Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

mietminderung t1_j2p6rr5 wrote

PhD is a double edged sword. What’s your aim? If your aim is income, you rather not do a PhD. A PhD degree is for you to “learn to learn” (conduct independent research). It’s a skill that could be valuable if you think broadly (even beyond ML). All other pursuits might be suited to industry applied science positions.

108

logicbloke_ t1_j2pwk06 wrote

This is great advice. First ask yourself why you want to do a PhD.

23

tonsofmiso t1_j2r6z32 wrote

The advice I was given was that you should do a PhD only if research is the only thing you really, really want to work with for the rest of your life. 4-5 years of pain, stress, late nights, loneliness, and suffering at that level is ridiculous if you're only motivated by a better industry title or a higher salary.

14

x0rg_ t1_j2rzj2k wrote

I disagree mostly. One should do a PhD if research is what one wants to do right now/for the next few years. The PhD is a unique opportunity to do focused, very deep research at the boundaries of human knowledge. You will most likely not be able to do that at any point later in your career (maybe still somewhat as a post doc, but certainly not as a professor, because then you are a science manager, and also not in industry). Also, the feeling of inventing the future when you make a discovery for the first time is just amazing.

Also, a PhD provides you with unique training to tackle unstructured problems, and having a PhD is often prerequisite to research positions in industry

However, I agree with the statement that one should not do a PhD if salary/prestige is what one wants. You have to be 150% self motivated in a PhD, otherwise it’s a recipe for misery.

10

tonsofmiso t1_j2s5npi wrote

> One should do a PhD if research is what one wants to do right now/for the next few years.

I like how you framed this, but it's important to consider opportunity costs. In many fields, the PhD track is severely underpaid compared to industry. You'll spend a few years working more or less alone, and in a single organization. The longer you stay your PhD, the greater the cost of not finishing. I dropped out after 1.5 years at a PhD, and this was one of the reasons.

Fresh PhDs going into industry are also junior in many aspects. I've been working alongside one who recently finished a PhD on the topic we're working on in my team, and they do require training in many aspects like someone fresh from a master's. He excels in other areas, naturally, and that's why we hired them :)

Edit: The advice I was given is a little bit black and white to be honest. I think points from both sides are valid, but the importance of really, really wanting to do a PhD can not be overstated.

4

x0rg_ t1_j2xj1le wrote

Agreed, the salary difference is brutal (>3x more in industry after MSc, at least in ML…). My PhD experience was similar in terms of isolation. However, I think this does not necessarily have to be this way, it’s just how most academics unfortunately work :-/ advice would be to try to find groups which are more collaborative

2

mietminderung t1_j2rc5nf wrote

I’d mostly agree. I would like to add one additional point. If you can, a PhD can change the way one thinks. The idea of formulation of a question, creating a plan to test it, evaluation criteria to monitor and drawing conclusions is beneficial even beyond research. However, those benefits only materialise if one views it from that lens. You will think differently from your peers which can give you an edge in sports, management etc. The question then arises is 1) Is this something one desires? and 2) what effort are you willing to spend to achieve this desire? That’s a personal choice to make.

9

arcandor t1_j2rctjs wrote

There is a perceived market need for PhDs in ML. It's in all the job descriptions. It will allow easier access to research oriented positions in industry.

9

madeInSwamp t1_j2qp8ts wrote

I thought that when comparing master degree vs PhD the latter wins because it can ask for a better salary, or am I wrong?

5

mietminderung t1_j2qt281 wrote

Typically, only in areas where PhD (ability to conduct independent research) skills are important. Otherwise, you might get a net lower value.

13

madeInSwamp t1_j2qu755 wrote

If the ability to conduct independent research is the most valuable skill for a PhD... A master graduate could close that gap by publishing several papers during his/her career? Maybe he/she can also become more valuable since the additional years in the job market (as /u/dvorakcoder said)

7

mietminderung t1_j2quj6r wrote

Yes of course. There are more than one ways to achieve an outcome. That said, the skills you want to learn from a PhD are best learnt from spending dedicated time in one. The quality will show. You can hack around it. However, very few people are able to sustain.

In any case, the question of - is this a relevant skill to earn more income - will always be a personal choice and question.

12

dvorakcoder t1_j2qt3o8 wrote

The salary gap isn't that different from master to phd, while the person with a master degree will have an additional five to six years headstart on accumulating tech salary wealth and career growth.

13

VarietyElderberry t1_j2r43xd wrote

This. A PhD can ask for a higher salary than a master student, but a person with a master and 5 years of experience can ask for a higher salary than a PhD student.

I wonder if having a PhD will allow faster growth to a senior position such that a PhD will win out in the long term. I'm guessing on average the difference is not that big in the long term.

As others have said: ask yourself why you want to do a PhD. If it is to get a higher salary, you might want to think again.

3