[shard]

The parent is talking about intent, not result. The work a PhD does is meant to push the boundary of knowledge, not that a PhD is required to push the boundary of knowledge. Same for the work of a programmer in a company, it's meant to generate value for the customer and company, not that it's the only way to generate value.

A PhD works as a status indicator is valid in the sense that a Github account with lots of accepted PRs into major OSS is a status indicator: that you have done the work and it has been found by academics in that field / the code maintainers for that OSS to be of high enough quality to be accepted. The work (thesis / PRs) and the credentials of the academics and academic institution / the code maintainer and the OSS project are probably public information that can be verified if there is doubt as to the worth of the credential.

[amznthrowaway5]

Lots of people get these degrees simply for the status aspect. I take meaningful Github OSS contributions much more seriously than PhDs, given all the garbage I have seen in academia. I don't understand how that can be called anecdotal when you can pick up any scientific journal and see that most of the papers are usually trash.