[HN Gopher] There aren't enough smart people in biology doing so...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       There aren't enough smart people in biology doing something boring
        
       Author : abhishaike
       Score  : 53 points
       Date   : 2024-11-09 17:13 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.owlposting.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.owlposting.com)
        
       | practal wrote:
       | I'd rather formulate it the other way around. There are not
       | enough smart people in computing working on the really important
       | things. Instead they are working on what pays the most.
        
         | eu wrote:
         | and what would be some important (and boring) things to focus
         | on?
        
           | gherkinnn wrote:
           | Not ads.
           | 
           | I for one would be happy if the everyday software I use
           | wasn't complete rubbish. It won't make the world meaningfully
           | better, but it certainly won't make it worse. It's a start.
        
             | immibis wrote:
             | Ad blockers :)
             | 
             | Why isn't there a browser which you can just install to
             | have a good Internet experience? It would have to update
             | itself every day with a new definition of "good" due to the
             | arms race with advertisers.
             | 
             | It would have to block all ads and trackers and other bad
             | JavaScript; automatically redirect YouTube to Invidious and
             | so on, while seamlessly keeping all YouTube features;
             | automatically open the chronological tab instead of the
             | recommended tab on most social media; be blatantly illegal
             | to possess; and update itself through Tor so nobody can do
             | anything about it.
        
               | Euphorbium wrote:
               | All of that war can be ended legally in a day. The
               | solution is not technological.
        
               | lieks wrote:
               | Librewolf is pretty much that.
               | 
               | Firefox with stupid features turned off, all privacy
               | settings to the max, uBlock Origin and no other
               | customizations.
        
             | partomniscient wrote:
             | I agree. I detest that the world I live in, there's an
             | inordinate amount of human effort that goes into diverting
             | my attention to make me behave against my own best
             | interests by buying something, or even just offered the
             | opportunity to notice something buyable, that in both cases
             | enriches someone else.
             | 
             | If all of that effort was focused on something meaningful,
             | rather than something 'profitable', I wouldn't despise
             | myself or the rest of humanity.
             | 
             | There's a massive difference between making the world a
             | better place versus making the world a better place for a
             | select few. Late stage capitalism has a massively heavy
             | emphasis on the latter.
             | 
             | And now the USA has effectively reverted to monarchism. [1]
             | 
             | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wycjnCCgUes
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | do what I do. every time grammarly interrupts my YouTube
               | viewing, I say out loud clearly to myself "fuck off
               | grammarly", and then I use YouTube-download to get the
               | video without the ads.
               | 
               | every time Facebook shows me an advert for solar panels,
               | I close Facebook (I only go for the pictures and stories
               | of cats getting in awkward situations).
               | 
               | I've amassed a ton of books for my old age - some day I'm
               | going to go offline and never go back online.
        
           | javcasas wrote:
           | Imagine you had a team of 10 average (not bad, but also not
           | great) software engineers for a year. Choose between:
           | 
           | * Get them to implement the kubernetes ssd/disk attachment
           | plugin for the Adobe cloud offering.
           | 
           | * Get them to implement the remote access, scheduling and
           | status control of a biochemistry centrifugue.
           | 
           | Both missions are boring, and neither will change much how
           | whe world runs.
           | 
           | Well, I lied. Because of incentives, it is actually choosing
           | between 15 decent engineers for the Adobe cloud or 1-2 cheap
           | & bad engineers for the centrifugue (I have worked in
           | embedded, I know software is an afterthought in that
           | industry).
           | 
           | And now let's make it more personal: would you rather work
           | for Adobe cloud for 135k per year, or for Centrifugues R Us
           | for 85k per year? Would your spouse agree with your decision,
           | especially after your 3 year old decided to grab and throw
           | the TV to the floor?
        
         | tomrod wrote:
         | Yep, collaboration problems are hard to solve.
         | 
         | What are the financial incentives in biotech to trade time for
         | wages?
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | And building slightly special versions of things that already
         | exist.
         | 
         | In some ways I think we'd have more progress with fewer devs.
         | And I don't mean "cull the bad ones". I mean necessity is the
         | mother of invention.
         | 
         | We'd have 3 CRMs and a dozen content management systems instead
         | of dozens and thousands respectively.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | That may have an effect, but I don't think the root cause is
           | the number of developers.
           | 
           | The root issue is that people and groups are disorganized and
           | have inconsistencies between them. Changing habits and
           | convincing other humans and making political coalitions is
           | very hard, so instead people are willing to spend
           | surprisingly large amounts of money in various ways that
           | somehow take the edge off.
           | 
           | Creating or adopting software to "organize" is just one way
           | that can occur. It could also be something like a doomed
           | initiative that someone with clout wants, or even just paying
           | the salary of a useless person hoping they'll leave on their
           | own because firing them is too hard.
        
         | Terr_ wrote:
         | > > doing something boring
         | 
         | > the other way around [...] important things
         | 
         | That makes it sound like "boring" and "important" are
         | opposites, but they aren't.
         | 
         | There may be some very boring database shuffling import/export
         | problems, but if they aren't done by somebody, a bunch of
         | people won't get paychecks and won't make rent. Or the boring
         | task of _reviewing_ code that needs to be right or else someone
         | dies.
        
         | briandear wrote:
         | Important things pay the most. Or they aren't important. If
         | they aren't valuable, they aren't important. The market
         | determines important. If there is something that someone thinks
         | is important but aren't willing to spend their own money on it,
         | then it clearly isn't that important.
        
           | kibwen wrote:
           | Right, which is why oxygen isn't important, because I don't
           | pay anything for oxygen. Praise the Market!
        
           | Buttons840 wrote:
           | The people that maintain the Cobol that runs all the banks
           | make less money than people writing a web page that half
           | works.
           | 
           | I have a family member who works for Wells Fargo and
           | discovered this while talking to him and a programmer friend
           | of his. They work on the systems that move money around
           | between accounts, and I work on a shitty half-thought-out web
           | app. I'm paid like 2x what they are.
        
           | exe34 wrote:
           | exactly, that's why nurses are treated like shit and football
           | players are paid so much. we truly live in idiocracy. most
           | recent example being the man who can't string a full sentence
           | together getting elected a second time.
        
           | fnordpiglet wrote:
           | This assumes people's preferences are optimally aligned to
           | their best interests in a micro and macro sense and that,
           | more or less, classical economics is precisely accurate. None
           | of this is actually true.
           | 
           | There are plenty of things that are important that the
           | "market" doesn't allocate a ton of money towards and tons of
           | stuff that are really not important but the "market" rewards.
           | The market in the end is a collection of decisions by
           | individuals in aggregation, and decisions by humans are
           | rooted more in their psychology than in some uber rational
           | god mind of optimality. It is very possible to shape
           | behavior, decision making, and capital allocation in ways
           | that are demonstrably pessimal. Indeed with the advent of
           | mass consumption of social media and algorithmic manipulation
           | of psychology you can shape market behavior directly in ways
           | that are detrimental to the participants in the market while
           | rewarding the manipulators. This can be even done as a method
           | of warfare, in which you shape psychology, behavior, and
           | market preferences against a societies best interests.
           | 
           | This is why we have non market systems that prioritize
           | objectively important work that's inefficient by the market's
           | perspective. This is essentially the outcome of 248 years of
           | economic research after the wealth of nations.
        
       | joshdavham wrote:
       | > Stripe is a fundamentally boring business
       | 
       | I understand what you're trying to say here, but I disagree.
       | 
       | What someone finds interesting or boring is of course subjective,
       | but you'd be surpised at how many people find finance endlessly
       | interesting - and especially the overlap between finance and
       | software ("fintech").
       | 
       | On the surface, it might be bewildering that some people are more
       | interested in internet payment processing than say, stem cell
       | research, but that's just how peoples interests work!
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | High level topics aren't what people are doing day to day
         | though. There's definitely parts of any business that are
         | interesting but that only goes so far. Science also involves a
         | great deal to tedious work.
         | 
         | Comparatively high fintech pay suggests it needs those wages to
         | attract people.
        
         | cj wrote:
         | Some people get satisfaction out of solving problems and
         | learning, regardless of what the problem is or what they're
         | learning.
         | 
         | Building a company is a constant exercise of problem solving
         | and learning, especially at the early stages.
         | 
         | I grew a SaaS to millions of ARR but the thing that keeps me
         | interested isn't really the industry we're in, it's all of the
         | tangential things that are required to build and grow (learning
         | how to hire well, learning how to build company culture,
         | pitching to investors, M&A, figuring out how to be a good
         | leader, etc)
         | 
         | Sometimes I feel guilty that I'm not as directly passionate
         | about the product itself as I should be, and am more passionate
         | about the people and company and the journey it's on.
        
           | Jerrrrrrry wrote:
           | >Sometimes I feel guilty that I'm not as directly passionate
           | about the product itself as I should be, and am more
           | passionate about the people and company and the journey it's
           | on.
           | 
           | That's because you are a human, that built a company. You are
           | not that company, even if you must embody it - literally and
           | figuratively.
        
         | ninetyninenine wrote:
         | I hate it when someone tries to take it in a subjective
         | direction without accounting for fundamental human biases.
         | 
         | Like any human can understand why space x catching a freaking
         | rocket is less boring than stripe payment processing. I mean
         | come on!
         | 
         | Do you really expect me to believe you fundamentally think
         | payment processing is so much more cooler than catching a
         | freaking rocket? If anyone believes that I'd point to them
         | having more of an axe to grind with Elon then any depiction of
         | what they really feel.
         | 
         | I subjectively think I am god. That's just my subjective
         | opinion and it's valid because everything on the face of the
         | earth is subjective.
        
         | rgmerk wrote:
         | The company I work for runs a wrap platform [1]. Not one
         | developer in the company has ever mentioned that they find the
         | area intrinsically exciting to work on.
         | 
         | There is a sense of collective responsibility that we are the
         | custodian for the retirement savings of hundreds of thousands
         | of people, so you do not want to screw that up. There is also
         | satisfaction in that our efforts as developers mean that our
         | platform is consistently rated the best on the market.
         | 
         | But nobody, least of all management, is kidding themselves that
         | people are working for the company because of the problem
         | domain - they're working for the company because of the pay,
         | conditions, and company culture. And there's absolutely nothing
         | wrong with that.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.finance-monthly.com/2020/03/the-benefits-of-
         | wrap... (NB: not the company mentioned in the article).
        
       | epgui wrote:
       | Strongly disagree. Easily 99% of people in biology are doing very
       | tedious boring things. Maybe you just don't hear about it because
       | it's "boring".
        
         | doctorpangloss wrote:
         | "All generalization is wrong, including this"
        
       | Workaccount2 wrote:
       | Software engineering and finance have completely sucked the air
       | out of the STEM room.
       | 
       | I'll be surprised if in a generation anyone in the US knows how
       | to build anything other than JavaScript apps and swap agreements.
        
         | georgeburdell wrote:
         | Software engineering is well on the way to normalizing, IMO.
         | The job market has not been great for the past two years. The
         | margins in finance are getting squeezed too by tech. If you've
         | been investing for a decade or two, you know how much lower
         | fees are now.
        
         | dangerwill wrote:
         | We're already there. It's one of the causes of why all our
         | physical infrastructure is failing. When we outsourced our
         | manufacturing in the 90s-2010s, we lost all that talent.
         | 
         | It's also why this will be the Chinese century.
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | > It's also why this will be the Chinese century.
           | 
           | Modulo how important AI turns out to be.
           | 
           | 25 years ago, it seemed obvious China was going to be to the
           | 21st century what the USA was to the 20th. But also 25 years
           | ago, AI translation in a video call that not only dubs you in
           | your own voice but also modifies your mouth to sync lips with
           | the synthesised voice, was wild speculative SciFi on par with
           | a warp drive.
        
       | irrational wrote:
       | > most decent or ambitious companies in this field are run by
       | exactly one type of person. They are often deeply curious, hard
       | working to the point of near pathology, and will almost always
       | end up pursuing some sort of crazy pie-in-the-sky mission. Like
       | curing aging or making de-novo proteins in a zero-shot manner or
       | trying to usher in entirely new dogmas in biology. In other
       | words, something where immense intellectual output leads to
       | outsized market payoff.
       | 
       | I have a friend who works for Nvidia. I can't remember the
       | founder of Nvidia's name, but the above paragraph reminded me of
       | the description my friend gives of him. Frankly, my friend is a
       | fanboy of this guy for the reasons given in the article about
       | biology company founders.
        
       | PostOnce wrote:
       | Software doesn't require a degree to get a job, even an advanced
       | high paying one, but just about all the other STEM fields do.
        
       | psyklic wrote:
       | It's very likely that Stripe initially pitched very cutting-edge,
       | ambitious ideas to VCs. So, comparing seemingly "boring" mature
       | company to new startups may be misleading.
        
       | philipwhiuk wrote:
       | > the democratization of online payments
       | 
       | What's more democratic about Stripe than WorldPay?
       | 
       | I don't go to a polling station and elect Stripe. I pay it's
       | fees.
        
         | skybrian wrote:
         | Another meaning of democratization is "the action of making
         | something accessible to everyone."
        
       | odyssey7 wrote:
       | The way PhD programs work, pursuing a research career is an
       | extreme lifestyle.
       | 
       | Don't make it a game of extremes, and you'll get more of the
       | "boring" work done.
        
       | ninetyninenine wrote:
       | I have a lot to say about this.
       | 
       | First, Software is saturated. Every idea is being attacked such
       | that the boring things are the only niche available. That's why
       | you see more boring startups in software.
       | 
       | Second the innovation in software largely raw garbage. Humanity
       | moving forward is developing a light speed drive but software
       | innovation is mainly something along the lines of: instead of
       | looking through the phone book for a plumber there's an app for
       | that now.
       | 
       | And if you look even deeper at the technology of software itself
       | it's mostly horizontal development of endlessly making new
       | abstraction after abstraction without ever really knowing if
       | things are improving. Case in point we went from server side
       | rendering to single page apps and now we're heading back without
       | ever really knowing if things have improved or gotten more
       | complex.
       | 
       | I don't want biology to model software. Software is a bunch of
       | illusions and no progress anywhere.
       | 
       | Ironically I think AI is the one part of software that isn't an
       | illusion as this is real progress in creating an entity that
       | can't be differentiated from a human. The thing is most people
       | think AI is an illusion because it "hallucinates" and I'm just
       | thinking the whole time that the fact that we created something
       | that can lie, deceive and hallucinate is a marker of progress
       | bigger than all the bullshit progress you see in the rest of
       | software and the software startup world.
       | 
       | So I disagree with op. Good on biology to not do boring bs.
        
         | syndicatedjelly wrote:
         | If you replace the word "software" with "web development" then
         | yeah you're right
        
       | Jerrrrrrry wrote:
       | Biology is just too vast of the Gap (difficulty) for our own
       | exellence/smart people to be incentived to jump.
       | 
       | Every "discovery" is merely reduced to a classification, which
       | can reduce one's accomplishments - when every question's answer
       | just is a name of a new branch of questions.
       | 
       | Biology is life, life is just an arbitrary nested magnitude of
       | complexity.
       | 
       | https://xkcd.com/435/
       | 
       | The real meta-joke to this xkcd is that the horizontal scale is
       | logarithmic.
        
       | titanomachy wrote:
       | > They live and breathe biology, and their penultimate goal in
       | life is to have some sort of fundamental impact on the field at
       | large.
       | 
       | But what's their _ultimate_ goal??
       | 
       | "Penultimate" means second-to-most-important. It's not some kind
       | of modifier that means "extra ultimate".
        
         | abhishaike wrote:
         | dumb wording on my part! fixed :)
        
         | karmakurtisaani wrote:
         | Now that you point it out, it would be pretty cool to have a
         | word for "extra ultimate".
        
           | leoc wrote:
           | That would probably be 'perultimate' (see
           | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/per-#Latin ). Mind you, since
           | 'ultimate' means 'last' it's not clear what this word would
           | actually _mean_.
        
       | sampo wrote:
       | > Here's one answer: the historical role that for-profit biology
       | has played is basically a single thing: developing drugs.
       | 
       | Breeding new plant varieties, and new animal breeds, for
       | agriculture, is also for-profit biology.
        
       | otoburb wrote:
       | This post doesn't address the elephant in the room -- wages in
       | biology seem to be supressed due to an oversupply of life
       | sciences scientists willing to do tasks in various corporate and
       | academic labs.
       | 
       | Since life science wages (rewards) seem to be so low compared to
       | other careers in relation to the density of advanced degree
       | holders, the ambitions need to be that much bigger to make it
       | worth it to found uncertain and risky startups. Only big ideas
       | would be worth funding. Ecosystem tooling startups might be
       | founded once more capital for that category trickles in.
       | 
       | >> _And I have no doubt that Patrick Collinson -- the CEO of
       | Stripe [...]_
       | 
       | Patrick's last name is Collison, not Collinson, as per the
       | wikipedia link that the blog post references.
        
         | abhishaike wrote:
         | Fixed!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-09 23:01 UTC)