Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Audiophile
Is this you? Claim Profile »
5 years ago
in Ze Future! on kev/null
One more thing. This is another thing I told them:
6-7 years is a long time. I know people that took 8+. I don't know your age or your relationship status, but ask yourself what you want to be doing 5 years from now. Ask yourself if busting your ass for something like
$20K/year fits into those plans.
6-7 years is a long time. I know people that took 8+. I don't know your age or your relationship status, but ask yourself what you want to be doing 5 years from now. Ask yourself if busting your ass for something like
$20K/year fits into those plans.
5 years ago
in Ze Future! on kev/null
Someone recently asked me for advice about whether they should go for a PhD. This is what I told them:
So here's the standard "why you shouldn't get a PhD in Computer Science" spiel. You've probably already heard this several times, but no conversation on the matter would be complete without it.
Getting a PhD is usually between a 6-7 year committment, sometimes more, and almost never less. If you were a CS undergrad, the opportunity cost of going to school is huge. Likely costs that you will never recoup in overall financial terms. I haven't seen a "real" salary survey in quite some time, but all talented software developers that I know rake in upwards of $75K/year and almost always in excess of six figures. While, PhDs typically do make more, they do not typically hold an appreciable salary advantage in this field. So if you're at all thinking that getting a PhD, makes financial sense, I'd say that you're probably wrong.
If you think being in academia will help you leave behind office politics or the daily grind, you're mistaken. Before you get tenure, you basically have to work your ass off on research to make sure you get published and do a lot
of ass kissing to make sure that the in-crowd likes you. You also have to fight with a huge number of other people to come up with research funding (read: beg for money). Then even if you have funding, you have to work your butt off to get good students. Getting tenure at a good research university is not easy. When you finally do get tenure, you probably won't be doing a ton of research. Your students probably end up doing 75+% of it, and you'll spend all of your time working on getting funding.
If you want to teach, you can always get a lecturer/teaching position without a PhD.
So if none of those options fit into your plans, what is left? Government or industry. Government research is... well... government. There are basically 2 types of research, applied and basic. Basic CS research is fairly limited outside of academia. TJ Watson and just maybe some at Microsoft. If you want to do applied research, you can get a lot of interesting positions without a PhD. So why bother?
Basically, you really need to know why you're getting a PhD. Doing research is one of those things that sounds a lot more glamorous than it ends up being in reality. At the end of the day, if that's what you really want to do, all
the more power to you. However, you have to recognize that a PhD (like all degrees) is really just a piece of paper.
So here's the standard "why you shouldn't get a PhD in Computer Science" spiel. You've probably already heard this several times, but no conversation on the matter would be complete without it.
Getting a PhD is usually between a 6-7 year committment, sometimes more, and almost never less. If you were a CS undergrad, the opportunity cost of going to school is huge. Likely costs that you will never recoup in overall financial terms. I haven't seen a "real" salary survey in quite some time, but all talented software developers that I know rake in upwards of $75K/year and almost always in excess of six figures. While, PhDs typically do make more, they do not typically hold an appreciable salary advantage in this field. So if you're at all thinking that getting a PhD, makes financial sense, I'd say that you're probably wrong.
If you think being in academia will help you leave behind office politics or the daily grind, you're mistaken. Before you get tenure, you basically have to work your ass off on research to make sure you get published and do a lot
of ass kissing to make sure that the in-crowd likes you. You also have to fight with a huge number of other people to come up with research funding (read: beg for money). Then even if you have funding, you have to work your butt off to get good students. Getting tenure at a good research university is not easy. When you finally do get tenure, you probably won't be doing a ton of research. Your students probably end up doing 75+% of it, and you'll spend all of your time working on getting funding.
If you want to teach, you can always get a lecturer/teaching position without a PhD.
So if none of those options fit into your plans, what is left? Government or industry. Government research is... well... government. There are basically 2 types of research, applied and basic. Basic CS research is fairly limited outside of academia. TJ Watson and just maybe some at Microsoft. If you want to do applied research, you can get a lot of interesting positions without a PhD. So why bother?
Basically, you really need to know why you're getting a PhD. Doing research is one of those things that sounds a lot more glamorous than it ends up being in reality. At the end of the day, if that's what you really want to do, all
the more power to you. However, you have to recognize that a PhD (like all degrees) is really just a piece of paper.
5 years ago
in FeedDemon Begone! on kev/null
I've been using Sharp Reader for a while and it's not bad...
5 years ago
in NHL on London TV on kev/null
"When we get into the finals, maybe I'll just nab a hotel room in one of the hotels that have NASN =)"
What are the odds that you'll still be in London in 20 years? =P
What are the odds that you'll still be in London in 20 years? =P
