Having what it takes

There is only one trait you need in order to be a computer scientist: persistence. And I mean dogged persistence. Like you spend 10 hours on a problem persistent.

This is actually a learning exercise. After some time, you start to discern patterns in how things tend to break, and you see them in multiple places. Even as operating systems, programming languages, and applications change, you see these patterns of how to fix broken things, because you have experience under your belt.

The truth is, if you have no patience for such things, or if you want to quit after an hour of working on something, chances are you won't last long in this field.

I can tell you, though, that persistence pays off. After awhile, the mystery of machines begins to go away, you begin to see patterns, and your frustration dissipates.  And best of all, when you do have that breakthrough and fix the damned thing, you feel an overwhelming sense of accomplishment.

It feels like this is difficult to communicate to "kids today". I think it's hard for them to see the point of the struggle, when there are so many other fields that don't require nearly so much frustration. (A friend once described it as constantly banging your head against the wall and then feeling really good when you stop doing it, which perhaps is apt.)

Often people ask me why I became a computer scientist, and I always reply honestly - it never occurred to me to do anything else. (And I'm as stubborn as a mule, which helps. :-))

Achoo !

I feel strange not blogging much, like I didn't brush my teeth or something.

Life has been incredibly busy, though all for good reasons which I'll discuss here soon.

I think we need a panel not on work-life balance, but on blog-life balance. After housework, the blog is the first thing to go.

Anyway, it seems my first blog-a-versary is on Sunday, which is neat. I've enjoyed meeting so many of you online and interacting with you, reading your blogs, and learning from you. It's fun when people in meatspace mention some of your blogs at work, and I have to silently giggle under my thin veil of pseudo-anonymity.

Thanks for reading!

Scientopia

The folks over at Scientopia have kindly invited me to join their blogging community. I have accepted, and created a new blog called The Difference Engine.

I've decided to keep this blog going, because as much as the Blogger UI drives me nuts I actually kind of like it. And I like that I can metaphorically and literally paint the walls purple here without troubling anyone.

So over there I will post occasionally (weekly I hope), probably more about Computer Science than I do here, but perhaps about other things as well. We'll see how it goes.

As for how this affects you? Not in the slightest. When I post over there I'll post a pointer here, so if you don't want to add another RSS subscription you don't have to. (But if you do want to, here is a link).

If horses were wishes

Photo by Stuck in Customs

Sometimes I wish I had a cadre of graduate students to help me out with my research. The irony is that in order to prove to future employers that I am able to supervise graduate students, I need to prove that I am capable of "independent research". But the grim reality of independent research in my subfield means sitting in the lab all day and all night alone, toiling away. I do get help along the way, I do "outsource" when I can, but in the end it's up to me to wrap together the whole kit n' caboodle and make the magic happen.

I guess it's different in the biosciences or physics where a whole team of people are working late in the lab on an experiment. But in my field you pretty much fly solo. Even when I collaborate with other researchers, somehow it's still just me writing the bulk of the software, collecting the data, analyzing the results, and writing the paper. (And, apparently, complaining on my blog :))

How collaborative is your work?

Who are I?

Image by xrrr

I'm far too much of a blogger newbie to do the "who are you, dear readers?" meme, since I think there are only about four of you who read this :-), so instead I'll do a reverse one, FAQ-style.

Who are you exactly?

I'm trying this pseudo-anonymity thing. I think it's probably ludicrous, because there are just so few academic female computer scientists I'm sure I'll be outed one day by some clever, bored black hatter, but hey, worth a shot.

What is your background?

I worked in industry for quite awhile, and was really enjoying it, but I felt like career-wise I had two choices in front of me: either become a manager or become a super-code-monkey. To do the former, I felt like I had to start building sentences that contained the words "synergistic leverage goals", and no matter how many fancy titles they give you I just didn't see being a code-monkey a sustainable career.

Code Monkey? Don't you mean "software engineer"?

Oh, right, sorry. Would you prefer Software Simian?

So why academia?

I wanted a career-path change. I decided if I got a PhD and became a professor, I could research whatever I wanted and (sort of) be my own boss. Most importantly, I wouldn't ever have to use the word synergy if I didn't want to.

Why do you blog?

After reading this book, I decided to get a TT job I'd need lots of (good) publications. So I spent a lot of my time early on focusing on that. Then I started talking to people who said, "Ha ha, big deal. Everyone has lots of publications. You'll also need a network of Turing Award winners to get you a job in this market."And so on. So I realized there's a lot of these little things no one tells you but you absolutely need to know to make it. I figured I'd share those things with the masses in case they were useful to others, and hope that they'll share some back.

Oh, and also, I was mad at John Tierney.