Hacker News Reader

Comment by anongradstudent | Hacker News Reader

Do you think there's a point to getting a PhD at all? I've been debating dropping out of my PhD program (after one year), mostly for personal reasons, but partially because most grads from my (top N) program end up not being able to land a research or academic position after graduation. If I end up like 95% of the graduates from my program, will it have been a waste of time?

Is there any value in a PhD if you do your own startup, become a dev at a huge company like Google, or become a dev at a small company like Yelp? And if so, what does it get you over having five years of experience? I don't mean in monetary terms -- a PhD is obviously a net negative monetarily; what I'm looking for is the chance to make a living working on 'interesting' problems.

View on HN

A PhD programme is ideally an opportunity to work on whatever you want, for years, in the company of smart people who are also interested in the same subject. You can use this time to try out different ideas and see if any of them take off. Having that shot is valuable in itself, even if you don't "succeed" with a research position afterwards.

Plus, sometimes new startup ideas, connections, or key skills come out of a PhD. The traditional approach is to found a startup directly from your research, but equally important is the role of PhD projects in helping you identify people who will get things done. If they flake out on helping write an academic paper, what will they do when you're working on a company?

Now sometimes a programme falls short of the ideal. You may end up teaching too much, you may end up working on projects you don't like because the funding is there, and so on. If that's happening, then that is a reason to quit. If you have an incredible opportunity that comes up and isn't compatible with continuing, that's a reason to quit. Just quitting because the grass is greener, though, does not seem like it will work.

This was my attitude going into the program. I'll get to spend five years working on fun problems! Even if I don't land a research job at the end of it, at least I'll have had five years of fun. But when I look at how bitter the people who are graduating now are when they don't get research jobs, I'm not sure that I'll have the same attitude towards things when I finish.

Yes, sometimes new ideas, connections, and skills come out of a PhD. Don't those things come out of working in industry, too?

You may end up teaching too much, you may end up working on projects you don't like

Yes. This. I feel like I had more freedom at my old industry position than I do in my PhD program.

As you said, there is not much in the way of direct financial compensation for having a PhD in industry, but it can act as a foot in the door and it can (depending on the company) mean you get treated a bit differently once you are hired. Researchy type projects tend to get pushed to people who are good at open ended researchy things, and having a PhD is a good indicator of that.

For me the biggest value from my PhD came from the writing up. It is really, really, really hard to get from having "done all of the work" to writing a coherent, well defended thesis on it. You will get very good at spotting holes in arguments (particularly yours, but also other peoples). You will get a very real understanding of how much work is involved in getting from 95% to 100% finished. It's not directly valued in industry but I know that I benefit personally from my writing up experience.

And you get to call yourself doctor. That's nice.

What settings have you found where you could call yourself "doctor" without someone mistakenly believing you are an MD? The only ones I've found so far are in academia and at work, but in both cases it's not really that much of a boost. (At work everyone more or less has a PhD.)

The pub.

"Hey baby, I'm a doctor. I do radiology." (Both true statements.)

"Ooh, tell me more."

Yeah, mainly the pub, but also any situation where you want someone to do something that seems risky:

"Trust me, I'm a doctor!"

And dealing with unhelpful customer service:

"We're sorry Mr Smith but we can't do that..."

"Actually that's DOCTOR Smith"

It won't help you get what you want, but the amusement factor will make you feel better.

A friend of mine has Dr on all of his credit cards. He claims to have received free upgrades on rental cars from time to time as a result. Not sure if I believe that.

Yes, that's right, the writing up is key. In addition to spotting holes in arguments, it's good for showing you that you can finish a large sustained project.

It's easier to immigrate, as a foreigner to the USA/Canada/Australia, if you have a PhD. That's really the only reason I'm getting my degree.

I'd recommend staying with it. If you're young (i.e. straight out of undergrad), it'll seem like the ~5 years you have left is a long time.

As somebody who spent some time working and then came back, though, it's just a short hop. The Ph.D. will only open doors for you in the future, and the six-year commitment is not an easy thing to do the older you get, with greater lifestyle expectations, family situation, and the general crotechety-ness that comes with time.

I'm not that young. I spent a couple years picking up an MS and five years working before starting the PhD. Five years still seems like a long time to me. It's nearly 10% of my remaining life expectancy!

Sure, a PhD will open some doors. So will five years in industry: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1373334

A PhD is required to do research in academia and most industry labs. Otherwise, it's a net loss. However, it's free and fun for a while (if you don't work for an asshole).

> A PhD is required to do research in academia

I'm not sure what this means—no-one can stop you from doing research anywhere, regardless of your qualifications. Do you mean that most academic research jobs require a Ph.D.?

(I left the bit about industry out of my quote because I don't have the faintest idea. Maybe it's true.)

Probably what he means is that most "research scientist" or "research engineer" jobs out there require a PhD. Though there are a fair number at larger labs that only ask for a masters. But:

>I'm not sure what this means--no-one can stop you from doing research anywhere, regardless of your qualifications.

This may be true in CS, but in most physical or biological fields is not fully true. The permits you need for handling certain materials are more difficult to obtain without a PhD, and it's hard to get funded without it as well.

> This may be true in CS, but in most physical or biological fields is not fully true.

Good point. I'm a mathematician, and the resources that we absolutely must have are even fewer than those of most CSers; I didn't consider life in other disciplines.

Well I've heard that Apple won't even bother considering you if you don't have at least a minimum of a master's degree in something related if you're applying for the Spotlight team.

If you're studying something hard and you get good at it someone will want to hire you. You will have essentially paid for a good chunk of their R&D for them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com