Customize your cookie preferences

Nice blog

AI sounds like fun

There are a handful of reasons to say no and I'll cover them really briefly. If one point is more interesting than another, I can elaborate if I have time:

- "Professional PhD" programs are something I only hear about from Europeans. European PhD programs are seen with a *deep* negative connotation compared to American PhD programs. Without getting into it (unless you're curious), European doctoral programs are much shorter (and undergrad curricula are shorter than the corresponding undergrad curricula as well). I've talked to professors and heads of research groups in industry in the Bay Area (I'm a grad student in the bay) and at their most generous they've expressed reluctance over whether they could trust a graduate of a European PhD program to (completely independently) run a research project (let alone a whole program). That concern is just absent among graduates of American programs.

The second issue, which should deflate all the excitement you've got wound up, is that CS PhD programs should never cost a student money. Your advisor should be well-funded, and/or you should have no trouble securing funding from any number of organizations that are looking to fund high-impact work. That someone is willing to pay for your PhD shouldn't faze you.

>>51405191
I'm not sure if it was the image I posted that gave you the impression I was studying in Europe. I am currently an undergrad in the United States and I would actually have to remain here to do the PhD because I am required to work alongside my degree. I am on the east coast.

Second issue knocked my confidence down a few pegs.

the only reason and I mean the ONLY raisin to get a PHD is if you're a becoming a medical doctor

>>51404982
>Artificial Intelligence and Databases
>Visual Computing
More interesting.

>Programming Languages and Software Engineering
>Systems and Networks
Less interesting, but more useful, better for your job.

>Theoretical Computer Science
ISHYGDDT, it IS the current year!

>>51405612
Sorry about the assumption of a European program. I've never heard of an American PhD program that was entirely funded by a company. Usually American PhD programs are ~5-6 years, and that's just too long an investment to risk, especially given that CS students are *very* liable to drop out as tech companies poach them.

>>51406391/>>51405191 here again

>>51406287
I think you're confusing PhD with MD. PhDs do research (typically going into academia or doing "industrial" research (basically more applied research, for a company)), and they typically occupy a different career track than regular devs and whatnot.

You shouldn't get a CS PhD if you plan on climbing the ladder up through PM and shit. You'll come out of a PhD program in CS with too little industry experience to be given a management job, and too many qualifications to be given an "entry level" job. You should really really only go for it if you want to do research in some vertical or another.

>>51406391
I just checked the details of the program and no. They fund a 2 year masters program. So then my question becomes do I do the two years and get my masters?

>>51406752
Sure. A masters is less risky (spending 4 years to earn a PhD and dropping out is a bit of a gamble in a lot of ways), and masters programs are less often funded (in fact, even in engineering fields it's not that common). If someone's willing to pay for yours, go ahead and get it.

>>51406752
Enter the PhD program and leave after two years with a Masters if you don't like it. Shoot for the stars OP. You should definitely do this.