|
|
|
|
|
by robwwilliams
1629 days ago
|
|
I think this demand for focus is more pervasive at top tier institutions. I intentionally chose a second tier research institution with great colleagues in my area, then neuroscience, so that I could indulge my whims and T-type style of science. I “wasted” two years playing with databases for genetics and then published the first paper in biomedical science with a URL in 1994 (Portable Dictionary of the Mouse Genome). That service is still running as wwww.genenetwork.org and has been a terrific catalyst for much high impact work. The advantage now of T type approaches is that, as the source points out so clearly, it gives you flexibility to grow, shift fields, and collaborate efficiently. |
|
The article mentions, for example, maintaining the group's build system and making project logos. Different in kind, no?
PhD students should not be recruited with the expectation that they will do devops, software engineering, and graphic design work. Or, if that's the labor they're doing, universities should maybe start paying them a fair wage for their labor.
Building something like genenetwork.org in 1994 was exciting R&D for the time. Setting up a CI/CD pipeline or making a project logo in 2022 isn't.