TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

PhD vs Startup

45 点作者 amiune大约 12 年前

17 条评论

john_w_t_b大约 12 年前
Don't agree with this statement from the post.<p>"A PhD is safer. If you don’t do so well, you are going to get the title anyways. A Startup is riskier. If you don’t do very well (90% of the time), you can end broke."<p>Plenty of people drop out without finishing their PhD and generally they are broke afterwards. I'd say a startup is safer as you are closer to industry in case you need to find a job.
评论 #5770239 未加载
评论 #5770191 未加载
评论 #5770685 未加载
auctiontheory大约 12 年前
The author's view of PhD programs seems unrealistically positive. Maybe he means a CS PhD, but then the bit about changing the world makes even less sense.<p>Startups are for pragmatic (as opposed to idealistic) self-starters.<p>I think most PhD students identify with "I want to think deeply and learn a lot about one thing" much more than they identify with "I am a self-starter who loves to work in an unstructured environment."
评论 #5770388 未加载
评论 #5770262 未加载
carterschonwald大约 12 年前
this entire post has wildly false premises, on both sides.<p>on one side: the majority of engineers working at startups are <i>hired and paid</i>.<p>on the other side:<p>The vast majority of CS phds can't get an academic job unless they don't have <i>any</i> constraints on where they wish to live. The moment you have any location preferences <i>and</i> want an academic job, you have to be total super star, which is hard, and by definition few people will be. Theres also the fact that the typical phd recipient will never earn back the lost income from the extra years of education over their master degree only clone.<p>being a startup founder or a phd student, both can suck, they're fundamentally different experiences, and when one or another works out well for someone, its an incredibly unique and personal situation that will not be replicable by anyone else.
评论 #5770299 未加载
评论 #5770448 未加载
jurassic大约 12 年前
This post seems to miss the point that the two choices address completely different goals. Do you want to be a professor? Better get that doctorate. Want bags of money? Better work on your idea for the Next Big Thing. Both paths have upsides and downsides, but the important difference is that they're taking you toward different destinations.
stared大约 12 年前
Being a PhD student myself, I have to disagree with the last point: changing the world (actually, it was one of things that lured me were I am). While doing PhD you can be pretty certain that you won't become rich, it is also unlikely that you will change the world.<p>And comparing with science long-dead science luminaries is unfair - it used to be possible to make a (scientific) breakthrough working alone. But, say, for 50 years or so it is no longer true (the transition was smooth). When a field is fresh you can make a great in your garage; latter - not so.<p>Also, academia is a strictly top-down organization with all its consequences for creativity (in particular, having a great idea and skills at 17 yo will allow you to startup, put not - to assemble a research group). So if there is a great impact to the world by a PhD student, I can bet a lot, that it is because it was the PhD student's side project.
Fomite大约 12 年前
"The PhD...a job at the end it’s guaranteed"<p>And this is where I stopped taking the author seriously - they've got a seriously rose colored view of the job market.
javert大约 12 年前
&#62; you can have a greater impact by doing research. At least that's my opinion. I have tons of respect for entrepreneurs like Henry Ford or Larry Page but can you compare their contributions to the ones of Carl Friedrich Gauss or Alan Turing?<p>As a PhD student, I tend to think the opposite.<p>Entrepreneurs who are successful tend to change the world, or at least improve it. Even if you have a small business, you are helping fuel the economy.<p>It seems that most academics tend not to improve the world or fuel the economy.
评论 #5770757 未加载
maaku大约 12 年前
Be honest: chances are the startup will fail. (And probably for reasons you have little control over, so don't think you can just avoid the mistakes.)<p>So at the end of 5 years, what have you got? With the Ph.D you've got something recognizable and real academic cred. With the startup it'd be a bit of a mixed bag. If you <i>knew</i> the startup would fail, would you still choose it over the Ph.D?
评论 #5770206 未加载
评论 #5770184 未加载
marmaduke大约 12 年前
&#62; Both take at least five years.<p>Europeans do it in 3 or 4.<p>&#62; In a PhD you have a scholarship and a tutor that tells you what to do.<p>Salary is usually contingent on applications, work, etc.<p>After the first half, the PhD should be directing the project, not the tutor.<p>&#62; A PhD is safer. If you don’t do so well, you are going to get the title anyways.<p>A PhD is only a PhD if you make it to the endgame. You can fail quickly or slowly in an infinite cornucopia of ways.<p>&#62; In a PhD you learn a lot about an specific subject.<p>If you have two brain cells to rub together, you learn just as much about yourself, people's motivations, etc. as you do about the domain.<p>&#62; If what you want to do is to change the world, go with the PhD.<p>A PhD is at best learning to do research, not much else, and at worst, a poorly paid programmer or lab tech. Changing the world is thing altogether.
leftnode大约 12 年前
Why not both? The university I attended, UT Dallas, has a program called the Venture Development Center. Professors can pitch a start-up idea, and if they get accepted, the university donates office space and computers/software/etc. The professors Ph.D students get to work on the startup as an employee while also working toward their Ph.D.
mrcactu5大约 12 年前
PhD's and Startups are similar enough experiences that they can be constrasted. Every PhD is unique - REALLY unique and only a few people in the world understand. Startups these days seem to be as individual.<p>I agree that PhD's and startups have similar elements of risk. In both spaces, it's possible to stick to safe ideas or ideas that don't meet approval of your colleagues.<p>Startups teach you to be responsible for your own ideas, in a way the PhD system does not.<p>Not every PhD student has a scholarship. The ones who don't get a fellowship, tend not to accept. The ones that do get money still don't really understand where that money comes from.
return0大约 12 年前
Lots of false dichotomies and exaggerations. One does not even preclude the other.
simonbarker87大约 12 年前
A PhD does not take at least 5 years, I did mine in just under 3 and am now 2 years in to a startup I founded which will take at least 5 years.<p>The final point is also very very wrong. PhD's don't change the world, they push the boundary of what we know a tiny tiny bit forward. And it's widely known that a start up is not the most effective way to earn lots of money, investment banking or working your way up the corporate ladder is. The main difference is that a start up is probably more fun and fulfilling.
评论 #5771185 未加载
greenyoda大约 12 年前
It's not a dichotomy. You could do neither a PhD nor a startup, and that's also a perfectly legitimate option.
评论 #5770852 未加载
wellboy大约 12 年前
How does one change the world with a PhD? One's contribution is very little among all the other hundreds of researchers that are trying to work out that one problem and most of the time, your PhD doesn't have an impact at all.
评论 #5770728 未加载
评论 #5770698 未加载
yamalight大约 12 年前
It's also possible to do both. It's a bit harder than just one a time, but possible
评论 #5770918 未加载
outside1234大约 12 年前
can we get the ability to downvote articles i don't even know where to start with this one - its better if it just vanishes.