/sci/ - Science & Math

Aerospace. It's useless, overly specialized, and <10% of graduates actually go into the aero industry; but you get to shit on mech eng pajeets

If you want a good job you should know better than to study engineering. This shit sucks.

t. engineer

Biomedical engineering in order to cure aging.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/aubrey-de-grey-getting-more-optimistic-on-life-extension/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxEwI1bjZqU

>>10438557
This unironically

> t. Biochem PhD student studying aging

>>10438534
Is CS seriously the only good field for jobs? I don't want to be a code monkey

>>10438534
Has anyone ever actually fucking checked if this infographic is true or not

>>10438557
aubrey de grey is completely retarded and if you majored in BMED to work for him, you deserve your inevitable unemployment

>>10438597
Yes. The raw data looks even more depressing depending on your subfield. Mine certainly was.

>>10438480
The only eng fields that have job prospects right now are electrical or/and computer engineering, anything else is a meme unless you're going to an ivy league college and have good contacts

>>10438632
What can you do with a computer engineering degree that isn't code monkey shit? Literally everyone I know who majored in it are working as software developers.

>>10438641
Embedded systems, signal processing, image processing, low level stuff at the boundary of software and hardware, stuff that EE's can't program and CS monkeys can't grasp because they can't into electronic equipement and signals

>>10438641
>>10438646
Just wondering though, what exactly sucks so much about software dev/code monkeying?

>>10438480
Social Engineering, but rarely is it used for the common good.

Chemical engineering

>>10438742

>>10438742
It's cubicle grunt work.

>>10438480

Systems engineer, BUT this job basically doesn't exist and few OEMs/aero coglomerates that think so define it more or less as programmer/system architect with 15+ years of experience.

IMHO if you can live off modeling systems + doing some analytics like uncertainty/regression/finite element, then you are pretty much doing the best you can as an engineer.

The closer you are to manufacturing the more suicide-tier engineering is. In normal mode it is cushy office job where you get mediocre pay and are overworked, but at least you can joke around with other guys sitting on their asses.

Worst is, if you want to have career your only sensible option is being "project/program manager" which is also suicide tier because it's basically having responsibilities same as owner of small business without any pros. And being 24/7 in a job.

tl;dr

The earlier in production/development chain the better.

t. CAD monkey for big BiW supplier located in slavland

>>10438534
I-I will definitely get a comfy job after my phd in engineering h-haha

>>10440357
What slav land was it and what exactly was the original translation of systems engineer degree there?

>>10440373

I'm from Poland. There's no system engineer job here. The closest university faculty that we have is called "Mechatronic Engineering" which I finished. It's a mash-up of mechanical degree with lots of signal and control modeling.

>>10440373
>>10440392

Oh and about jobs - you have something like Aptiv, so design of safety systems for cars, mainly airbags of different kinds. You have OEM jobs for autonomous driving and systems for electric cars. You also have Boeing jobs that require clearance, so if you aren't from 'murrica don't even try. Same for nuclear at places like Sandia (check out their soft, lots of really nice open-source like Dakota for uncertainty analysis/quantification/regression)

>>10440392
I expected Poland. Is automatyka i robotyka a meme degree? Zgaduje że kończyłeś po prostu to co nazywają mechatroniką?

>>10440414

Mechatronika, przechrzczona na "Inżynierię mechatroniczną" na AGH. Automatyka i Robotyka jest w dwóch odmianach - elektryczna bardziej kierunkuje Cię na programistę (90% ludzi którzy ją kończą pracuje koniec końców jako jakiś, zwykle w elektroenergetyce), a po mechanicznej albo idziesz do utrzymania ruchu bawić się jako pół-robol z PLCkami (ale za to za przyzwoitą kasę) albo to samo co mechanika i budowa maszyn - konstruktor/drafter.

>>10440452
Ta podziałka jest tylko z AGH czy ogólna? Tutaj jedna poprostu prowadzona jest na wydziale informatyki and druga na elektrycznym. Od następnego naboru i dalej funkcjonować będzie tylka jeden kierunek przemianowany na "automatyka" decyzją rządową (wszystkie kierunki podobno mają być jedynie raz na uczelnie, a nie prowadzone przez osobne wydziały).

ching chong

>>10440512

Tak jest na AGH, ale też na innych uczelniach, zazwyczaj AiR to albo wydział mechaniczny albo elektryczny/informatyczny.

Byłem w twoich butach jak szedłem na studia. Nie dowiesz się z zewnątrz jaka jest różnica dopóki nie będziesz studiować na danej uczelni. Generalnie patrz bardziej na wydział niż na kierunek. Im bardziej "prestiżowy" tym większe prawdopodobieństwo, że będzie lepiej. Jeśli jakiś kierunek ma certyfikację ABET albo jest po angielsku, to dodatkowy plus.
Polska to kraj zagranicznych korporacji, w dużej mierze niemieckich. Ja dostałem się na moje stanowisko bardziej dlatego, że studiowałem po angielsku i na AGH niż z powodu tego, co.

>>10438480
Materials, do electronics

5G rollout means there are jobs

>>10438597
I work at a paper mill as a process engineer. We can't get enough people here. Sure, working in a factory in flyover land may not be as glamorous as inventing the next social media phone app or unicorn- jizz coffee drink for Starbucks, but it's a good living and I feel like I do something tangible and good.

Nobody ever talks about civil, but there’s good job security, good prospects 20 years down the line (as opposed to a field that’s always changing), and growth in the industry. You can do anything from environmental and water work to structures, bridges, and roads.

>>10440675
How much do you make?

>>10438601
>aubrey de grey is completely retarded
Not an argument

>>10441135

And you are the only semi-concious non-NPC guy around 99% of time and have to manage fucking awful suppliers and a bunch of retards and alcoholics that do stupid shit all the time. And if they fuck up, you go down.

Civil in terms of absolute shitiness is on the level of all manufacturing/plant jobs and it's only hell out there. Not to mention travelling all the time.

>>10438587
>he doesn't want to take it easy as a code monkey then do whatever in your free time

>>10438480
ausfag here
just finished a bachelor with honours in "civil and construction" engineering, which is basically just structural engineering with some geotechnical engineering, hydraulics and project management. The best for jobs here seems to be electrical, software has well paying jobs if you can get one, plenty for structural and mech but not alot for civil outside of government work. The good part about civil is the focus on project management, which apparently isnt taught as much in the other fields.

>>10441246
here's an argument for you:
-in vivo genetic engineering is currently impossible in human beings and will require multiple paradigm-changing inventions in molecular biology to become viable. best case is that it becomes possible by 2100

-human life expectancy has plateaued at around 85 in the most highly-developed nations and shows no sign of starting a substantial logarithmic increase in the next few decades

-the cost of producing a new FDA-approved pharmaceutical drug is increasing at a literal exponential rate (see: Eroom's Law) because small molecules and biologics have filled the vast majority of easy solutions for human medical problems. most of what is left is comprised by extremely difficult problems (i.e. cancer, alzheimer's, autoimmune diseases)

-anyone with a background in cell biology will tell you that the cellular mechanisms of aging are mostly unknown and not druggable

-aubrey de grey is not a scientist and the vast majority of his publications are essentially 'review paper' op-eds about the same tired and speculative talking points w.r.t aging and biology

>>10438480
Dude what is that pic about?

>>10441889
If you're so sure then, my friend. Why don't you apply for the prize money?
>During June 2005, David Gobel, CEO and Co-founder of Methuselah Foundation offered Technology Review $20,000 to fund a prize competition to publicly clarify the viability of the SENS approach. In July 2005, Pontin announced a $20,000 prize, funded 50/50 by Methuselah Foundation and MIT Technology Review, open to any molecular biologist, with a record of publication in biogerontology, who could prove that the alleged benefits of SENS were "so wrong that it is unworthy of learned debate."[37] Technology Review received five submissions to its Challenge. In March 2006, Technology Review announced that it had chosen a panel of judges for the Challenge: Rodney Brooks, Anita Goel, Nathan Myhrvold, Vikram Sheel Kumar, and Craig Venter.[38] Three of the five submissions met the terms of the prize competition. They were published by Technology Review on June 9, 2006. Accompanying the three submissions were rebuttals by de Grey, and counter-responses to de Grey's rebuttals. On July 11, 2006, Technology Review published the results of the SENS Challenge.[7][39]
Cont.

>>10441889
>>10441937
>In the end, no one won the $20,000 prize. The judges felt that no submission met the criterion of the challenge and discredited SENS, although they unanimously agreed that one submission, by Preston Estep and his colleagues, was the most eloquent. Craig Venter succinctly expressed the prevailing opinion: "Estep et al. ... have not demonstrated that SENS is unworthy of discussion, but the proponents of SENS have not made a compelling case for it."[7] Summarizing the judges' deliberations, Pontin wrote that SENS is "highly speculative" and that many of its proposals could not be reproduced with the scientific technology of that period.[clarification needed] Myhrvold described SENS as belonging to a kind of "antechamber of science" where they wait until technology and scientific knowledge advance to the point where it can be tested.[7][8] In a letter of dissent dated July 11, 2006 in Technology Review, Estep et al. criticized the ruling of the judges.

Oh wait, that's because it's the fact it isn't scientifically impossible (because it isn't, otherwise someone would've claimed that 20k prize), it is because it isn't feasible with todays technology.
Well, guess what? Half a century ago, it wasn't feasible to make mobile phones, and yet we have them today.

>>10441889
>-aubrey de grey is not a scientist
Well, Cambridge university seem to disagree:
>Cambridge awarded de Grey a PhD in biology on 9 December 2000.[24][29]

>>10441937
>>10441941
>>10441951

Half-assed ripoffs of the Randi Challenge do not count as evidence that an exponential increase in human lifespan is on the horizon.

Also, de Grey's PhD is honorary and based on a book, not his ability to perform science.

>Cambridge awarded de Grey a PhD in biology on 9 December 2000.[24][29] The degree was based on his 1999 book The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging, in which de Grey wrote that obviating damage to mitochondrial DNA might by itself extend lifespan significantly, though he said it was more likely that cumulative damage to mitochondria is a significant cause of senescence, but not the single dominant cause.

>>10441989
Then why didn't they awared him an honorary doctorate? Clearly, it was compelling enough to display he had the knowledge required to be given a proper academic doctorate.

>Half-assed ripoffs of the Randi Challenge do not count as evidence that an exponential increase in human lifespan is on the horizon.
Not, an, argument.

>>10441999
>Then why didn't they awared him an honorary doctorate? Clearly, it was compelling enough to display he had the knowledge required to be given a proper academic doctorate.

To his credit, he is absolutely an academic, but being an academic doesn't mean you're a scientist. You have to actually do science to be a scientist - by definition.

>Not, an, argument.

Neither is your bullshit. Even if they failed to award $20,000 because every single person came forth with terrible arguments, that doesn't mean that we're magically going to increase human lifespan in the next few decades.

My background is actually in biomedical research science - tell me exactly what modern innovations in medicine you think will result in a complete tidal shift in human life expectancy.

>>10442009
>You have to actually do science to be a scientist - by definition.
I'm pretty sure he carries out some of the research at the SENS Institute himself.
>Neither is your bullshit.
Then it's a moot point, because none of us can provide enough "proof" of either claim. So stop waggling around those phalanges, and pipe down.
?Even if they failed to award $20,000 because every single person came forth with terrible arguments, that doesn't mean that we're magically going to increase human lifespan in the next few decades.
And that isn't what I said. You said:
>aubrey de grey is completely retarded and if you majored in BMED to work for him, you deserve your inevitable unemployment
>-anyone with a background in cell biology will tell you that the cellular mechanisms of aging are mostly unknown and not druggable
And yet, Aubrey and his colleagues have seemingly found a potential solution, which hasn't been discredited as being scientifically implausible, despite there having been a significant effort to do so. With a prize no less.
>tell me exactly what modern innovations in medicine you think will result in a complete tidal shift in human life expectancy.
I think SENS will, once we are able to engineer the theory in the form of viable clinical treatments. The theory itself seems to be sound, thus far.

>>10442028
>*? -> meant to be greentext

>>10442028
>And yet, Aubrey and his colleagues have seemingly found a potential solution, which hasn't been discredited as being scientifically implausible, despite there having been a significant effort to do so.

Are you familiar with a concept known as 'the burden of proof'?

Civil will have the most growth but you are more of a manager than an engineer (not actually trying to bantz here). EE is based but hard. Chem pays well if you can find a job but the work sucks. Mech is also hard to find jobs.

>>10442037
>Make challenge.
>Offer prize.
>People send in attempts.
>No attempt is found compelling enough to warrant the prize.
Just because it seemingly cannot be done with contemporary technology, doesn't mean that it cannnot be done with 30-years-in-the-future technology.
What, so because we can't achieve break-even fusion yet, we should stop researching it?
If SENS offers a hope, and has withstood some level of professional criticism then it is clearly worth some measure of attention.
Or are you a deathist?

>>10442042
The fact you're speaking in extremely vague terms ('seemingly found a potential solution') and dodging around actually making claims about biology makes me think you don't really know what you're talking about.

Let me spell this out more directly: just because an organization claims that they have a 'potential solution for _____ that has not been yet falsified' doesn't mean that they have anything of value. Most results in biology are never replicated, and lots of big clinical failures only show up in later trials. Has SENS' "potential solution" made immortal rats? mice? non-human primates? No? Then I wouldn't bet a cent on them curing aging any time soon. Extremely-generous optimism rarely pays off in biology/medicine.

>>10438480
hi guys brainlet here, can someone explain to me what is the op pic, wtf am i looking at

>>10442048
>The fact you're speaking in extremely vague terms ('seemingly found a potential solution') and dodging around actually making claims about biology makes me think you don't really know what you're talking about.
You wouldn't try and ad hom me, would you? No? It can't be!
You know, it's funny, you try and exude this air of erudite pretense, and waft around accusatory exclaim, and yet, ignore the crux of my argument:
Just because it isn't possible now, doesn't mean we should stop researching it is has some merit. Even if that merit is in the future.
Otherwise, as per your own logic, science should just stagnate if it cannot achieve something right now, rather than continuing research, and wait. Wait for what? If you don't try to make progress, you wont develop new technology.
It isn't like the SENS Foundation takes taxpayer money, or research grants from universities without consent of benefactors. They operate through donations.
So why shouldn't biogerontologists be considering SENS? Why?

>>10441928
I don’t know actually, I got it from some thread on here. I think it’s category theory.

Thanks for the responses everyone.

>>10442061
>Otherwise, as per your own logic, science should just stagnate if it cannot achieve something right now

No, you just shouldn't be a lying, deluded fuck.

There are a surplus of people working on problems that matter - better chemo drugs, better ways to deliver drugs, new diagnostics, new ways to understand complex diseases, new machines for doing science faster and better. None of them will tell you that immortality is directly on the horizon - biology is extremely slow and we regenerative medicine is currently almost non-existent in clinics.

I don't think Aubrey de Grey is a scam artist or a fraud - he's just a guy with really profound delusions about what is plausible in his lifetime with 2019's molecular biology toolkit. The fact his institute singularly strives to make people immortal probably causes them to ignore lots of research projects that could actually be very successful, but wouldn't lead to the 'longevity escape velocity' that their founder imagines.

I bring up the fact that he's not a scientist because it's really easy for laymen and untrained biologists to overestimate what medical research is currently capable of. If you're so passionate about life extension, why not go get yourself a PhD and start working on these problems? Then ask yourself two years in whether you think any of this guy's ideas are achievable in the next fifty years.

>>10441501

75% of your "free time" is spent sleeping, prepping, commuting, unwinding from work. Most people are lucky to budget a few hours of free time per weeknight for themselves or consistently deprive themselves of sleep.

>>10442042
Imagine having this level of cogitation