[1] https://members.cur.org/members_online/members/directory_lis...
A very relevant read FWIW.
Surely any irresponsible use of time is a personal deficit, not a graduate curricula's.
From a complexity barrier perspective, consider a career in ASIC design.
From a market saturation perspective, consider a career in any discipline of psychology.
Let me rephrase and probably further restrict what i mean: - If you want to work in big four(which was my assumption from Big4+Unicorn piece), you are better of not doing PHD in terms of progress careerwise. here is the reasoning, using some numbers i have seen around: - Big 4 usually let's you start Level N straight out of school. If you do PHD, they let you start Level N+1. Master's doesn't change anything, you still start Level N. - Phd takes (approximately) 5 years. - Promotions take 1-2 years, depending on your ambitions, your manager etc. Assume 1.5 years. - With the above numbers, instead of 5 years in PHD and start at LN+1, you could easily get to LN+3. If you are ambitious, you could get at least one promo in 1 year, which would put you in 1 year into LN+3, making you close to LN+4.
In all these 5 years, you'll also be banking stock refreshers, people would get to know you well, you could build reputation, and you would have a good chunk of money in the bank.
If you are targeting starting your own company, depending on what it is, phd might help (taking phd topic and making a company out of it is common). However, I believe, you could do much more in those 5 years, and you wouldn't have to go through emotional ride of graduate school as an extra stress.
Again, it all depends on what you want with phd. if your goal is working for FANG, 5 years of your youth is worth more than a phd.