Subject: Re: Ask (Was: Request for advice....)
From: "Arthur E. Sowers"
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:06:16 -0500
This is going out not only as a counter post but private email.
Trevor has a reasonable approach and a realistic attitude towards the
science job situation (see below, which is quoted in toto). I want to
remind people that there is an alternative to asking people to evaluate
you or asking yourself (as in a mirror) how "good" you are: do the "self
test" that I described in my CPSJ essays. Essentially this is an ongoing
evaluation of the growth of your CV as you go through your postdoc. You
almost can't tell where your life/career is headed at the time you get
your PhD, because you will find out during the postdoc (which is actually
analogous to an apprenticeship). The "self test" in short is a comparison
between where your CV is going and examples of where it needs to be to be
competitive and a tracking of how many CVs you send out vs. how many
seminar/interview invites you get vs. how many job offers you get. There
is a little more to it than that, and it IS brutal, but then the job
market is brutal also. I think I remember looking at your homepage and I
seem to remember protein folding as the subject. Its not bad because its a
popular area, but you have to also consider if it has any commercial
potential (that factor is important in terms of the breadth of your job
market [i.e. probability of getting some decent job]). But, then, maybe
you know all this already.
Good luck.
Art S.
====no change to below, included for reference and context===
On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Trevor Creamer wrote:
> Arthur E. Sowers wrote:
>
>
>
> > ... ask him if he thinks YOU have a good/fair/excellent future ahead of
> > you and is there anything he would recommend that would help that.
> >
> > Art Sowers
>
> By now almost everyone who reads src must be well aware of (and probably
> tired of hearing about) the number of applications sent to each
> advertised academic position in science (generally 300+). Whenever I
> think about such numbers I wonder just how many of those people have
> bothered to ask the question outlined by Art above. Perhaps this is
> obvious advice, but here goes anyway. Everyone who is in the academic
> job market should seek out _several_ people whose opinion they think
> they can trust, and ask them for their candid opinion on your chances.
> _Listen_ to what they have to say. For many people the answers may turn
> out to be bitter medicine to swallow, nonetheless it's got to be better
> than wasting years applying for jobs you have no chance of ever getting.
>
> Who do you ask ? Well, you want to avoid people who will just give you
> the answers you want to hear. You also may want to avoid asking your
> current mentor if you have even the vaguest suspicion that he/she would
> like to keep you shackled to the lab bench indefinitely. And you want to
> make sure the people you ask are aware of the current job market (many
> older professors are not). If you don't know anyone who seems to fit the
> criteria, start looking - no matter where you end up you're going to
> need to know people you can trust.
>
> There is one person you can ask immediately - yourself. Be totally and
> brutally honest with yourself. It's not enough to look at the faculty at
> your current institution and tell yourself that you'd be a much better
> teacher/mentor/researcher. You probably would be - the amount of dead
> wood in departments is amazing. Most current faculty got their jobs back
> in the dim and distant past when there actually were jobs - it's tougher
> today. How do you stack up against the people you are competing with ?
> Be realistic.
>
> By the way, in another thread there was a lot of talk about there being
> no point in being optimistic. I humbly beg to differ - being pessimistic
> won't get anyone anywhere they want to be. Be optimistic. But above all,
> be _realistic_.
>
> Cheers,
> Trevor
>
> p.s. Someone also noted the lack of success stories on this group - I'll
> post one sometime in the very near future.
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Trevor P. Creamer Dept. of Biophysics
> Email - trevor@grserv.med.jhu.edu & Biophysical Chemistry
> Phone - (410) 614 3972 Johns Hopkins University
> Fax - (410) 614 3971 School of Medicine
> Baltimore, MD 21205
> http://cherubino.med.jhu.edu/~trevor U.S.A.
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
Subject: Re: Intel hires most of its technical staff through exploitable visa program, leaving many deserving americans wondering whose country is this? Stock market soars, foreign millionaires being made in valley, our kids on drugs
From: "Jim K. Hale"
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:53:09 -0500
Marc Andelman wrote:
>
> I personnaly wouild like to see all jobs driven down to the lowest
> common denominator. The reasons are as follows.
>
> a. The work force is evolving towards smaller companies, individual
> consultants, and entrepreneurs. This offers tremendous personal
> freedom from large institutions running our lives.
>
> b. The above sorts of people do not owe old line Soviet style large companies
> and their employees a living. Cheaper goods and services allow more
> money in the pockets of those who can create wealth the most efficiently,
> namely "a" above.
I see ... spoken like someone who has been poor all their life and will
continue
to be poor until everyone else is in a like circumstance. :)
I agree business doesn't owe anyone anything but the check at the end of
the
work week, but let's be real here. I'm an extremely talented engineer,
and I
command (and deserve) top payment for my skills. To say that everyone
should
be paid the smallest amount possible is terribly naive. Why should some
lout
who can barely spell UNIX get paid the same pitiful amount as me? I
shouldn't
be paid a "minimum wage" any more than that individual should be paid
$100K
a year.
My conclusion on the above statement: reasoning good, but the
conclusion stinks. :)
***** My opinion doesn't reflect the opinion of my employer, my family,
my dog, nor anyone
else for that matter. *****
Subject: Re: common lab accidents.
From: "Arthur E. Sowers"
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:26:24 -0500
On Wed, 30 Oct 1996, Stanton K Young wrote:
> Sorry, the previous post was not common lab accidents... but they were accidents
>
> Stanton
>
>
I read the previous post. And, got a few YUKs out of it.
Heres my favorite: On my postdoc, a normally bright and considerate and
high manual dexterity person showed up every day about 10-15 minutes
before I did and started making coffee in the lab. Using a bunsen burner
(house gas line).
This guy, despite his postive attributes, was low in common sense and even
lower in "powers of observation."
The lab technician, who came in after me, also was low on observation.
Situation: Technician starts to store the absolute ethanol, in poly
squeeze bottles at a location on the lab bench which is about one foot
(about 0.3 meters, for you purists out there) from the burning bunsen
burner. Result: bunsen burner heat, which you can feel with your hand, at
the site of the absolute ethanol, is warming up the ethanol, increasing
the vapor pressure, which is pushing down on the liquid ethanol, raising
the level in the spout so that ethanol starts dripping out on the lab
benche, forming a small pool which is expanding at about 1-2 mm per
minute towards the bunsen burner (we're headed for accidental arson here,
in case you haven't figured it out yet).
Now, I very politely talked with the tech (as I showed her what was
happening), and separately the guy who started the coffee (a tenure track
ast. prof). Net effect the next day: zero. Same situation. Everyone = head
in sand. I gave up and walked over and moved the ethanol bottles about 3
feet farther away and hoped somebody wouldn't move them back.
Now, how does one "communicate" about serious safety issues and get
changed behaviors?
Art S.
Subject: Adult Computer Camp
From: "William R. Schrack"
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:57:24 -0500
Computer Resort Workshops Announces Their Computer Camp Designed for
Adults
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL--October 17, 1996 (CREW) Computer Resort Workshops,
a company engaged in computer education, today announced it’s fall
workshop to be held December 16-20 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Program
and registration information can be obtained at the CREW web site,
located at http://www.gate.net/~tricom/crew.
Co-director, Bill Schrack, explains, “This is a technical education
workshop for people who want to utilize the business-problem-solving
power of the computer. It is designed for those who want to learn more
about PC applications, however they realize that to really devote the
proper time, they need to get away for a week. They love a ‘total
immersion’ approach to their work but appreciate time to enjoy tropical
surroundings, fine dining, relaxation and recreation.”
The workshops are designed for anyone who would like hands-on experience
with PC applications such as e-mail, the world wide web, Windows, word
processing, spread sheets and databases. In addition there will be
management topics available on how to implement today's technology into
the workplace.
A number of features make Computer Resort Workshops unique. First, an
individual program is developed for each participant based on
questionnaires and interviews. This insures a positive experience for
the novice computer user as well as the experienced programmer and
guarantees that participants learn exactly what they want to know .
Instruction is hands-on and participants progress at their own rate and
level of achievement. There is at least one instructor for every five
participants. The instructors monitor the learning process
carefully. State of the art equipment is provided or a discount is
given to participants who chose to bring their own computers. The
computer center will be open 24 hours a day.
“In a few focused days, participants will gain knowledge and skills
that otherwise take months or years of trial-and-error experimentation,”
said co-director Dave Wilkeson. “It is amazing how many problems can be
solved with computer technology. But knowing where to start and how to
proceed can be daunting. This workshop will show participants exactly
what’s important and how to make it all work for them.”
Phone: 1-800-858-4516
Email: tricom@gate.net
http://www.gate.net/~tricom/crew
###
Subject: Re: Keeping An Eye On SRC
From: Garrett VanCleef
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 06:52:05 -0500
Arthur LaMarche wrote:
>
> I wrote:
>
> > be chained to a bench 60 - 80 hours a
> > week for $22,000 a year.... I can not support my family on that. Let
> > alone go to bed not feeling guilty for the long hours away from my
> > family....
>
> End Quote
>
> I should add that I am paying off $500 a month in loans which puts a
> big dent in the pay check. With out that, I would be better off....
>
> art, again
Me and my wife collectively make $75,000/yr with one child. We pay almost
$3000/mo in bills (90% which was racked up while doing post-doc
work). We are living hand-in-mouth until we get the debts paid off.
I can't see how anyone can survive on the scraps being falling off the
tables at the universities. I mean, if you "love research" and all,
that's great. But bill collectors couldn't give a hoot how much
you love research.
-Garrett
--
> HELLO <
> DOCTOR <
> NAME <
> CONTINUE <
> YESTERDAY <
> TOMORROW <
Subject: Re: Hope in change?
From: m9303@abc.se (Tommy Anderberg)
Date: 27 Oct 1996 21:59:14 GMT
Randy Crawford (crawford@mrj.com) wrote:
: Tommy Anderberg wrote:
: >
: 2% of the current US population (270 million) would be about 5 million.
: In fact only(?!) about 1 million are in prisons.
I know. That's why I wrote work force, not population. Most people don't
work and are not actively looking for employment (the criterium to be in the
work force, which is why prisoners do not count toward it).
As for the rest of your comments, thank you for a sane voice wishing to
discuss things in a civilized manner! I wonder if ditch-digging is such a
good example, though - I don't think it makes for much of current economic
activity. The jobs I have in mind as prime candidates for exticntion within
the next decade are manufacturing jobs like making cars or computers,
activities taking place in controlled, man-made environements (the opposite
of a messy ditch, each one a unique object). Here's a nice figure to consider:
since Swedish Ericsson started making cellular phones, the man-time needed to
assemble one has gone down from 30 to 5 minutes. Needless to say, Ericsson
are not hiring blue collars, but they ARE making very nice profits!
Once the blue collars are gone, you don't need all those low- and
middle-level managers who were organizing their work, either. While
letting a computer do their job wouldn't be easy with current technology,
the need for that may simply not be there. There will be nobody to manage!
Another point worth of consideration here is that GROWTH has not stopped in
Europe, in spite of high unemployment. Looking at Sweden, revised figures
for GNP growth were released just a few days ago, putting the last two years
at 3.2-3.6%. All this while unemployment has been at historically high
levels. I mentioned Ericsson above because Swedish industrialists themselves
(e.g. Ericssons CEO) are openly going on record saying: business is good, we
are growing, but don't look at us for a solution to unemployment. We don't
need more people, quite the contrary!
When you say that you think R&D; is likely to go in a more applied direction,
and to be slashed further rather than grow, you are describing CURRENT
trends which are there for us all to see. But I am speculating about what
might happen several decades from now, when current economic principles may
have been profoundly altered by a growing surplus of man-hours. Right now,
we are still insisting on doing things the good old way, looking at R&D; as
an activity which had better be "productive" to deserve funding. I am
suggesting that we may see a time, within our lives, when research becomes
appreciated for its capability of ABSORBING an increasingly embarassing
surplus!
I guess I can see why certain people (no names mentioned...) might get mad
at this. To them, it probably does sound like "socialism" (whatever that is
to them - I have this nasty caricature in my mind of a person living in
Smallville and firmly convinced that "Europe" is a large country run by one
huge "socialist" government... surprise surprise Clark Kent, the dominating
countries in the EU are run by conservatives, social policies vary widely,
and YET the unemplyment problem is a constant theme throughout the
continent). The idea that capitalism may one day become as outdated as
communism ever was may sound threatening. But really, how CAN we hope to
keep people competing fiercely once satisfying their basic needs has become
a trivial task? I recently caught an economist saying that if somebody wished
to spend his life watching TV after fulfilling his "quota" (just enough to
keep him alive for the rest of his natural life span) he should currently be
able to get away with working 5 years before going into retirement
(all at basic subsistence level, mind you). Given continued technical
advances, a day will come when those 5 years will buy you not only basic
subsistence level but more than the life-style of the current middle class.
Then what? My own perceived needs are not vastly different from those of
an educated man living 100 years ago - but of course, 100 years ago only
few people could have afforded my life-style! Today, it's anything but
exceptional - and I have a really hard time seeing myself craving 10 time
"more" than I have now. Will people really keep saying "more, ever more",
or will we reach a point when the competition for SCARCE resources which
is the driving force in capitalism will subside? And if that day comes,
will it still be possible to say "no, no, R&D; has to be economically
productive in the short term for us to fund it"? Or will we (and
politicians) look at the matter in a different light?
--
Tommy Anderberg
Tommy.Anderberg@abc.se
Subject: *CO-Sr & Jr RF Engineers-State of Art Systems-ETO
From: "ETO Corp"
Date: 1 Nov 96 08:35:12 -0500
RF Engineers - ETO Corp - Colorado Springs, CO
The Company:
For over three decades, ETO ( a division of ASTeX) has maintained worldwide
leadership in the design and manufacture of high-performance RF power
systems. The engineering staff readily handles diverse RF applications
including RF-powered lasers and plasmas, MRI and MRS, avionics and weapons
control, hypothermia cancer therapy, and industrial control. With
state-of-the-art instrumentation, computer systems, and advanced production
equipment, ETO is fully prepared to exceed the technological demands of the
future.
The Positions:
RF Engineers
We are looking for talented RF Engineers to assist us in meeting our goals
and our explosive growth.
BSEE (MSEE preferred) 10-15 years experience in the design of RF power
systems (solid state and/or vacuum tube). Ability to work closely with
customers on technical basis. Ability and experience in directing
development projects from inception to the market. Medical experience, in
particular MRI, highly desirable.
- or-
BSEE, 3-5 years experience in high power solid state RF amplifier and/or
generator design. Will work under the direction of a senior engineer.
Compensation
Our full compensation package includes a generous base salary, profit
sharing/bonus structure, full medical, 401k, tuition reimbursement and
liberal vacation/holiday.
Qualified candidates pleased forward resumes to:
ETO
Human Resources
4975 North 30th Street
Colorado Springs, CO 80919-4101
VIA fax - 719-260-0395
Via Email - jobs@astex.com
---------------------------------------------------
This message was created and sent using the Cyberdog Mail System
---------------------------------------------------