Hacker News Reader

Comment by grt_thr | Hacker News Reader

When I was a post grad I could make less than I would at McDonalds for work I was volontold to do.

I did the smart thing and quit. When you select for people who don't do the smart thing and want to be exploited in exchange for prestige they get exploited.

View on HN

Whenever these things come up, I'm always grateful toward my past self who opted out of academia and pursued industry. The entire system of placing your fate in the hands of disinterested, self motivated, senior faculty and researchers seemed very risky to me at the time. Plus the money has been nice. But I do feel like I missed out on some intellectual growth. YMMV.

In grad school I learned a bunch of stuff and pushed forward a research topic that was outdated at the time but I just had no idea. Once I got into industry it was obvious and I had to catch up. The degree ended up providing nothing more than a signal for job interviews.

True. But please consider the difference the social background of the people makes. If you are financially secure due to parents (or whatever) you can easily accept positions with a low payment and do your best to get into a promising tenure track.

So maybe it is only partly about exploitation, but also about applying a social filter.

I would describe the best "second-tier" academics I've encountered as mostly fitting the "parents money" archetype.

They're not the uber geniuses who flit to the top, but since the toxic incentives aren't as important to them due to their financial independence they get to focus on the work which ultimately pays dividends in their career.

> I did the smart thing and quit. When you select for people who don't do the smart thing and want to be exploited in exchange for prestige they get exploited.

I've also been told this is a prime driver for gender disparity in STEM academia: the women with the talent to succeed in a Ph. D. instead go earn their MD.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com