News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by mpweiher on Sunday October 16, 2016 @06:47AM (#12718010)
> The last thing, really? How about, say, making

> cardboard boxes for a living? Flipping burgers?

Or working as a patent clerk, maybe?

Yes, pretty much anything outside the academic process was what I meant, so that your livelihood does not depend on the outcome of your research, because then you have to tailor your research directions towards the safe and accepted. And so your straw men actually would work, though suboptimally because the income is probably too low to allow you free time.

Also, misquoting me by leaving out the "really" makes your argument disingenuous, because the "really" made clear that the statement is not a 100% but a trend (if a somewhat overwhelming one), and 4 exceptions (names?) don't exactly disprove a generalization.

It would also be interesting if you see your four examples as holdouts from a different era, or general exceptions. I'd wager they're more of the former rather than the latter, and that their number is dwindling.

Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by lx9911 on Sunday October 16, 2016 @06:57AM (#12718053)
> Or working as a patent clerk, maybe?

Does it still work though? In the days of Einstein, I imagine you could slack off easier in such a position than nowadays.

The problem these days is that we're inundated with busywork not only in academia, but in most occupations.

Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by VLM on Sunday October 16, 2016 @11:01AM (#12718885)
And wouldn't the smartest fraction of the population, or at least the researchers think they're the smartest, have the best skills at shamming and avoiding individual busywork and finding careers where they can ruminate in relative peace compared to working in a busy call center, for example?

Even in general at very large scale, a world of limited and shrinking economic opportunity but unlimited and expanding education (well, until the future student loan crash arrives), means you can try to pile on busywork but the people shamming and pencil whipping it are better at shamming and pencil whipping and everything else, than any other cohort in the history of humanity...

As a cultural touchstone look at the movie "Office Space" still relevant today. He stares at the walls for an hour or two every day trying to look busy. Sure you might have to pass three interviews with ten people while proving P=NP and writing a javascript compiler to GET the job, but to DO the job you have to update TPS report headers every couple weeks and that's about it, other than loading letter size paper into the laser printer and staring at walls looking busy. Not to spoil the plot of the movie but the lead actor is not a theoretical physicist although if he were, it would be a dream job for him, work about an hour a week then look really busy the other 39+ hours while working on physics.

Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by hilop on Sunday October 16, 2016 @01:37PM (#12719779)
Reddit (and to some extent HN) are proof that there are plenty of white collar jobs with oodles of free time.
Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by ScottBurson on Sunday October 16, 2016 @03:16PM (#12720401)
It's not the right kind of time, though. Reading and occasionally posting usually don't require sustained concentration -- they can mostly be done as a break from that. (Of course there are times when an interesting and difficult topic shows up, or a debate arises that one wants to participate in.) So for the most part, it's a break from work. Switching from one nontrivial technical task to squeeze bits of a much more difficult task into one's day is much harder.
Re:Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's ... by Ar-Curunir on Sunday October 16, 2016 @05:20PM (#12721028)
Are you seriously claiming that making posts on Hacker News and Reddit requires anywhere near the intellectual rigour and deep thought required for "paradigm-shifting" changes?