Remix.run Logo
caseysoftware 3 hours ago

"Academic experience typically doesn't count."

Why not?

godelski 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

  > Why not?
Weird egos. I moved from academia to industry and constantly got told "In industry we just care that 'it works'". I thought that was a weird premise, given... you know... who doesn't? But the more time I spent in industry the more time I found that they in fact do not care if it actually works. What seems to matter more is the politics and about "working"[0] the right way using the right new buzzword[1]

Truth is that the work and complexity is not that divorced. Honestly, the work in academia felt harder, though more fulfilling. Industry work hasn't made me have to really think deeply. If anything, I've heard most of my coworkers (at multiple companies) say something along the lines of "we have to move so fast that there's no time to think." Given that (multiple) managers tell me I'm "too slow" just because I'm not producing tons of lines of code (I'm neck and neck with everyone on milestones), I understand what they're talking about. Industry has a working mode of "do first, think second" while academia often thinks first. The reason is really because it is a lot cheaper to think first.

[0] It works enough for some demo to some person

[1] One example is I beat a company's fancy giant transformer based image detector with a scrappy CNN that took only a few hours to train. They were excited for all of 1 day and then wouldn't let me do the same thing to the transformer model (which would have had a bigger impact). Fun fact, my boss also loved to tell me about how dumb academia is because they never do anything useful and how industry makes all the real advancements.

mbreese 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Biotech and academia have very different standards for data quality and reproducibility. Most of the biotech people I know view academic research as an interesting first draft at best.

snailshare 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Drug development is just a totally different game. The tools are the same but the difference between what the reviewers at your favorite high impact publication want and what the FDA wants are pretty different. People spend their whole careers getting good at the latter in the same way people get good at the former. I've seen people come from academia and thrive and I've also seen the struggle. Some people also go to school with the goal of doing drug development, which sometimes academic folks don't realize. - person who was good at microscope and ended up in early stage drug development ~10y

garciasn 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I can’t speak to this particular sector; however, I have found academics to lag 5-7y behind the realities of the business world I operate in.

Business moves incredibly fast; academia, not so much.

totetsu 37 minutes ago | parent [-]

If it’s constantly 5-7 years behind isn’t it moving at the same speed just with an offset?

sandworm101 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Because the results from an acedemic paper are not, ever, going to be injected into a customer's arm. Developing products for sale in the real world is very different than designing lab experiments.

tennfown an hour ago | parent [-]

Sure, but it would seem the solution would be to hire the recently minted PhDs and teach them through more senior staff how to operate in the real world, just like in literally any other profession.

Instead you’ll just whine until they let you import a billion more Indians

coliveira 38 minutes ago | parent [-]

Because that's ultimately their goal! It's just smoke, mirrors, and complaining so they can get the cheap labor.