If you’re feeling trapped due to disciplinary boundaries I’d recommend reading this. The gist of it is that going against the grain of your own preferences is sub-optimal, with respect to reaching the fabled “mastery” or “10 000 hours” level of expertise in any given field. If you do what you like, what comes easily to you, you’ll reach this level much faster. But sometimes your preferences are such that instead of picking a field and sticking to it, you’ll just have to cross a bunch of boundaries and basically define a field of your own to reach mastery in.
For instance, what would be some domain, other than vision, where the math that you like might be applicable, but which is immune to the data abundance issue for some foreseeable period?
If you’re feeling trapped due to disciplinary boundaries I’d recommend reading this. The gist of it is that going against the grain of your own preferences is sub-optimal, with respect to reaching the fabled “mastery” or “10 000 hours” level of expertise in any given field. If you do what you like, what comes easily to you, you’ll reach this level much faster. But sometimes your preferences are such that instead of picking a field and sticking to it, you’ll just have to cross a bunch of boundaries and basically define a field of your own to reach mastery in.
For instance, what would be some domain, other than vision, where the math that you like might be applicable, but which is immune to the data abundance issue for some foreseeable period?