>> LOL. Riiiight...
> 
> I'm serious. You're way too worried about this stuff.
> 
> Don't spend much money. Just get funding and go. You have no obligations 
> right now. It's the best time in your life to start something 
> questionable like this.

Hmm. It has a flavour.

I guess it's just that I've spent my entire life surrounded by people 
telling me how stupid I am, and generally failing at almost everything I 
try to do. And given that a PhD is something that only a tiny percantage 
of the population manage to get... it all sounds a little implausible to 
me, that's all.

>>> Plus, you'll meet girls. :-)
>>
>> Oh. My. GOD! >_<
>>
>> You cannot *possibly* expect me to take anything else you say 
>> seriously now, can you? :-P
> 
> Know what? My wife has a PhD too. Know where I met her?

Heh. What do you have a PhD *in* though?

I rather doubt there are many females who have a PhD in anything 
remotely related to computing. (I also couldn't help noticing how the 
OU's PhD prospectus didn't seem to contain *any* people younger than 35...)

>> Heh. Actually, a few weeks back I did look at MSRC. But I couldn't 
>> figure out what they were talking about. I surmised this probably 
>> means I'm too stupid to be there. :-}
> 
> No. It means you haven't done any sort of PhD work.
> 
> It's like saying "I don't want to go to school to study mathematics, 
> because every time I read a math paper I don't already understand it."

Like I say, I couldn't figure out the application process. Maybe because 
I don't have a clear idea of how this stuff is supposed to work...

>> That's pretty impressive, right there.
> 
> But that's how it works.

Heh. I can believe it.

> By the time I started actually writing the 
> thesis, I'd already published papers in three or four journals, been to 
> two countries on the school's money presenting the papers, and 
> peer-reviewed other papers about vaguely similar topics. You meet people 
> at these things, and they're expensive, so you get the school to pay for 
> it.

That's pretty impressive... I've spent years writting silly scraps of 
text, but I've never yet managed to write "a paper".

>> Taking a PhD for no apparent reason is slightly crazy, but I'm 
>> gradually coming around to the idea. Leaving the UK is an absurd idea. 
>> :-P
> 
> It's not "no apparently reason."  Think of it like taking a job doing 
> something fun, for not quite as much money as you might like, but 
> probably still more than you're making now. :-)

Well, if you put it like that... ;-)

> Why is leaving the UK for a few years absurd?

I think spending all day in a brand new, possibly hostile environment is 
quite enough to be dealing with, without living in a completely random 
country on top of all that. (Quite apart from the fact that I have no 
desire to leave the UK in the first place.)

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

Post a reply to this message

On 22-2-2009 10:59, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> I wandered into lots of terms like "universal quantification" and got 
>>> horribly lost...
>>
>> You should look up "universal quantification" and "existential 
>> quantification" on wikipedia.
> 
> I've already done this several times. I still don't comprehend. 

What exactly is the problem? Other than that the upside down E and A are 
not part of the ascii character set?

Post a reply to this message

On 22-2-2009 10:53, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> See, I don't give a **** about solving real-world problems. I only 
>>> care about solving "interesting" problems. ;-)
>>
>> I've found that when I get paid to do something it mysteriously becomes
>> interesting ???
> 
> Heh. You clearly get paid very much more than I do. ;-)
> 
If that is that simple, you only have to find a job that pays much more 
than this one.

Post a reply to this message

On 22-2-2009 10:17, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
> 

>> issues, is
>> to ignore them. Don't look for reasons why you can't do something as 
>> you will
>> find plenty of them. Just say to yourself, I want it I will do it. 
>> Every time
>> you have self doubts force your mind away from those thoughts.
>> I want you to never, ever post self doubting comments here again. It only
>> reinforces your weakness. Try it for a season or two.
>> Here endeth the lesson, according to uncle Stevie.
> 
> OK, but I still think there's something to be said for knowing what your 
> real strengths and weaknesses actually are.
> 
Or if you are not able to self analysis, just post a lot of biographical 
information on a newsgroup, and let them sort it out for you. 
Unconventional perhaps, but I know at least one case that did it this way.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Yes, but... having a BSc already says all those things. I spent 4 years
> of my life studying for it, I learned all sorts of stuff, and in the end
> I did actually get my BSc. And yet, nobody gives a **** about that. How
> is a PhD different?

How is a PhD different?!?

A PhD is *entirely* different from a BSc.  Most people, myself included to some
extent, float through a BSc, just making sure they pass the tests and get the
homework in on time.  Professors spoon-feed students the basics of assorted
fields, and a mutual understanding has arisen that as long as students can
repeat what the professor told them, they'll get the degree.  The very fact
that so many can make it through undetected says volumes about the amount of
personal responsibility expected.  That does NOT mean it's worthless, and does
NOT mean it's easy.  You learn a lot getting a BSc but never really have to put
yourself out there.

For a PhD, you have to do the work.  You go out and find the relevant books and
papers.  Your advisor may give you something to accomplish, but you have to
figure out how to make it happen.  Sure, there are a few classes, but the
emphasis is entirely on the research.  *No one* floats through a PhD.  Some may
put in more effort than others, but to get the degree you have to demonstrate
that, whether your research is really revolutionary or not (it's probably not),
you are not only capable of comprehending and conversing in your field, but that
you are capable of actively researching, contributing to, and expanding your
field.

Think of a project you did for your BSc.  I don't mean to assume, but if it's
anything like projects I did, there was a clear set of guidelines and
requirements.  It only amounted to making something work.  Once that was done,
the project was done.  For a PhD, the project requires that you can make sense
of the field, figure out where the voids are, learn the prerequisite material
yourself, and ultimately discover something no one else knows the answer
to--and along the way, you interact with the best and most knowledgeable people
in your respective field.

Now I'm not trying to devalue a BSc, and I'm not trying to overstate the value
of a PhD or the people with them (this wouldn't include me anyway).  I'm only
trying to state the facts--that to say a BSc and PhD are really not so
different is simply not the truth.  They are different.  Very different.  And
employers will recognize the difference.

 - Ricky

Post a reply to this message

"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> to get the degree you have to demonstrate
> that, whether your research is really revolutionary or not (it's probably not),
> you are not only capable of comprehending and conversing in your field, but that
> you are capable of actively researching, contributing to, and expanding your
> field.

Oh, one more thing to add:  If you're saying, "That doesn't sound like me...,"
well it doesn't sound like me either.  As was pointed out, just like a math
class, the point of it is to develop those skills.  If you already had them,
you would have no use for the degree.  Don't sell yourself short though.  You
appear to have figured out digital filters and a bit of knot theory on your
own, among other things.  That's not PhD-level research, but that's the same
kind of effort and skills it requires.  One purpose of an advisor is to channel
that effort so that you can learn what you need and not get lost.

 - Ricky

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:53:19 +0000, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>>> See, I don't give a **** about solving real-world problems. I only care 
>>> about solving "interesting" problems. ;-)
>> 
>> I've found that when I get paid to do something it mysteriously becomes
>> interesting ???
>
>Heh. You clearly get paid very much more than I do. ;-)

Could be ;)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> I had them all on cassette, then a friend of mine in the UK bought me the 
> CDs - which have subsequently gone missing, so I've got another set now.
> 
> The thing I've been trying to find is a copy of the version that has 
> Marvin's bit (when they first land on Magrathea) where he plays "Rock 'n 
> Roll Music" after Arthur mentions that "that robot can hum like Pink 
> Floyd".  I could swear I heard it in the radio version once upon a time, 
> but now I only seem to be able to find it in the LP (I believe, I have 
> the LP here somewhere but don't have a turntable).

If it's on the LP, you're probably stuck with that, because it seems 
they lifted that bit out for copyright reasons:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy_(radio_series)#Musical_copyrights

I've never heard that version before...

>> I recently watched the film again, and it's really astounding how badly
>> they buggered up Zaphod's character in that version... pretty good apart
>> from that though.
 >
> Yeah, I didn't think Rockwell captured the character well at all.  I also 
> didn't think Mos Def made a convincing Ford, it often sounded he was just 
> reading the lines.  

Essentially Zaphod is about right in the film, but in the previous 
versions the character managed to stay likeable, never becoming outright 
unpleasant. You just want Martin Freeman's Arthur to pummel him. In the 
other versions it's much more low-level jibing and Arthur gives as good 
as he gets in most cases. ("Well, go bang your heads together, foureyes!")

Mos Def was actually better than I expected. Unfortunately the original 
actors' interpretations are so firmly embedded in my mind that I doubt 
anyone else will do it as well to my ears... although, as you say, 
Stephen Fry was excellent.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:17:30 +0000, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>OK, but I still think there's something to be said for knowing what your 
>real strengths and weaknesses actually are.

True but not a lot. I believe that introspection is bad for you, I also believe
that analysis, public displays of grief and talking about your (not aimed at
you) feelings are amongst the worst things that you can do for your mental
health.

<Sits back and waits for the avalanche>
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Not true. If you're going for a technical position, even if it's 
>> unrelated to your field of study, the fact that you are capable of 
>> completing a PhD says a lot. It says you stick with the job, have a 
>> capacity and interest for learning, have experience in 
>> communication/dissemination, etc... and that's ignoring the 
>> field-specific skills.
> 
> Yes, but... having a BSc already says all those things. I spent 4 years 
> of my life studying for it, I learned all sorts of stuff, and in the end 
> I did actually get my BSc. And yet, nobody gives a **** about that. How 
> is a PhD different?

A *good* BSc says you have a capacity for learning. I'm not convinced it 
says anything more than that. My first degree certainly didn't equip me 
with the ability to communicate effectively with my professional(!) 
peers. If anything, it made me want to avoid giving presentations and so 
forth even more! The experiences gained in a PhD are as valuable, and 
real, as actual work experience. They're the same thing. For all intents 
and purposes, you can regard a PhD project as a proper job.

That said, be proud of the BSc, it's still a valuable achievement and 
puts you firmly in a higher category than most. But just think: you hold 
the thought of a PhD in very high esteem - why shouldn't others too?

>> Speculative queries
> [snip]
> 
> Well, maybe it's worth a giggle. ;-)

Absolutely. Worked for me. And I wasn't even looking for it with the 
deliberation that you (hopefully) will be!

Post a reply to this message