Stefu's theory of nicknames: Everyone's alias can be shortened to 6 letters or less

[Buck Birdseed]

Okay, how about one like that with no inherent english meaning? "Dzsordzs", a straight phonetic rendedring of the english name "george" in Hungarian, for instace.

[Stefu]

How about "George", Snappy? "Sordy" might also work.

obiwan, you might not have noticed, but "string" has six letters.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger


Sorry I wasn't clear -- my prof gave me my assistantship six weeks ago, but classes didn't start until two weeks ago, so I wound up putting in 80-odd hours worth of research before school technically began.

Sorry was confused. Thought you meant 6 YEARS of previous work. The 6 weeks is irrelevant to this discussion. I wouldn't even feel that you have to stay with this guy. That's like a summer internship. Not really that big a deal. More something to learn what you like.

I've got a paper I wrote as an undergrad that I presented at a conference, but the thing hasn't been published yet. I'll look into cleaning it up and submitting it ASAP -- it's not very good (which is why I haven't submitted it up until now), but it sounds like that doesn't really matter.

Disregard. I thought you meant 6 years of work. There would be some good stuff in there. in general, I think people ought to publish more. Because most research is taxpayer funded in some evenntual sense. So you owe it to the coutnry to publish. Others can take your small findings and take them to higher levels. Also, you prevent other people from having to duplicate your work.

I'm not an advocate of crappy papers. My first two papers (which my advisor was worried wouldn't be accepted) were accepted WITHOUT REVISION. This was because I was VERY honest about all claims and experimental limitations. because I had a good lit search and cited all relevant other work. Because I didn't try to overhype the work. But still made it interesting by pointing out how it might tie to commercial application or to related work. And because I went over it with a fine-tooth comb and was totally anal about following submission guidelines. My advisor had 150 papers on his resume. And this was his first experience with not having any reviewer comments to answer or things to fix. He was floored. Even as an editor of 300+ papers, he had never seen a single paper without revision.

Do solid work. Just don't feel like you have to explain the photo-electric effect to get into print. Anyway, you will learn to guage this stuff. Just realize that publications MATTER. The sooner you "pop your cherry" and get in the game, the better.

Anyw

[TCO]

Originally posted by GP


You DON'T want to look for the Holy Grail as a grad student. You want a simple, quick research projkect. Nad than be gone. If you are a PI, the incentives are different. But as a student, take the easy route.

To embelish: It's ok to pursue the Holy Grail. And nice to link your solid "data-pointish" papers to the quest for the Holy Grail. Just KNOW how you will publish parts of your research. I remember getting a dirty look form my advisor when he was encouraging a young grad student to go down a rathole. I told the guy, "That is fine. Just make some plans for how you will publish when the experiment doesn't work. The tone was acerbic. Guess I have a little bit of troll in me. It's a sub thing. But I meant part of it. It is important to have something to show for your work. Do some cool stuff with potential huge upside. But make sure there is a publishable escape clause when you don't get the Holy GRail. I can give chemistry examples if you want.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by GP
Disregard. I thought you meant 6 years of work.

No, no, I'm 22. I just got my B.S. last May, and my work experience consists of jerking around with databases and building walls out of limestone. I'm on a different page entirely.

Do solid work. Just don't feel like you have to explain the photo-electric effect to get into print.

By "not very good" I mean that my paper wasn't very useful, not that it was poorly written. It's worth looking into getting it published -- I'll just run it by a prof or two first to make sure. (It's a sorting algorithm that has fantastic speed and storage properties, but I didn't discover until too late that it's slow as nails when it comes down to actually moving the data. Not worthless, just not what I'd been hoping for.)

I see what you're saying about having an escape clause, though, and I've laid out my one/three year research plan with that in mind. But like I said, it's astounding just how much research hasn't been done in AI -- escape clauses are a dime a dozen if you know where to look for them.

[Buck Birdseed]

Okay, if I registered Dzalght then, which is a totally made up word, how would you shorten that?

Or, how about a random combination of consonants? KGTDPTC, or something.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger
What's your take on Ph.D's for folks not going into academia? All of the advice I've gotten so far has been useless, since my relatives are split down party lines -- the ones with Ph.D's say that I should get one, the ones who haven't got Ph.D's say that a doctorate is a waste of time. My undergraduate profs are equally useless -- the one who got his Ph.D right off the bat says that I should do the same, and the one who waited twenty years to get his says that I should do the same. And of course my advisor isn't even worth asking, his answer's pretty much a given.

I don't have an awesome take on this, young jedi. In chemistry, MOST degree winners don't go into academia. But that is the oddball field. Things are grimmer in other fields. Also, in some parts of engineering there is a stagma to the Ph.D. But at the end of the day, there are some people who are very impressed by it. I guess I would talk to some recent grads and get their take. You need to hear at least a little bitter whining from recent escapees from the slave labor camps. Take it all together and then see what it means to you. Are you hungry to get moving? Do you want up fornt cash? Or are you a little scared of the real world and want to hang out in school for a while (nothing wrong with that. If you're healthy and single it is a good gig.) How academic are you? Etc. Sorry. Don't have a great answer other than to talk to more people and do a little more introsepction on what makes you groove.

Cool?

[TCO]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
What if you have a seven-letter one-syllable user name? Like "Schlong".

shlong.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Okay, if I registered Dzalght then, which is a totally made up word, how would you shorten that?

Or, how about a random combination of consonants? KGTDPTC, or something.

I'll usually just use the first three or four letters (or whatever), since one random combination of letters is as good as the next. Dzal, or KGT, f'rinstance.

Originally posted by GP
Cool?

Yup, I'm just looking for advice wherever I can get it, since the advice I've gotten up to now is so biased that it's practically useless.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger


Not much, I've seen a coupla dissertations and they seemed very much like "copy-and-paste" theses.

Ok. Just check how long people typically have to be there. If anything, when you are leaving "early" there is a little bit of a higher hurdle for the dissertation. (they don't want to let you off easy.) And if you leave "late" there is a lower bar. (they want your ass out the door.)

On the research end I'm required to put in (more-or-less) 20 hours a week for my assistantship, and that more than satisfies any research requirements they've got with the program (they wink at double-dipping).

1. Nothing wrong with double-dipping. Do it whenever possible. Synergy, baby.
2. I still keep hearing a lot of words about hour requirements and stuff that I'm not used to hearing. AT NU (and most hardcore programs) it is not about punching the clock for 20 hours. It is about getting the heavy science done. And publications are the measure of your **** size.

Yeah, that one I don't know the answer to -- I'll scrounge around for some alums.

Good man.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by GP
2. I still keep hearing a lot of words about hour requirements and stuff that I'm not used to hearing.

That's the University talking, not my prof -- the University's got standards where there don't need to be standards ("Assistants must work for 20 hours a week, and cannot work for more than 30 during exam week, and they have to wear knee-high socks and plaid skirts..." etc.). My prof doesn't care how many hours I put in so long as I've got something to show for it -- if I'm lazy or incompetent then he'll fire me, if I'm a good worker then he'll give me a raise. But technically I'm doing 20 hours of research a week (even if I'm really doing 30, or 10).

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger

By "not very good" I mean that my paper wasn't very useful, not that it was poorly written. It's worth looking into getting it published -- I'll just run it by a prof or two first to make sure. (It's a sorting algorithm that has fantastic speed and storage properties, but I didn't discover until too late that it's slow as nails when it comes down to actually moving the data. Not worthless, just not what I'd been hoping for.)

1. Even if it doesn't solve the problem that you set out to solve it may be useful to publish it for whatever you did accomplish. Mayebe someone else will see your work and it will help them accomplish something.

2. Asking profs is OK. But at the end of the day, you need to be able to make these decisions on your own. REad some literature. Learn to think for yourself. Profs aren't gods. you could do their job. (Or that's how I always felt...byt was older of cousre.) Still by the end ouf your tenure, you willb e bale to publish on your own. Faster you move there the better.

I see what you're saying about having an escape clause, though, and I've laid out my one/three year research plan with that in mind. But like I said, it's astounding just how much research hasn't been done in AI -- escape clauses are a dime a dozen if you know where to look for them.

Sopunds real good.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger


That's the University talking, not my prof -- the University's got standards where there don't need to be standards ("Assistants must work for 20 hours a week, and cannot work for more than 30 during exam week, and they have to wear knee-high socks and plaid skirts..." etc.). My prof doesn't care how many hours I put in so long as I've got something to show for it -- if I'm lazy or incompetent then he'll fire me, if I'm a good worker then he'll give me a raise. But technically I'm doing 20 hours of research a week (even if I'm really doing 30, or 10).

So find out the real rules. Discuss them with your prof. And also with other students. Seperately.

BTW, is this the place you got your B.S.? What is holding you there?

[Jon Miller]

if by the end of two years profs are still gods you are in trouble, before that it is cool

Jon Miller

[Provost Harrison]

PH

No offense Paul Hanson, but this one is mine

[loinburger]

Originally posted by GP
So find out the real rules.

It pretty much means that I've got almost complete leeway in how I do my research, so long as I've got something to show for it at the end of the day (or at the end of the quarter, or year, or whatever). The prof doesn't like to micromanage, so he gives everybody quite a bit of leeway, and in my case he's giving me even more than usual. By way of example, three weeks ago he told me "Think about how you'd build an introspective software system, and get back to me in a coupla weeks," and he's left me alone since then.

BTW, is this the place you got your B.S.?

Nah, I did the last two years of my B.S. at a rinky-dink liberal arts college. I couldn't have gotten an M.S. from that place if I'd wanted to.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger


It pretty much means that I've got almost complete leeway in how I do my research, so long as I've got something to show for it at the end of the day (or at the end of the quarter, or year, or whatever). The prof doesn't like to micromanage, so he gives everybody quite a bit of leeway, and in my case he's giving me even more than usual. By way of example, three weeks ago he told me "Think about how you'd build an introspective software system, and get back to me in a coupla weeks," and he's left me alone since then.

That's the norm. You have to get it done on your own. By find out the real rules, i mean find out how much needs to be done. Find out if this guy is a stickler for specific results or if he just lets everybody go after a certain amount of time.

[loinburger]

Ah, gotcha. That'll be difficult to find out ahead of time, unfortunately, since he's made it pretty clear that he's not dealing with me in the same way that he's dealing with his other assistants, so he might be much more (or much less) of a stickler with me than usual. Still, I've got a year to see how the game's played before I have to make a decision on the doctorate.

[TCO]

Originally posted by loinburger
Ah, gotcha. That'll be difficult to find out ahead of time, unfortunately, since he's made it pretty clear that he's not dealing with me in the same way that he's dealing with his other assistants, so he might be much more (or much less) of a stickler with me than usual. Still, I've got a year to see how the game's played before I have to make a decision on the doctorate.

Yeah...talk to the other students. That will be a good guide for you. Even if you think you're the golden boy.