets!

There's another aspect to this though: There's a big tradeoff between
"interesting" work and "good" work in some cases - for instance consider the
games industry. That's arguably the peak of creative technical work but
because so many people want to do it often the conditions aren't great and the
pay is lower than some other fields despite the work being as hard or harder.
Consider it an artefact of supply and demand in the labour market I suppose.

------
wildmanxx
My advice to anybody in general would be: Do it. I did a Ph.D. and I had a
blast. You need to be in an area of your field that you really like, and over
the Ph.D. candidate years you will meet essentially everybody on the planet
working on the same stuff, geek out with similarly-minded people in your lab
or at conferences around the globe. A Ph.D. widens your view on our field
substantially and you feel less like your role in the world is that of a code
monkey. Don't do it in the U.S. though, where your position in society is to
be a (financially) poor student and often times just being used by your
advisor as cheap labor. Do it in a country that has better conditions, like
you find all over the place in Europe for example. If you first go to
industry, you'll never come back.

My advice to you specifically would be: Don't do it. You seem to dislike
academia and your area in particular. A Ph.D. is _not_ an instrument to get
better opportunities in industry, except for a very few research-oriented
positions. I'm now working in industry as a software engineer, and I'm also
having a blast, but the position I have did not require a Ph.D. (I feel like I
have a broader understanding of CS than my colleagues do though.)

------
slothtrop
PhD life is, in general, a pathway to academia; it means research and
teaching. Add to the fact, you'll be overqualified for the vast majority of
relevant work.

> I much prefer creating things.

Just do that. Enter the workforce and start a pet project, or think bigger.

------
drchewbacca
In general I think if you are very unhappy it makes sense to change things up.
It is possible to do a PhD later in life if you want to.

It might help you to change the area you live, get a job and see what that is
like. It will help you see what is good and bad about academia and just
working a normal job and that will let you make an informed decision about how
to proceed.

Also I agree totally the interactive theorem proving is the future.

------
Schwolop
Entry to a PhD program is not something that is dangled like a golden carrot
as the promise of an interesting life. Anyone offering such a lure is more
likely looking for cheap graduate student labour and you should run a mile
away.

In reality, if you are self-funded or have a scholarship, and suitable grades,
most academics will gladly take you on as a PhD candidate. There is no
shortage of junior academics looking for people to maintain their labs, fix
their equipment, and add their names to the end of some papers as a
professional courtesy for fixing a few spelling mistakes. Sure, you might not
get a position under a world-famous academic, but - especially if you have no
interest staying in academia afterwards anyway - this has absolutely no impact
on your future life whatsoever. If you're just interested in the letters P, H,
and D after your name then you can study for that anywhere, anytime, on _your_
terms.

From the limited context you've provided, I would recommend you do not
continue on to _this_ PhD. Do one later in life if you still feel it's
warranted.

------
metaphor
This short essay[1] (with links to 26 translations now...wow!) by CS Prof.
Douglas Comer of Purdue helped me find solace when I was struggling with a
comparable dilemma.

[1]
[https://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/essay.phd.html](https://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/essay.phd.html)

------
woeirua
I was in a PhD program, and left because I realized that I didn't really want
to be there for another 4 years to finish after my Masters degree.

I think the problem with academia is that you are always around very
intelligent people with PhDs, who have survived the very ruthless culling to
make it into academia. From their perspective, a PhD is a great deal. In
reality, a PhD is more of a mixed bag.

These are my observations from viewing the outcomes of my cohort:

The pros of a PhD: 1 - you're more likely to be working on research, 2 -
you're more likely to lead an R&D team (and in some places it will be a
requirement past a certain point if you want to climb the science management
ladder), 3 - there's a small salary bump, 4 - people will tend to give your
scientific arguments more weight than someone without a PhD, 5 - a PhD is a
requirement for some positions at (a very limited) number of employers.

Cons: 1 - Those three letters next to your name will make you overqualified
for a lot of very interesting jobs; 2 - there is a huge opportunity cost
associated with getting a PhD; 3 - employers value practical experience far
more than someone with more education; 4 - a PhD does not necessarily
guarantee that you will find more interesting work, there are tons of people
with PhDs who are essentially underemployed (by choice or by necessity); 5 -
depending on your field, you may find that jobs at the PhD level are
geographically limited; 6 - job search typically takes much longer.

Overall, there are only two reasons I would recommend someone get a PhD: 1 -
they want to be an academic/researcher; or 2 - they want to spend 4-6 years
studying a specific subject out of curiosity or intense interest.

Also, you can always go back. There are people who complete PhDs in their 30s,
40s, and 50s. The only thing that alternative students give up, is potentially
the ability to enter academia, but even that is not always true.

------
yxchng
If you want to get cool jobs in AI, you do need PhD.(i.e.
[https://careers.google.com/jobs/results/6231594434232320-res...](https://careers.google.com/jobs/results/6231594434232320-research-
scientist-google-ai-united-states/), [https://www.quora.com/Does-the-AI-team-
at-Facebook-hire-rese...](https://www.quora.com/Does-the-AI-team-at-Facebook-
hire-researchers-without-a-PhD-degree)). Those that don’t are just meaningless
jobs in startups that pretend to do AI (git clone X, change dataset, train and
pray that the machine learning god makes magic happen).

Though these meaningless jobs do pay well these days, thanks to Softbank.

------
hbbio
Like many here, I have a PhD. First, I did this because I strongly wanted to
do it, and I don't regret my choice at all.

In your case, since you don't like the environment where you are and where you
would pursue your PhD, it seems a clear no! You want to do a PhD because you
either want to stay in the environment where you are (e.g. your lab internship
during M.Sc.) and you want to continue doing more advanced research with the
same people. Or you have been in (remote) contact with a team or a researcher
and you badly _want_ to work a few years with them and make their research
topic yours. If you feel none of these situations apply, you'd rather go
(working) in an environment where you will thrive.

------
eanthy
Only place in industry that requires a PhD is Data Science. How interesting
what you do there is depends on the company. In most cases as a Data Scientist
you won't be doing much coding. Otherwise if you want to go in any other
software development you don't need PhD, because as you said you don't want to
be a researcher. That being said its very likely for your 9-5 programming job
to be very boring and not what you expected so I suggest you don't completely
rule out researching, because it probably won't get any more interesting than
that.

~~~
threeseed
I only know a few hundred Data Scientists and (a) you don't need a PhD and (b)
they do quite a bit of coding. But I suppose if you work in a more research
capacity that might be flipped.

And personally I would be wary of any company that insists on a PhD since it's
a clear sign to me that they are clueless. Since great Data Scientists are
those with strong EQ and communication skills not those they know the most
algorithms.

~~~
bane
Concur. I know several dozen Data Scientists with and w/o PhDs, at a wide
range of skill levels. In general the better DSs I know, the ones who can
deliver useful solutions in meaningful timeframes, are the ones who chose not
to pursue the PhD, but have attained an MS in some engineering field and have
a desire to learn the technical ropes that feed into their field and that
their field feeds.

------
jaynetics
You might want to ask yourself whether it's the fear of making the jump into
working life that's holding you back. After all, academia is a lot like
school, so it's what you've done all your life and you know very well what is
expected of you.

I was a fairly good student and considered doing a PhD during my MA. However,
I felt exactly the same way.

In the end, I tried a variety of jobs instead. Looking back, I feel like I've
evaded a huge trap. Nowadays, I'd even say that dropping out after the
bachelor or doing a more unrelated master might have been best for me. YMMV.

------
sjg007
If you want to spend your day working on theorem proving then get a PhD. If
not, don't. You may also find another PhD subject you may like more. A PhD
opens different doors even though you may still arrive at the same
destination. If you are paralyzed in making a decision, you might want to
start the PhD and do a summer internships at various companies. Use
internships as a way to evaluate a "regular" jobs. BTW this advice doesn't
mean you have to stay in this country that you hate. You may be able to get a
PhD somewhere you like!

~~~
dehrmann
A PhD also closes some doors because the roles you apply for will tend to be
more specialized. Or maybe that's not the direction you want to go, and you
have to explain in every HR phone screen for five years "no, I actually want
to do x."

In general, the jobs you get if you have a PhD pay somewhat better, but
there's fewer of them, and have less flexibility with who you work for and
where.

~~~
sjg007
Eh you can leave it off your resume if you want.

------
leothekim
When I toyed with the idea of getting a PhD, I spoke to a professor at a CS
conference about what it's like to be on a conference committee. One of the
first things he said was "Well if my paper doesn't get in another professor's
conference, there's no way that professor's papers are getting in _my_
conference." (Double-blind notwithstanding, the research topics in this
particular conference had known investigators.)

As much as I enjoyed the toil and reward of seeking novel results, I decided
at that point that I could enjoy computer science and work on interesting
(possibly novel) things without having to be a part of academia and the petty
politics that drive a lot of it.

It really depends on what you define as "interesting" and what you want to get
out of your investment in time and energy towards your studies. In a lot of
ways, there's no better time to be alive as a software engineer than now. You
can apply those skills in such a wide variety of industries (multitudes of AI
applications, VR, health care, transportation, etc), many of which are getting
new or increased investment from VCs. You may not work on something
specifically interesting, but your contribution to a larger goal or mission
can be greatly satisfying. I'd say pick an industry where you can have even a
small impact as an engineer, or a company where you may have exposure to many
areas and drill down into things that interest you.

------
Ahmed90
As a 5th grade dropout who is a fully self-taught developer, I did Interview,
mentor, and supervised a multiple of developers with masters and PhDs to help
them understand and get comfortable in the real world of the IT industry, sure
they are probably "smarter", faster researchers, more organized than me but I
have the experience to put together the big picture, cover the edge cases,
account for common mistakes in the domain, understand the market and the
clients mentality etc... most of that won't be covered by a PhD.

Noone started his career with a bunch of experience, you'll get boring jobs,
you'll encounter annoying bosses or clients, you'll have stress and deadlines
pressure, you'll be forced to develop things that don't match "your idea" of
quality, you'll probably have some imposter syndrome... these are just common
parts of the industry especially for newcomers.

The best advice would be if you're not looking to go into academia then don't
go for PhD, it's a waste of time you can use that time to grind through the
industry and get that experience. Another important thing IMHO is that no
matter how cool your field is, no matter how much you like it, if it fells
under the deadlines, pressure, and stress wheel you'll not enjoy it, you'll
find something else that seems more fun and you'll wish if you can do that
instead!

I would say if you want maximum fun and then have fun on side-projects, open-
source, or freelance on the side

------
davemp
If you're already feeling a bit burnt out, an interesting hobby (HN probably
has a lot of good suggestions) and a decent job would probably lead to a more
satisfying near future. What seems like an enticing job can lose its luster in
a year or two anyways and the financial security you'll get from 4-5 extra
years of wages will go a long ways.

Imagine two years down the line: with a job you could be looking to buy /
living in your first house, or you could be maybe half way done your PhD.

------
cr1222
It sounds like it might not be the right move for you. If you do go into a
Ph.D, I do think it's important to have a clear idea of what you want out of
it.

I did a Ph.D and have no regrets - for me, it resulted in more interesting
work and rapid advancement once I was in industry. I picked up a lot of
relevant knowledge on distributed systems (not know-how or techniques, but
generally how to think about them and evaluate them) that comes in use every
day. Exploring the (vast) space of potential system designs and figuring out
how to evaluate them is something that I picked up in the Ph.D and is
incredibly useful in my job. A Ph.D doesn't give you that knowledge on a
platter, but it can give you the time and resources to learn and practice it.
I think a lot of engineers in the industry are... not great... at doing this
and in many cases don't even realize it.

Anyway, doing a Ph.D. gives you a big blank space to fill in with self-
directed learning and research. For some people that's a golden opportunity.
If your goal is to be taught skills that you will directly apply in your
future career, a Ph.D is a crapshoot. You _might_ get that if you have a
hands-on advisor in the right area.

One thing I've noticed is that whether work is interesting is as much a
function of the individual, environment and team as it is of the work itself.
A curious individual who is engaged with their teammates and is given autonomy
to do their job in the best way they see fit is likely to be a lot more
engaged in a "dull" task than someone who is working in an "exciting" area
without those things.

~~~
dandrewsen
What was your PhD in? How did you go about studying distributed systems? I'm
really curious about this topic and appreciate any advice on getting started.

------
wsy
If you don't _want_ to get a PhD, it will be very hard to finish. It is
already hard if you are motivated and eager to do research.

Also, just the title alone is of not much value in industry, you need to have
done research in a sought-after area. So if you mainly want to do it for
career purposes, interactive theorem proving is probably not a good choice. If
you think you need a PhD to get interesting industry jobs, better look for a
PhD in an area where FAANG researchers publish.

------
tomp
I don't recommend doing PhD in "theorem proving" as I don't see a lot of
industry demand for it. Machine learning, statistics, optimisation, ... all
better choices (if you _know_ you're not going to stay in academia).

Having said that, I'd apply for PhDs in other countries as well. Hopefully
some would offer you a place directly, not "1 year of free work that will
_potentially_ (a.k.a. "not") lead to a PhD opportunity".

~~~
nestorD
Side note: there is some industrial use (and interesting work) for theorem
proving in software verification and cybersecurity.

------
Itaxpica
The thing is, a PhD is in its own way a professional degree, like a JD or MD.
The difference is that the profession a PhD is teaching you is _research_. If
you don't enjoy research, there's really no reason to get a PhD. For non-
research jobs in industry it doesn't matter if you have a PhD or not, and if
you don't want to do research then you probably won't want the jobs in
industry that _would_ require a PhD.

------
jcpsimmons
PhD in Multimedia Art here. I transitioned during the degree into web dev.
While I don't regret getting the PhD I wouldn't recommend the process to
anyone. Funding is lean so you'll be taking a vow of poverty for 4-6 years. On
top of that, even with your assistantships, you'll be constantly pestered to
do additional, uncompensated work. In addition to this, something about the
scarcity of funding, and uncertain future of academia in general seems to
bring out the worst in people. I noticed an unusually high concentration of
narcissists in my own department (maybe varies by degree).

Paradoxically it made the job hunt hard, even though I had a good deal of part
time web dev job experience going into my full-time hunt, those three letters
after my name seemed to turn people off so much that I had much better luck
leaving the PhD off of my resume and mentioning it later on in the interview
process once I had gotten my foot in the door.

My first job after leaving, I am making a higher salary than 4/5 of my
committee members made last year (public university/public salaries). No
regrets but wouldn't recommend to anyone. It's a severe amount of stress.

------
varjag
If you can't make up your mind whether you need something, you usually don't.

------
AdrianB1
Not giving any advice, just data; you can draw your own conclusion.

As an IT manager doing recruiting, a PhD is irrelevant, both for hiring
decisions and for salary & career. It will be your skills that matter, not
your titles. If the PhD is helping you acquire some useful skills, that
matters.

As someone who knows a number of people with PhD's: except for MDs and people
working in universities, nobody is using in real life more than 1% of what
they did for the PhD. But most of these people did the PhD after they got a
job, in parallel with working full time, it took a while to complete but it
was a passion/hobby and I appreciate that. One of these people is a lady that
has a low level job, but interacting mostly with people in Germany: as Germans
have a higher appreciation to titles, her PhD is impressive to them. Well, if
they ever ask and find the PhD is in German literature (completely unrelated
with her actual work), then it becomes less impressive.

For academia, I find PhD requirements to be more of a bureaucracy than real
positive, but I confess my lack of expertise in that area and I am open to
learn different.

~~~
enraged_camel
>>As an IT manager doing recruiting, a PhD is irrelevant, both for hiring
decisions and for salary & career.

I mean, that's because you're talking about IT, which is traditionally about
practical sysadmin/network engineer skills and even a Master's degree is good
only for management tracks.

If you were recruiting in a field where cutting edge research is performed,
e.g. hardware engineers for microprocessor design, it would be a different
story. Intel and AMD for example employ a ton of PhDs.

~~~
AdrianB1
" Intel and AMD for example employ a ton of PhDs." Not for their titles, but
for their skills. This is what I have also said.

------
mechcsengr
My PhD is in mechanical engineering with a minor in computer science. I would
just remind you that a PhD is a research degree. If you really don't like
research, it may not be for you. You should also be quite good at math since
PhD-level work in CS is very math-oriented. The comments about the financial
costs are also something to keep in mind. You shouldn't expect a PhD to be a
net positive financially over your working life. What it can do is give you
the ability to tackle a wider array of projects during your career along with
the confidence to know you're capable of working in new fields. I've worked in
spacecraft engineering, as a research professor in medicine, as a self-
employed software developer, and am now working on a robotics project of my
own design. Tackling new fields is not a problem because I know I can do the
research necessary to get up to speed. Maybe I'd have the same attitude with
only a MS, but I doubt it.

------
DoofusOfDeath
It sounds like you're burned out, and not 100% sold on the idea of doing a
PhD.

I suggest taking a break from school for a year or two, try moving to a
country you like better, and reassessing what you want.

If you decide you really _are_ interested in doing a PhD in theorem-proving,
and you have talent for doing graduate research in that area, getting back
onto that track should be possible.

------
smdz
> I don't particularly love studying

You need to introspect a bit more on what part of this is really true to you.
You are already doing an MSc and that shows you are good at studying. May be
you do not love pointless-studying. But no matter what degree you have in CS,
you will have to study in your career to stay relevant in the industry

> I have no desire to become a professor

Good PhDs are usually good teachers. They do not have to be a professor and
many are not. Teaching brings clarity of thought and improves your
fundamentals. You could just ask your professors "why you need to be a
teaching assistant" and check out if their answers make sense to you.

> I have no desire to become a researcher...and I'm really afraid of getting a
> boring software engineering gig.

Why pursue a PhD if you do not want to be a researcher? And who says software
engineering has to be boring? You can chose what you want to work on and have
just not found it. Obviously, a choice is easier for a PhD. But may be you can
also look at being an entrepreneur (unless you dislike hard work)

> I'm also absolutely sick of living like a student with little financial
> freedom.

You have not even started on the financial part of financial freedom.

> Does anyone have any guiding advice?

My personal opinion - I find PhD to be too time consuming if it does not have
a good purpose. I declined admission to PhD after working pretty hard towards
that. I had been working on a certain topic of research for 3 years before
that. My reason for declining was the quality of the faculties/mentors and the
quality of research produced from the university. For next 2 years I did have
second thoughts about whether I made a wrong decision. But I am happy with how
my life turned out to be after that. However, if I had good faculties or good
research produced I would have stayed

Look at the quality of the PhDs coming out of your college/university. Also
check out if their research is actual research or some kind of documentation.
You could even talk to or interview a few people who have spend 2 or 3 years
attempting the PhD. Avoid the ones in the first year because they are more
likely to be unhappy with their choice in the first year.

From your post, it just looks like you need a break. Couple of weeks off and
you should be able to think clearly for yourself.

------
timwaagh
A masters is already quite good. It should make your life more interesting
than a bachelor's. Think about a decent job, no questions asked, you might
even have a reasonable choice on what type of job you will take. Don't expect
too much though.

Now with a PhD you could be the envy of your community. Imagine posting about
pursuing your PhD in Australia or posting on Facebook about the space entity
named after your research group. From what I know phds like to post on fb a
lot. That is not to deride them. Most of their achievements are genuine and
worthy of a like or three. A PhD is quite something. But it is no guarantee.
You could get a PhD and still end up at the bottom end of the totem pole. One
of my friends is like that. Spent years as a lecturer in China only to choose
unemployment for a decade when he got back. But yeah. You have to mess up
quite badly. I would argue that even in his case his life became more
interesting because of it.

------
aazaa
The training you get during a PhD is mostly your responsibility. There are
good academic PIs who know how to actually mentor students. From them you can
learn a lot about research and people. Most professors lack the soft skills
needed to mentor and grow students because it's rarely a condition for
employment.

The growth you do during a PhD is, therefore, mostly on you. If you're not the
type who can teach themselves and have fun doing it then, perhaps ironically,
you're going to find it extremely difficult in a PhD program.

Given the right company, you may be surprised at the opportunities open to
you. Technical people tend to over-rate the "interestingness" of the work
being done and under-rate the quality of the work environment when looking for
jobs.

Think hard and very honestly about what work environment you'd do best in,
work hard to find that environment. If you do, it doesn't sound like you'll
miss those three letters that much in a few years.

------
cryptozeus
Good question but its a non starter. Do not look to college, people and phd to
live a interesting life. It seems you have few options to explore so why not
start exploring them before making a decision.

\- look at job boards and see if you find interesting work, apply and see if
you get in. You can always return to get your phd if that is not interesting.

\- search on linkedin with people who are working in interesting jobs and have
phd. Email them and talk about your question, people are normally eager to
help.

I noticed that right now some of the AI and ML jobs do require PHD but it’s
limited and by the time you finish it may become mainstream. Look into those
options.

At the end you make your life interesting by figuring out yourself and not
depending on job market or friends.

Last thing based on your words it looks like you enjoy people and want to
leave student life then just get into one of the tech company as a researcher
where you will get all of that.

Who knows may be that is not what you wanted after all, but atleast you will
know.

------
nashalo
Given what you said especially in your last paragraph, I would advise against
pursuing a PhD right now.

However, I don't think that going for an industry job now would "surrender
your chances for a PhD". I also got a MSc in computer science, then I worked
in the industry for 5 years before going back to academia and start a PhD.
Depending on your field, this can be a more or less dauting process.

Working in the industry before going back to a PhD has a number of pros:

\- you can make a better decision about what you want to do because you have
actual industry experience

\- you can save some money for your PhD

Cons:

\- Going from an industry salary to a PhD salary is really sad

\- The process of getting accepted in a PhD program after you've left academia
for a number of years can be difficult (but not impossible!)

You seem to be quite sick of student life during your MSc, so be aware that
during a PhD it is about the same or worse. Getting yourself an industry job
now can let you breathe some air and make a better decision about what you
want to do next.

------
foopdoopfoop
Hey everyone,

I just wanted to say thanks for all your insightful and helpful comments. A
big, wide range of opinions are represented and it gave me a lot of needed
perspective.

I'm still thinking carefully about my options/future and haven't come to a
definite decision yet--but I wanted to give a big thanks to everyone who
contributed. Thanks again.

------
jedberg
Number one, unless you love what you study, don't get a PhD. You'll probably
never finish.

Number two, if the only reason you want a PhD is for more money, you won't
make _and_ it won't help. If you look at the earnings of people with a PhD vs.
people without one (but who could have gotten one), the ones who didn't are
pretty even because they have four/five years of work experience when their
friends are just getting out of their PhD programs.

If you don't like doing reading and research, then you probably won't make it
through the PhD. Even worse, the "interesting" work that you get to do in
industry with a PhD vs. without is basically more of the same, because all of
the stuff that isn't like that is just as open to people with a PhD vs
without.

It sounds like the PhD really isn't for you. Get out there and go apply what
you've learned thus far.

------
vslTxDlgXk
PhD in CS here, currently working for start up.

TBH, I wasn't deeply committed to research but got a position offered at my
institute, which I took. Plus, I had to relocate to another city, because my
adviser took over another institute. My wife had to stay at our former place,
because of her job. And a lot more trouble I had to undergo for the entire
process. On the other side, having these three letters next to my name was
super appealing to me. This let to mixed feelings about doing a PhD. Some
examples.

Pro: I was really free to do what ever I wanted Con: But I also had to get my
own funding and couldn't save any money

Pro: I focused a lot on methods I was interested in and developed some on my
own Con: I left new technologies behind, which made my start into industry
quite bumpy

Pro: I learned a ton of interesting things in great detail Con: No one cares.
Just as with technologies - models, paradigms, methods come and go. The PhD
is, in most cases, only a certificate of your "self learner attitude".

But what really hit me hard was something else. During my time as a PhD I
mostly worked on stuff I enjoyed and I was surrounded by people doing this for
the same reasons. In industry, in special CS/coding related fields, you likely
work on a ticket system. You arrive at your office, grab the ticket, machine
it off, take a another one... From now and then your agile coach wants you to
wright words on colored post its. I didn't expect the change to be that
dramatic. Especially because I already worked as a developer in such systems
during bachelors/masters degree. The PhD changed my perception of work.

In summary: I enjoyed doing a PhD, but the PhD left me with wrong self-
assessment (for the industry). After getting fired I joined a fresh start-up,
which turned out to be great. Here I found the freedom and creativity I was
missing. Looking back I would probably skip the PhD for a start-up with a good
team. Pay attention to the team - it's key.

------
jfitzpa22
Get the PhD. You KNOW you can get it now. You may not be able to say the same
thing in 5-7 years. Private industry will NOT penalize you for having
additional education, and academia does NOT hold a monopoly on boredom. In
fact, plenty of people are just earning a paycheck and can't remember the last
time they felt satisfied professionally. In my experience, private industry
gives PhD.s a lot of latitude to figure out what THEY want to do for the
company. Does that sound interesting to you? Also, you mention that you are
studying in a foreign country and are very unhappy there; do you mean the
country, the university, or both? I ask because every country has an
intellectual tradition that reflects its values and culture. Is it possible
you would be happy in academia or private industry if you returned home?

------
ghaff
You seem to flag a lot of things that you don't like which boil down to you
don't like research very much. And that's pretty much what a PhD is. It also
tends to be something very specific and narrow. This doesn't preclude you from
taking your PhD and branching out into something broader down the road, but
the value prop of a PhD, if you will, is that you're a world expert in some
specific area.

The other downside of not just getting industry experience is that a lot of
PhD research is very, well, academic. Wrote a book recently (something else
that involves _lots_ of time in a library and elsewhere reading and writing on
your own) and a lot of the papers I used for research were pretty much crap
and disconnected from anything in the real world.

------
beher
I hold a German Diploma in computer science (comparable to MSc but - of course
- much better.) I started a PhD without really wanting it, I thought it's a
good opportunity. After one year I came to the conclusion that it was a bad
idea to start it. It took another 1,5 years to actually quit. Why did it took
me so long? Because by doing something I didn't like I had developed a
depression...

I went to a decently paid job and would never go back.

I did, however learn some great things during these years in academia, as I
had a great postdoc and a very skillful team.

If you ever want to go back, you surely will find a good position to do your
PhD. Professor love cheap labor. It's not hard to find. And PhD students are
by far not the brightest people I met. Some are, some absolutely not.

------
rramadass
In a discussion about PhD's nobody has as yet mentioned Freeman Dyson?

\- [https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-math-puzzle-worthy-of-
freem...](https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-math-puzzle-worthy-of-freeman-
dyson-20140326/)

\-
[https://old.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/21h1xv/freeman_dys...](https://old.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/21h1xv/freeman_dyson_i_think_the_phd_system_is_an/)

On the other hand, i myself feel that, if you have the mental inclination and
can afford to do a PhD, one should do it. It gives you a greater probability
of actually contributing to Humanity's collective knowledge base.

------
fsloth
I have a lot of PhD friends (physics and CS) and I personally dropped out of
PhD program after 6 months to work in industry.

The people who absolutely needed their PhD were those that loved research and
were and are amazing at it. They are now professors, researchers, etc. and are
obviously doing what they enjoy.

Others took PhD to support their self esteem. Some felt it was easiest to
continue studying and not go to an industry job yet.

The saddest category thought they would find meaningful career in PhD work but
only found dead end academic career path and burned out or just switched
careers.

I don't regret not doing my PhD. Software engineers are generally recognised
for their skills, not for their degrees.

It sounds like you are considering PhD out of fear and not out of love. I
would advice against it...

------
dan00
All you said about yourself doesn't quite sound like you should get a PhD.

Also having a PhD doesn't automatically make your life more interesting.

Having a PhD will make you an expert in a narrow topic. So it most likely will
lead to job opportunities inside this topic. If you love this topic, then it
might help having a more fulfilling work life.

The problem is, it's not quite possible to really know if you're still
interested that much in a topic after studying it for several years. You might
be even sick of the topic after your PhD.

What you will take away from a PhD are some research skills that you could
apply on different topics. But if you don't like and enjoy researching, then I
don't quite see what you will really take away from a PhD.

------
flor1s
As someone who has a PhD in informatics, I would say it's only worth it if you
(mostly) like doing what is required for getting the actual PhD (research,
writing papers, giving presentations - often to an audience that is not really
interested in what you have to say but still has to grade you).

Having the PhD is not that useful unless you want to be a professor / academic
researcher. In my case I work for a Japanese governmental research institute,
which hires both PhDs and "supporting staff". Supporting staff have less
freedom and have temporary contracts. No-one really gets paid that well. In
terms of work, I'm still coding a lot, but also need to read and write many
papers, proposals, etc.

------
toxicFork
> I won't be able to find interesting work with just a MSc, and I'm really
> afraid of getting a boring software engineering gig.

You don't even need a MSc to get interesting work...

What do you find to be interesting work? Creating things, what sort of things?

------
thiago_fm
If you don't like to study so much and to become a professor/researcher.
Please don't take me in the wrong way, but you are just wasting your time.

I also wanted to do a master and PHD for the same reasons that you do. But for
financial reasons I couldn't afford it at the time, I felt sad: I wanted to be
"smarter" on paper than others. I've did what a loser would do: find a job.

I've found a job and since then, I've just looked in the academia a few times
back, but never went back. I've looked back only because I've wanted to maybe
do a bit of ML. Anyways, I think you need to find yourself there.

If you work a few years and don't like it, you can go back. I also think that
you have a few complexes that could be better handled by a psychologist, such
as, you think that getting a PhD would be a huge intellectual challenge, when
you are about to finish your master... Yet, it isn't even hard, you just need
to pump infinite hours into that and want to become a researcher/professor or
find a job in ML/AI(nowadays, you don't even need that to find a job anymore).

I had a lot of growth on my career and all my friends that went to academia
just talk to me about that choice with a lot of regret. I don't doubt that
they know more than me as they had many years of study time, while I was
working full time and building a career/family, but it isn't that important to
me anymore. I would give it a go, maybe quit even your master and try to work.

Of course, it is all your own responsibility. Don't blame me for your choices,
but make up your mind and take charge of your life. I did back then, and I'm
happy Today to have done that, all that because I had a financial problem that
didn't allow me to have that, I couldn't really make that choice and I quite
liked the fact that I didn't have to choose. I was very insecure at the time
and that changed a lot and I consider even silly the fears and thoughts I had
back in the days. I wish that this helps you somehow. Also, if you then find
out that you want to get that PhD, it is fine! The most important thing is
that you find what is important for you.

Cheers

------
fancyfredbot
I studied for and completed a PhD. I am quite sure it has opened doors for me,
allowing me to access more interesting/enjoyable and arguably better paid
work. I'm glad I did it.

However, based on what you say I would not recommend you do the same. If you
hate the process you may not finish - it's a long and at times demoralising
journey, even if you normally enjoy the process. If you don't like reading
papers then you may not enjoy the jobs you'll get when you graduate. There are
probably better ways to get interesting jobs, for example with an early stage
start-up which can't afford to hire someone with a top PhD.

------
throwawayphd
My PhD contract ends today. I'll defend by the end of the year. I'm leaving
academia.

I'm happy to have "tried" a PhD. I didn't know whether I wanted to do
research. During my PhD, I advised several interns on a software project I
started as a student during an internship. I could teach, which I liked to do.

But it was exhausting. It was hard to even start working these days. It didn't
work out, because I didn't get to grips with my subject, and didn't enjoy my
advisors.

My father is a researcher and sees research and writing paper as I game. He
enjoys doing it. If you don't particularly like doing research and don't plan
to become a researcher, it's a big no. Don't do a PhD.

Also don't start a PhD at a place you know you don't like. What kept me
enjoying life is my friends, my family, enjoying the place where I live and
the club I'm part of.

> It seems very lonely, and I don't find much enjoyment from, say, sitting in
> my office reading papers all day

It's not quite like that. There is paper reading, and there is sitting at a
desk, behind a computer, writing. But a PhD is also about learning and having
interesting discussion with your advisors and your colleagues (I didn't
especially experience that but I now former and current PhD students who
do/did). It's also solving problems and modeling things using a sheet of paper
or a big whiteboard. It's also implementing proof of concepts.

My experience as a PhD student was not so great, but loneliness was not part
of this. I had an active social life and loved these years as a PhD student
just for that. Being alone during the day in such a life is a feature at
times, but if you have a nice team, you may enjoy coffee breaks and meals with
your colleagues, who may become your friends. You are not really alone. There
are nice people around you you can enjoy and have interesting conversations
with every day.

If you do a PhD, don't stay alone. You will most likely need support from your
friends and your family. Either by just doing something else with them, or by
talking about your difficulties.

------
welliman
The decisions you are trying to make seem to be based more off of anxiety
and/or fear rather than a passion for what you want to be doing with your
life. Try to find out what you would enjoy doing with your current skillset
and spend some time figuring out a way to make that happen. A MSc in CS opens
doors to many industries as well academia, so you have tons of options to
choose from.

You probably won't regret spending the next few years of your life doing
something that you think is interesting. There is, however, a chance that you
will regret spending the next few years worrying about if your future self
will regret those years.

------
ckaygusu
The conventional wisdom states, if you have a burning passion about the topic
you're going to research on, go for it; otherwise, no, and I agree with that.
I don't think it will add much to your life except 2-3 letters of a title,
especially if you have written a thesis for your MSc which you probably are
going to do since you mentioned you are doing research.

Mind if I ask if you have had any experience working as a software dev? That's
what everyone else does (including me, even after my masters), and it is not
bad because so. Can you elaborate on what you are afraid of if you transition
to the industry?

------
a-saleh
I would say there are limited number of fields where having PhD is an assumed
norm, and would influence your hire-ability. Molecular biology is one of
those, from my experience?

Your time is probably better spent interviewing, networking or searching for
internships.

Your idea of how PhD works seems quite bleak, from what I heard, it can be a
bit more creative/involved version of things you already do for your MSc
thesis.

So if you hate MSc, but really like the research you do, and your advisor and
research-group, I would consider staying. Especially if they know how to write
grant-proposals ;)

If you don't like the research, run.

------
netjiro
Only continue with a PhD if you really love research and learning. Even the
best international positions are ridiculously underpaid and you will have to
move around the world multiple times and travel way too much.

I spent 10y in academia. Loved my PhD and subsequent research positions. Went
back to industry because I wanted to spend more time with my lady.

For me the research years have paid of exceptionally well. Lots of interesting
people and projects, and enabled work I would never have been able to get off
the ground without the training and network.

But my case is very uncommon.

------
debbiedowner
IMO people should be discouraged from getting PhDs so that the only PhDs are
the ones who do it out of internal drive and craziness. #keepPhDsWeird

It isn't logical to get a PhD. The worth of your PhD will be determined by how
much you can make for yourself, and how much charity your advisor is motivated
to give to you in leadership and insights. A PhD is not very transactional,
you don't know what you'll get except what you think you can give to yourself.
A PhD works best for people who have no other choice.

------
ummonk
This sounds like a no brainer. If you don't actually enjoy academia then it
definitely isn't worth it; even for those who do enjoy academia, a PhD is hit
or miss.

You can go into industry and work in that time, and you'll have at least as
interesting a life at the end of it. And if industry demand for interactive
theorem proving does increase (which it would have needed to for you to get a
job in it at the end of a PhD), you will have ample opportunity to learn it on
the job instead of in school.

------
thom
Anyone have any thoughts on doing a PhD in later life? I don't need a career
change or salary boost, but I'm very aware I've stumbled into data science
(albeit very much on the applied side) without the right fundamental maths
knowledge or research mindset. I read dozens of papers each week and even now
I find them terribly abstruse.

I suppose I'm contrasting this to just continuing on with online courses and
books - is the added structure, focus and community more transformative?

~~~
majos
The point of a PhD is to learn enough that you can produce research and then
get better at producing research. Learning how to produce research is where an
advisor and community of grad students and postdocs becomes important.

However, if you just want a better understanding of the fundamentals, you
certainly don’t need to (and probably shouldn’t) do a PhD.

Also, if you’re reading “dozens of papers each week”, maybe slow down? I
wouldn’t pick up much more than abstract-level knowledge at that rate.

------
andreyk
Currently doing a CS PhD at Stanford. If you have no interest in becoming a
professor/researcher and don't like to do research, there is very little
reason to do a PhD. The PhD is actually a training program for doing research
much moreso than another degree to learn more specialized knowledge. You don't
need a PhD to keep learning. So i'd suggest trying to go into industry, but
positioning yourself to be able to keep learning cutting edge stuff.

------
eigenrick
I'll give you some advice, but first, a caveat: PHds are correlated with
higher intelligence, and higher self-discipline. This is obviously due to the
filtering process involved in achieving such a goal.

To succeed in life, you will need self discipline. Intelligence isn't bad
either.

But most importantly, if it is interesting, gainful employment that you seek,
then you must understand that supply and demand drives everything.

People often mistake any level of college as some sort of guarantee of a job
or money. But it doesn't. Not even close.. It might be a prerequisite for
certain positions, but that's all. To get your dream job, you must supply
exactly what the employer needs, or at least convince them that you're the
best person to provide it.

With that in mind, you need to design your life:

1\. Begin with the end in mind. If you aren't incredibly precise about what
you actually _want_ , you'll just be walking backwards in life, and you might
get lucky and end up in a nice place, but probably not.

You want a more interesting life. What does that mean? More interesting than
your current life? How interesting is that? Do you want to travel? Do you want
to hunt spies for a living? What do you actually want to do? Take as much time
as you need to precisely answer this question. Seriously. This is critical.

2\. Work backwards from this dream life. Let's say you love the ocean, and you
have envisioned that your dream job involves sailing on a ship a few months of
the year.

Well, you've got a few options: 1\. Be a nomadic freelancer with a satellite
phone. 2\. Work for an oceanic survey or marine biology research outfit. 3\.
Work for the oil industry and help support oil rigs.

Whichever sounds great at that point. Dig into whatever is necessary to achive
your next step. You might need ta phd if you want to do marine biology
research. If you want to be a nomadic freelancer, you should work to establish
yourself as an expert in a particular field. You can do so without an employer
by creating, or contributing to, open source projects.

These are just a few random thoughts, but the point here I want to repeat is:

1\. Design your life, don't expect random chance to work out for you. 2\. Work
towards your design, step-by-step.

------
jhoechtl
Will getting a PhD lead to a more prosperous life?

Will getting a PhD lead to a more satisfied life?

A have a PhD. I think I can say probaly yes to the first. But: Where others
can earn black money next to their work, I can't. So go figure.

For the second: I am certain - no. When others go home and leave their work
where it belongs to, I keep on chewing. More responsibolity leads to more
stress Imho which colides with satisfaction.

Both answers do not answer the OPs question though.

------
gamesbrainiac
If you had an opportunity to study AI for your PhD then it might be worth it.
However, since your field is rather niche, I don't see how it would be that
valuable to industry. My advice is that you need to get out of there, and get
a job as soon as possible. You will realize that what you've learned at
university and real world software development are really quite different.

------
djaque
This is something I'm struggling with too. I'm about to finish the masters
part of my US based PhD and I like my adviser and love what I'm studying, but
the lab's culture (or lack thereof) is really isolating. I'm not sure if it's
a case of "the grass is always greener" or if I really should push though and
finish up my program.

------
jamisteven
Its a mind blowing thing to me that people study for that long, not really
even starting their career until their 30's, to get a Ph.D - That said, if you
are that close, and having this serious of thoughts about what is the right
decision, and it will only take this extra 8 months to set you on the right
path, then just do it. btw what country are you in?

~~~
chrisseaton
In most countries a PhD will graduate around 24. It’s only a marathon in the
US, and isn’t such a huge investment in time in other places.

~~~
akuji1993
> In most countries a PhD will graduate around 24

Not in Germany. I started studying at 18, so as early as possible. Finished
after 5 years with my Masters degree. A PhD would've taken a minimum (!) of 3
more years, so I would've been 26 or older. If you don't have a perfect start,
take more than regular study time or take longer than those 3 years, it's easy
(and not considered being bad) to be 30 when you're done.

~~~
chrisseaton
23, 24, 25, 26, yeah somewhere around there. That's a lot different to 30s. I
had a colleague in Austria who got a very good PhD, with top-tier
publications, all done in two years and out into industry.

------
anonu
> , I will likely surrender my chance for a PhD.

I don't think this is completely valid. I know a handful of people I graduated
with both undergrad and grad, who went into industry for a year or two and
then went back to study for a PhD. I wouldn't say it's a common path, but it
happens..

In your case, you may benefit from a 2 year stint in the workforce IMHO

~~~
ghaff
In practice, I expect most people will, if nothing else, find it hard to give
up a likely fairly lucrative job in an on-demand profession to get a PhD.
Golden handcuffs and all that.

But, sure, it's possible.

------
stunt
If you want to do it for the sake of better job opportunity, and to make more
money, or status, don’t do it because there are better ways to reach that
goal.

If you’re passionate about it and have different goals and believe you can
have a positive impact by deep diving into an area, go for it and you will
enjoy every day of it.

------
ktln2
Short answer: No

Long answer:

Forget about "studying".

If you doesn't like doing research, i.e. try to solve open-ended problems
without even knowing if an answer exists, do not do a PhD.

Doing a PhD is like Antarctic expedition - low wages, bitter cold, long hours
of complete darkness, safe return doubtful. There's no reason to do it unless
you really like it.

------
Blackstone4
From my friends who have done PhD's, I understand that its a hard road to go
down. I feel like you would need to be committed, interested and motivated....

An exercise I find useful when it comes to making hard decisions, is that I
flip a coin and if I am disappoint with the outcome then I know it's the wrong
decision.

------
cschep
There is no piece of paper that will ever give you the permission all of us
humans seem to desire from the universe.

Get out. Go to a place you like. Do what you like there. Permission is given
by doing.

Or in short, if you have to ask if a PhD is the right thing to pursue, it's
not. :) have fun and enjoy life! good luck!

------
therobot24
phd in machine learning - it was worth it, but i had an awesome advisor and my
own funding (via a fellowship) so my experience is not necessarily the norm. I
would never recommend a phd to someone given the time commitment (almost lost
my girlfriend, and now wife, and a lot of friends), but life is way better
post-phd than if i hadn't done it. I understand the bind you're in. The phd
will open more doors to more interesting work, your opinion will start to have
more weight, and available interesting work finds a way to your desk. Just
remember that you do pay for all of this with several years of hard, stressful
labor - being an expert in a specific technology can get you to the same place
without nearly as much of a personal time commitment.

------
fergie
Get the PhD (unless you really feel like it is going to mentally destroy you)

In my 20 years career in tech (dotcoms, startups, academia), there have been
several times when having a PhD would have come in handy for pay bumps,
funding, new jobs, and interesting projects, etc.

------
Merrill
If you intend to go into industry, what is the industrial job market for
interactive theorem proving? If it is not so good, then you will be doing a
career change at the end of your PhD and at least part of the degree's value
will have been lost.

------
snrji
Not necessarily, it depends on the advisor, university, program and field.

The problem is that once you start you are committed for 4 years. Abandoning a
PhD program and starting another one is quite more complicated than changing
of job.

------
scarejunba
Don't do it unless you have something deep pulling you in that direction.
People fetishize the things. You will grow in industry in other ways. You will
see what things look like when the rubber meets the road.

------
randomsearch
Don’t do it.

A PhD is a massive emotional challenge. Unless you’re 90%
enthusiastic/committed from the start I’d strongly recommend against it.

If you really feel regret strongly in the future, you can return. It’s not an
irreversible decision.

------
chrisseaton
You can go back and do a PhD after working for a few years - I did this.

------
tfont
If you have to ask the question, you don't need it nor truly want it, so why
bother?|

A Masters is good enough; you are above most people but not too deep into the
trenches.

------
aboodman
There’s no correlation. Particularly in the software world, “interestingness”
of work is dominated primarily by what you can do, and what you deliver, not
by credentials.

------
DarmokJalad1701
Aerospace PhD from Purdue. I do not regret it whatsover. I met some great
people and it definitely made me a better engineer. I did not go into academia
either.

------
dannykwells
A PhD is a research degree. It teaches you how to do research. If you do not
want to do research, but rather, build things, I would recommend forgoing it.

------
milkers
No it won't, find a position in industry asap.

------
PopeDotNinja
As a former tech recruiter, if you want to be a data scientist, a PhD helps.
So look to see if the jobs you dream about ask for a PhD.

------
danbrooks
"I have no desire to become a professor/researcher. After I acquire my PhD, I
surmise that I would go to industry."

Go for industry!

------
Mxtetris
Related question: are there ways to get involved in research on the side,
rather than as a full-time, multi-year commitment?

------
vymague
> I choose to graduate soon, I will likely surrender my chance for a PhD.

Why? There must be a prof somewhere who is willing to accept you.

------
joker3
If you don't enjoy doing research, you will be miserable doing a PhD. That's
really all there is to it.

------
samfisher83
A phD will help you get a visa/GC. I think that is why you see a lot of
foreign candidates doing a phd.

------
currymj
being in Europe makes a big difference here I think.

in the US i know several people who did an MS, worked in industry, then went
back for a PhD. it’s extremely possible.

i suspect this is less true in Europe, where the degree process is faster and
more focused and where the hierarchical aspects of academia are much stronger.

------
crb002
If you turn in the Iowa State University VP of Finance in for NSF grant fraud,
then YES. Do not recommend.

------
stakhanov
If difficult is interesting, then _yes_. Getting a PhD will make your life
waaaay more interesting.

------
joelgrus
I dropped out of PhD school, and I have a more interesting life than most of
my friends who stayed. :)

------
partingshots
Get a PhD, but only do it if you actually enjoy academia. Otherwise, it really
isn’t worth it.

------
musicale
Yes, but "interesting" and "happy" are not the same thing.

------
saas_startup
TL;DR: For me personally Ph.D. has been the greatest decision I have ever
made.

I am not going to cover the typical discussion regarding the diminished
lifelong earnings of Ph.D graduates as I don't think everyone is optimizing
their life 100% around money. If that's the case I would recommend looking
holistically including choice of life partner and their earning potential as
well where you live and the job market there.

I have a PhD in Computer Science from one of the top 5 schools in the world
and Masters from unknown university in a medium size city.

Through the years I have struggled with being an outlier at my unknown
university where people did not understand my passion for CS. I took part in
open source projects, went to meetups and read tons of CS books just to
satisfy my curiosity. at the same time there was nobody I could talk to
regarding my passion.

When I entered Ph.D this turned out to be the greatest social experience ever.
Almost all my current friends I have met during Ph.D. They are geeks in their
own respective area (CS, Chemistry, Biology, Social Science, Theatre studies)
and we can talk for hours about our research which never happened with me
before. I met my life partner there and chances of finding of someone who I
can talk to about theorem proving in a "normal" world are close to zero. On
top of it she also understands the value of hard work and long hours I commit
to work which has always been a struggle with my partners from general
population.

Now the bad parts. You should expect that Ph.D. is a long and lonely journey
that you have to execute by yourself. You are likely to go for months without
any tangible results and you need to be happy with that. I did not suffer any
mental health problems during the Ph.D. but they were fairly common between my
friends due to pressure to publish and loneliness of the pursuit. If during
Masters you are already dealing with some anxiety Ph.D. may not be enjoyable.
In the end all my friends turned out fine and graduated but expect ups/down
during the process.

------
known
You may want to check Larry Page
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Page#PhD_studies_and_res...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Page#PhD_studies_and_research)

------
proc0
From my sporadic research on this the tl;dr is you don't get a PhD unless you
want to profess the cutting edge of that field by teaching, researching and
perhaps doing general public education. It seems it is not as profitable as it
is intrinsically rewarding. Then my own perspective is that at the moment
academia is a minefield depending on which institution you join and what field
of study. Some fields end up looking like industry job anyways, except you
write and review papers day to day.

------
seanhunter
A PhD will make close to zero difference to the quality of job you get, so if
you're thinking that an MSc will get you a boring job but a PhD would get you
an interesting job that's absolutely not the case. I speak as someone who has
had a long and fulfilling career in software engineering in spite of having a
music degree, and knowing people with strong quantitative PhDs doing very
boring work. (I would say they aren't "stuck" other than in their own
perception however). It's on you to find yourself interesting work though -
PhD or no, it's not going to land in your lap.

Secondly, it's definitely not the case that if you don't get a PhD now you'll
never get one, however in all likelihood it will be much harder later on. In
my experience, people's responsibilities and commitments (personal and work-
wise) grow constantly and it only gets more and more difficult to find time
for things in future.

It sounds like 9 months doesn't give you a PhD, 9 months gives you potentially
the opportunity of a PhD. So it's a theoretical minimum and when you're
looking at this, you should calculate on the PhD take longer. Be wary of sunk
cost. Having invested time in getting an MSc, it's easy to think "9 months
isn't that long given how much I've done so far" without thinking through
whether the goal is worth achieving in itself.

tl;dr: Get a PhD because you want a PhD. Probably don't get a PhD thinking it
will make some sort of difference to your job prospects.

------
cvaidya1986
Follow your intuition.

------
moonbug
get a job. you can always go back to do a PhD later, and the workplace will
equip you with the skills you'll need as PhD student to take no shit

------
skorlir
I left my PhD program in CS (specifically, compilers).

I began working after graduation with a job at a (very) small Chicago start-
up. I was the first engineer. I enjoyed a lot of freedom, and I was paid OK.
The job had many ups and downs. The opportunity arose to pursue a PhD when my
advisor-to-be recruited me at a weeklong PL research retreat over the summer.
I thought: "well, I will regret it if I don't at least try and see." Not to
mention: how could I have a better opportunity, than for my advisor to recruit
_me_?

I was part-time for a little while. (My advisor was very flexible.) Work got
worse, mostly for unrelated reasons, and it was time to quit the job. I was
spending 3 days a week on research for the PhD, and not enjoying it. However,
I was very much enjoying my compilers research seminar course (read a paper
and discuss every week). So, I quit the job. I figured: "maybe I am not
enjoying research because I haven't been able to focus on it."

It turned out I really didn't enjoy the work I was doing. I wanted to do
research, but this wasn't it.

My advisor and I discussed my dissatisfaction with the PhD at length. I felt
like I came to the program with a lot of excitement for compilers research,
but I was spending all my time on tedious engineering work (writing a
`#pragma`-parsing extension in Clang). I wanted a promise that there was a
plan to switch gears, to get creative, to do (what I believed) I had signed up
to do: to write a totally new kind of compiler!

My advisor was flummoxed. "This is it," they said. I was confused, and a
little angry.

It's a common story to start a PhD on the promise that you'll get to do a
certain interesting piece of research, but spend 2 years (in some cases,
more!) doing other work for your advisor (possibly due to funding). I knew a
PhD candidate in this very position, who one day finally became so frustrated
they said aloud: "I'm sick and f*cking tired of this! This is not what I
signed up for." They had been there 2 years, and still weren't working on the
research they began the PhD out of an interest in pursuing.

Finally, my advisor issued an ultimatum: decide whether to stay at least 2
years through quals, or quit.

I told my advisor I couldn't commit to 2 more years. Not when I was unhappy
with the work, and when they were openly promising me more of the same.

My advisor was angry. They started to say some unflattering things: sometimes
things like, "since you're an engineer, you should understand that the
foundation work comes first." Other times, they were just openly rude, and
non-constructive: "in my opinion, you are a bad presenter." They prided
theirself on radical honesty, but failed to value empathy. Eventually, I just
stopped listening to them.

I told my advisor I was going to explore my options and look for work. At
first, they were encouraging: "I expect nothing less." In retrospect, I think
they were confident at the time that I would stay. After it became clear I was
planning to find a job instead of continuing in the program, however, my
advisor began to make arguments to me like:

"Nothing in industry is interesting. Only people with PhDs get to do the
interesting work."

"You will get paid more with the PhD."

"You will never become a self-directed learner if you quit."

All of these points are blatantly false. (The last one in particular was
really weird to hear.) But, finally, I was hearing it said: I was hearing my
advisor spread the fear. All along I picked up on the trepidation my peers in
the research lab felt toward "industry work," which they all seemed to imagine
as a form of cubicle hell in the bowels of Oracle's terrifying UFO office
complex in California. My advisor finally gave a voice to that fear. They
tried to spread that fear to me.

I am extremely glad I had already worked in industry. I knew my advisor was
wrong. I think, however, that they believed their own arguments. They've never
worked in industry, after all. And maybe they needed to believe it was worse,
in order to justify the stress and overwork of academia.

For my part, I ended up with an excellent job in New York City working for
better.com. I have no regrets. I still have a fascination with compilers, and
I occasionally read papers for fun. I work on my own self-directed projects in
my free time, which I enjoy far more than I enjoyed working for my advisor. I
also get paid very well, and my work peers are some of the smartest and most
talented people I've ever met - PhDs included. The best thing my advisor ever
did for me was fire me. I got a raise (even over my first job); I got to move
to New York City; I got to work with incredible new people (and lots of them);
and I now know exactly what I'm missing out on, having left the program.

By the way: we're hiring at better.com. :)

------
michaelrpeskin
I've been thinking all morning how to answer this. Rather than give advice,
here's some thoughts about what I've seen in the industry. The quick answer is
that, yes, a PhD should give you a more interesting life...but you might not
want that.

I have a PhD in Chemical Physics. I got it about 15 years ago. The need to go
deep into computation to solve chemistry problems is what gave me the computer
skills that have served me well. That is, after I got my PhD, I haven't done
any work in in chemistry or physics at all, but have been a high-performance
computing expert everywhere I go. So, in my case, having the PhD really helps,
but that's because I work in a field that secondary to my PhD work. I would
wager, that's probably true of any academic field. The actual PhD work is so
esoteric that it's not going to have any good application to reality
(industry) in a reasonable time frame, but the underlying skills needed to get
the PhD are going to be super useful.

Now, as for getting a job...I have had very bad luck (until recently) getting
the FAANG-like companies to take me seriously: I'm expensive, I don't want to
sit around all day gluing APIs together, and I don't have a public repository
of code to point to. They want folks who fit into their mold of whiteboard
interview. But now that I'm senior enough (15 years + PhD), I'm starting to
get the target calls rather than the generic recruiter nonsense.

The point about not having the public repository of code is important: when
you're a PhD, you job is to solve problems that _have never been solved
before_. That is, it's not a rehash of the same problem in a new language, or
a different architecture, or anything. It's new! The world hasn't seen it yet.
That means 1) you can't go find an answer on stack overflow, and 2) your day-
to-day work is HARD, and often demoralizing - at least I feel stupid every day
until I find the solution, and then the dopamine hit keeps me coming back!.
Since work is very hard (now, I also don't put tons of hours in, because the
work is hard, so that's good). I don't have the mental energy for any side
projects. I'm ok with that, I love what I do! But there is no public ego
stroking and thought-leadership and all of that other stuff you see with other
semi-famous developers. I can't point to a public project and say "I did that"
or "I helped build that" because what I do is propitiatory.

Getting the PhD itself was a slog, and I didn't really enjoy the grind. But it
is good have that credential. I know SV is all about "meritocracy" and
whatnot, but having the PhD is a good signal that a person knows how to think
and problem solve with little to no supervision, especially when the problem
space is ill-defined. When hiring, I always count a PhD very high. I know a
bunch of companies do too. So while the initial work of getting the PhD wasn't
terribly fun, I've always had an easy time finding a job or getting a
promotion.

I think another commenter said something to the effect that a PhD is a good
signal that you can (and have) owned a full project start-to-finish. Don't
discount that. It shows you as a closer. That's a good thing.

Sorry for the brain dump, but this was an interesting question you
posed...tl;dr - I think a PhD can make you super valuable if you set it up in
a way that the skills you learn while getting the degree are transferrable
(now) to industry. You will have a leg-up on everyone else entering the field.
Just don't get caught in pure theory that will not have an application for
another decade. But you need to be ok with feeling stupid everyday because the
problems you're solving are hard and new.

~~~
steve_gh
This is a very good answer!

I got a PhD almost 20 years ago (in ML). I worked hard and played hard - and
had the time of my life. I learned to surf, got a black belt in Aikido,
restored a sailboat, climbed 3 times a week, and made friends for life.

Professionally, it set me up to join industry, and put me on a technical fast
track. Do I still use any of the research from my PhD - almost never (although
I still dabble with NNs and GAs occasionally). Do I still use the overall
research and organisational skills, and the critical thinking I learned -
every day!

If you are a self-starter and have the right sort of intellectual curiosity, a
PhD will be a worthwhile exercise, whatever you do afterwards. And, as the
parent points out, the signalling that a PhD gives can be very useful. The
fact that you completed a PhD points out that you are both smart, and can get
things done.

------
dlphn___xyz
do the phd and find a profession outside of tech.

------
spraveenitpro
No.

------
rubicon33
> I'm afraid I won't be able to find interesting work with just a MSc, and I'm
> really afraid of getting a boring software engineering gig.

This is probably true. Most jobs you'll get with a BS+Msc are going to be app
development. Web, mobile, server... pick your flavor. You'll largely be using
tools developed by other people, to build applications.

The really interesting jobs are absolutely held by Phds. But that's not to say
that having a Phd guarantees you'll get one of those jobs.

I think if you have the option to get a Phd, hunker down, and do it. The
industry is headed for a correction in salaries soon. Way too easy of work is
being done for 100k+ salaries. When that correction happens, you're going to
be happy that you have a Phd and are doing work in a much more challenging
field that warrants the pay.

~~~
mceachen
> The really interesting jobs are absolutely held by Phds.

That wholly depends on your definition of interesting.

I don't have a PhD.

I've written software that taught literacy to kids, helped people pay their
bills online (back in 1999, when this was novel), written full ML systems (15
years ago, before the advent of open source ml packages), co-founded a YC
company, and now I'm helping people rediscover the images of their lives (see
my profile if you're interested!)

To be sure, I'd love to go back to school. There's so much I know I don't
know, and would be wonderful to discover.

Just realize you can work on interesting stuff if you look for it, are willing
to stretch your skills continuously, and change jobs every handful of years.

~~~
malms
None of it qualify as interesting to peopple interested by phds.

~~~
rubicon33
Exactly my point, which seems to be eluding many others.

People who are interested in a PHD, aren't interested (most likely) in your
CRUD / another run of the mill app.

