If you will learn to work with the system, you can go as far as the system will support you … By realizing you have to use the system and studying how to get the system to do your work, you learn how to adapt the system to your desires. Or you can fight it steadily, as a small undeclared war, for the whole of your life … Very few of you have the ability to both reform the system and become a first-class scientist.
—Richard Hamming
(I recommend the whole talk, which contains some great examples and many other excellent points.)
I think the thing that strikes me most about this talk is how different science was then versus now. For one small example he was asked to comment on the relative effectiveness of giving talks, writing papers and writing books. In today’s world its not a question anyone would ask, and the answer would be “write at least a few papers a year or you won’t keep your job.”
The status and resources that you get for being a first-class scientist will help you to fight the system.
And would even more help you continue being a first-class scientist, won’t help you fight for free (no Time-Turners on offer, I’m afraid), and even in this scenario you still need to decide to first become a first-class scientist—since fighting the system is not a great path to getting status & resources.
Picking fights when you don’t have any resources to fight them is in general no good strategy.
Whenever you pick a fight you actually have to think about the price and possible reward.
Craig Venter did oppose the NIH and then went and got private funding for himself to persue the ideas in a way he thought to be superior.
Eliezer Yudkowsky did decide to operate outside acdemia. Peter Thiel funded him and the whole LessWrong enterprize increased the amount of resources that he has at his disposal.
There are a lot of sources of resources, that can be gained by picking some fights.
Those aren’t the kinds of fights Hamming is talking about. (You have read his talk, right?)
Sorry, now I read it and you are right Hamming does acklowedge that you can fight some fights but just recommends against wasting your time with fights that don’t matter in the large scale of things.
—Richard Hamming
(I recommend the whole talk, which contains some great examples and many other excellent points.)
I think the thing that strikes me most about this talk is how different science was then versus now. For one small example he was asked to comment on the relative effectiveness of giving talks, writing papers and writing books. In today’s world its not a question anyone would ask, and the answer would be “write at least a few papers a year or you won’t keep your job.”
I don’t see why it has to be either or.
Time and effort are zero-sum.
I don’t think so. The status and resources that you get for being a first-class scientist will help you to fight the system.
And would even more help you continue being a first-class scientist, won’t help you fight for free (no Time-Turners on offer, I’m afraid), and even in this scenario you still need to decide to first become a first-class scientist—since fighting the system is not a great path to getting status & resources.
Picking fights when you don’t have any resources to fight them is in general no good strategy. Whenever you pick a fight you actually have to think about the price and possible reward.
Craig Venter did oppose the NIH and then went and got private funding for himself to persue the ideas in a way he thought to be superior.
Eliezer Yudkowsky did decide to operate outside acdemia. Peter Thiel funded him and the whole LessWrong enterprize increased the amount of resources that he has at his disposal.
There are a lot of sources of resources, that can be gained by picking some fights.
Those aren’t the kinds of fights Hamming is talking about. (You have read his talk, right?)
Sorry, now I read it and you are right Hamming does acklowedge that you can fight some fights but just recommends against wasting your time with fights that don’t matter in the large scale of things.