I enjoyed the read. For readers who skim the comments before deciding to read the submission, a main idea of the author Nielsen is that one of the most important principles to develop a successful research career is to carefully choose the right area of study, making sure there are lots of opportunity for growth.
The author makes the case (after a good deal of noting that his advice may not apply to every reader) that finding a niche with growth potential is far more important than your abilities, or even your willingness to choose the most difficult topics. Another major idea of the author is that keeping a positive attitude about your work over time is crucial, and you should be cautious if you are beginning to feel cynical about your work. The author also notes that you should make sure to rest properly and take vacations to avoid feelings of exhaustion.
A particularly interesting quote from the Nielsen was: "[...] By contrast: you can be astoundingly talented and hard working, but if you're in the wrong area you will only make a minor contribution."
Another perspective by computer scientist Donald Knuth is relevant to one of Nielsen's nuanced points (that he advises against "figuring out what's fashionable, and going where the crowd is going"). Knuth wrote [1]: "Don’t just do trendy stuff. If something is really popular, I tend to think: back off. I tell myself and my students to go with your own aesthetics, what you think is important. Don’t do what you think other people think you want to do, but what you really want to do yourself. That’s been a guiding heuristic for me all the way through."
To integrate the two perspectives, it's plausible that when choosing an area of focus, a researcher may find it useful to find a balance between selecting an area of high growth, while also trying to avoid fads or trends that may fizzle out or lose favour years from the present.
My advise: Do not be too innovative before you are a professor, otherwise you cannot become one because the positions you are qualified for do not exist yet.
The author makes the case (after a good deal of noting that his advice may not apply to every reader) that finding a niche with growth potential is far more important than your abilities, or even your willingness to choose the most difficult topics. Another major idea of the author is that keeping a positive attitude about your work over time is crucial, and you should be cautious if you are beginning to feel cynical about your work. The author also notes that you should make sure to rest properly and take vacations to avoid feelings of exhaustion.
A particularly interesting quote from the Nielsen was: "[...] By contrast: you can be astoundingly talented and hard working, but if you're in the wrong area you will only make a minor contribution."
Another perspective by computer scientist Donald Knuth is relevant to one of Nielsen's nuanced points (that he advises against "figuring out what's fashionable, and going where the crowd is going"). Knuth wrote [1]: "Don’t just do trendy stuff. If something is really popular, I tend to think: back off. I tell myself and my students to go with your own aesthetics, what you think is important. Don’t do what you think other people think you want to do, but what you really want to do yourself. That’s been a guiding heuristic for me all the way through."
To integrate the two perspectives, it's plausible that when choosing an area of focus, a researcher may find it useful to find a balance between selecting an area of high growth, while also trying to avoid fads or trends that may fizzle out or lose favour years from the present.
[1] https://shuvomoy.github.io/blogs/posts/Knuth-on-work-habits-...