As far as I can see, the top PhD programs are getting better and better applications for the same number of slots, and the process is becoming far more competitive. There are plenty of students coming in with publications at good venues (maybe not NIPS, SOSP, STOC level). It used to be that students came in without doing research, but that doesn't seem to be the norm any more.<p>I don't know how I got into grad school --- looking at the qualifications the incoming students have these days I don't think I'd make it --- and I only started my PhD 4 years ago.<p>This ratcheting up in qualifications is happening at every level in academia (and not just in CS). I know some grad students whose work and lifestyle is best described as "tenure track professors in the 80s." I know researchers at top labs like MSR who were hired on the strength of a _single_ OSDI publication. I had one as a second year PhD student, and I'm so far off the ball that I don't think I will even be attempting to go on the academic job market when I graduate. At this point I think it's pretty fruitless to apply to do a PhD without having prior research experience, ideally with a publication. I may be getting too jaded and pessimistic though. Consider alternate points of view.<p>On the other hand, if you can get in, it's a pretty amazing life of learning and developing industry relevant skills (if you're smart about it) on the NSF's dime. I know some of y'all are cynical about academia and like to badmouth PhD students as being unhirable and writing crap code, but consider that RTM is a top academic, and is pretty relevant as far as the startup scene is considered.
It may be worth noting that in many areas of CS, you can still do research and think deeply about hard problems even if you don't go to grad school. You can read papers on the internet, which are free in some cases, and use your own computer. It will be a lot harder to publish anything, you won't have a faculty adviser to steer you in the right direction, and you won't get to go to conferences. But nothing stops you from doing research anyway, and if you happen to solve some important problem and can prove it, eventually word will get out and people will notice (one would hope).
It was a very good article and I agreed with most of it except that people who decide to leave academia after PhD still have learned a lot: self management, self motivation and critical thinking as well as learning how to think are several of them. I would say that thinking of PhD as a wasted time assuming that the person is not pursuing academic career is something I don't agree with.
Pretty good advice, much of it not exclusive to CS alone. In particular the notes about the opportunity cost involved with getting a PhD.<p>I'd add to this: find out with absolute clarity upfront what the terms are for applying as a doctoral student vs. a masters student (with option to matriculate).<p>Often there is an expectation that doctoral students can and will pass qualifying exams within a pretty short period of time (a year perhaps) of being accepted to their program. This was the case in my own program.
I have BS in CS, MBA-FINANCE, neither will provide the real experience in a real hacker world, less will do a Ph.D a total waste of money and a debt that will hunt you for a long time.
Time=Money
<a href="https://www.coursera.org/" rel="nofollow">https://www.coursera.org/</a>
Sorry for the aside, this opened for me in pdf.js in firefox (on archlinux) and the font rendered very poorly, but when I downloaded it and looked at it in zathura (vi-like pdf viewer) the font looked fine. Does anybody know what I can do to fix the fonts in pdf.js?
Manuel Blum's page on research[1] is also relevant. He was Mor's advisor.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mblum/research/pdf/grad.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mblum/research/pdf/grad.html</a>