>> The requirement that you
>> have to do something "new" seems pretty hard to meet; almost everything
>> has been done already.
> 
> I think the idea is that you find an advisor with a topic that interests you.
> He/she has ideas that you implement and explore.  This leads to new ideas
> (yours!) that you can explore.  Not many people can walk into a field with
> fresh new ideas and no experience.

Well sure. But it seems it would take little old me a *long* time to 
travel all the way to the frontiers of knowledge to do genuinely new stuff.

OTOH, presumably that's what your supervisor is for? ;-)

>>  They just want to know whether you have skill X. If you do
>> not have skill X, not interested. Goodbye.
> 
> As was pointed out, a few years of study in field Y should put you in touch with
> people who also care about skill Y.

It has a flavour...

> Maybe I should elaborate.  At a Q&A session, people were worried they would be
> viewed as overqualified or not have experience in exactly the right field.  The
> answer was that if that's the case it's probably not the right job anyway, but
> there are certainly jobs out there that do match a different set of
> qualifications.

Sounds plausible at least.

> Many of these jobs may carry more freedom and responsibility.

I was under the impression that "freedom" and "responsibility" are polar 
opposites.

>> Heh. I'm only asking because everybody *else* seems to think I should! :-P
>>
>> Still, I guess it merits further attention...
> 
> Forgive me.  I'm not trying to convince you to do anything, only trying to
> convince you that it's not an impossibility.  You obviously want a job that
> gives you the freedom to explore and apply yourself.  Grad school is one way to
> move in that direction, but certainly not the only way.

Hey, I started this thread to gather opinions. (And practical data too.) 
So far it's working. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message