Hacker News Reader

> Top companies are even more exclusive than PhD programs in terms of acceptance rate.

Acceptance rate is meaningless unless the base populations are the same. Considering only the (hopefully) top graduates are interested in applying for PhD, whereas most graduates have to look for jobs, acceptance rates between grad school and companies are really comparable.

> I think it's patently ridiculous that professors get "authorship" credit on papers even when they had a minimal, at best, role in it.

Think of professor as a spiritual mentor. I don't think Jony Ive put his hands on the drawing of latest apple watches anymore, and he gets to sit in the white room every year. It's the philosophical guides he puts into his team that earn him the privilege.

In terms of material compensation, I totally agree with you that companies generally pay much better. The credit part is really nominal. I've know some people working in google, facebook. Their projects range from google cardboard, google daydream, fb live video, to fb 360 video. Honestly, I have never seen their names/credits anywhere else but our private conversations. It's nowhere to be found.

>> you’re strictly more hirable as a PhD graduate or even as a PhD dropout and many companies might be willing to put you in a more interesting position or with a higher starting salary

> This is 100% false. Many many people have found a PhD to be a handicap when it comes to getting a job, particularly in software engineering. A large number of employers have anti-PhD biases which will work against you.

I was wondering if you could comment on this? Personal experience? I may be naive for not believing this in the first place; why would there be disdain expressed towards PhD applicants at a company? Is it a business perspective ("PhDs are too expensive"), technical ("they are too specialized, cannot practically implement solutions we expect of a new hire"), social ("I don't understand academia and couldn't achieve that high"), or something else?

> I was wondering if you could comment on this? Personal experience?

I do not have a PhD. My experience is based on personal experience with hiring people, speaking to friends and other hiring managers, and anecdotes from HN.

In general, the reasons are (for better or worse):

1. PhDs aren't very good programmers or don't follow software engineering best practices.

2. PhDs want to do "research" and will get bored with the basic software production required for 90% of industry jobs.

3. PhDs expect to be paid/respected at a higher level of seniority, even though skill-wise they'e often barely above a recent BA graduate.

I don't know how valid all of these are, but in general I would personally always choose someone with 5 years of industry work experience over someone with a PhD for a software job.

If you hire PhDs for software engineering jobs, then obviously there's a mismatch of skillsets.

I agree. If you are not having even a single problem in your company which makes you wish you had an expert (not that all PhDs are experts) in a specific domain (all the more if that domain is specialized in a way that you do not normally encounter in a typical software engineer job), it will be an unhappy marriage for both employer and employee.

> Top companies are even more exclusive than PhD programs in terms of acceptance rate.

False. Do you even know how many people apply online to Uber, Slack, Facebook, and Google? More than the entire population of flagship state universities.

> > you’re strictly more hirable as a PhD graduate or even as a PhD dropout and many companies might be willing to put you in a more interesting position or with a higher starting salary

> This is 100% false. Many many people have found a PhD to be a handicap when it comes to getting a job, particularly in software engineering. A large number of employers have anti-PhD biases which will work against you.

I agree.

> Meanwhile in companies you can have a tangible impact and see real results/credit from it (bonuses, promotions). Not to mention that many universities have draconian IP policies.

The results come from products you did not solely produce. There are plenty of other co-workers or teams which helped contribute large components to your product.

> False. Do you even know how many people apply online to Uber, Slack, Facebook, and Google? More than the entire population of flagship state universities.

I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing. That's precisely my point: Google, for example, gets tens of thousands of applications. Their acceptance rate is incredibly low.

> The results come from products you did not solely produce.

Sure, but I don't see how that detracts from the fact that you can see meaningful rewards for your work in corporate life.

>> False. Do you even know how many people apply online to Uber, Slack, Facebook, and Google? More than the entire population of flagship state universities.

> I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing. That's precisely my point: Google, for example, gets tens of thousands of applications. Their acceptance rate is incredibly low.

I spoke with an engineer (a PhD) and a recruiter at a recent USENIX conference; they stated Google gets much more than tens of thousands of applications (a factor of ten more than what you stated). I'm not sure if they meant applica_tions_ or unique applica_nts_.

I'm pretty sure the acceptance rate for those applying for jobs at retailers such as Best Buy are lower than the admission rates of many top graduate programs so the acceptance rate only tells part of the story. The barrier to even apply for these graduate programs is significantly higher and very self selecting.