Being an engineer working in "engineering" I'd offer this insight:Many of the traditional companies that hired fresh outs (AT&T, Bellcore, etc) are gone.What they've been replaced by, hoards of internet companies, can come off as kinda boring(yes even google). So the finance field has become an alternative. Companies (can you call them that)like DeShaw (and others) seem to be taking the place of a Bellcore where smart people cango and do some interesting work.As far as that stress/work load, heck high school teachers will swear up and down that theyhave it tough so its hard to do a comparsion between careers without getting into runaway "adversity inflation".How's that for my 1st post

First Name: peterLast Name: pauperUsername: ppauperProvince/State: OntarioCountry: Canada Message Posts: 19860Joined: Thu Nov 15, 01 02:29 PMLast Visited On: Mon Jun 23, 08 04:06 PM Average Posts Per Day: 8.23 I thought it would have been you TraderStats Guy

Quote. Academics publish papers and go to conferencesNot all academics are publishing academics, so sure if you want to be a publishing academic and lecturing you will pretty much be working 7 days a week. But some academics can choose to be good teachers and not publish. Stats Guy

DSPGuy has a point.Far fewer quants are likely to be faced by a knife or gun at work than a teacher.I've got sucked into giving some careers advice to teenagers, and a challenge is to model the next 40-50 year labour market.If you're an "old" person of 25, that's "only" 30 years...AT&T when I graduated was an aspirational employer, I was quite smug when my head of department suggested I go to their labs.I did a stint at IBM's labs, where you could get pretty good money and play with bleeding edge stuff.Neither outfit is an attractive employer now for people like us.I'm always wary of trend following in career optimisation.You cannot join Google as it was 3 years ago, and you won't stay employed by Google as it is now for very long.AT&T and IBM were unusually stably good employers, most go bad more quickly.Ultimately, your hedge against an employer going bad, is portable skills. In a given week, I advise a few dozen people on important issues in their career, and a key reason I feel qualified to do this, is that I've made some terrible choices myself. But I've got past them by constant investment in my skills.That's time and money, but it has paid off.You may feel able to make better career decision than me, indeed if I do the soft skills CQF lectures right, most people will have better decision trees; but shit will happen. I didn't predict Bear Stearns, was simply not on my radar, and I hear more gossip than most people, ditto Enron. You can be making money for your firm, and get hit as "collateral damage" when they decide not to do your kind of business at the same time other equally skilled people get dumped and saturate your part of the labour market.The space for shit to hit is very large. Maybe you will do so well that you never work for someone else again, but that's improbable. So you need a strategy that will see you through decades, not years.

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuy But some academics can choose to be good teachers and not publish. Stats Guy And get paid $40000/year for 50+ hour work weeks.

QuoteAnd get paid $40000/year for 50+ hour work weeksYes, but they have 3 months off if you become a school teacher. Sure you do a lot of marking in your time off, but at least it's in your own time which makes a difference.Stats Guy

Quotestatguy: I thought it would have been you Traderwrong, again .

You just added 1 extra post a few more and you there Stats Guy

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyQuoteAnd get paid $40000/year for 50+ hour work weeksYes, but they have 3 months off if you become a school teacher. Sure you do a lot of marking in your time off, but at least it's in your own time which makes a difference. Time off is no fun when you're broke.

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyYes, but they have 3 months off if you become a school teacher. I never really thought of a school teacher as an "academic". I wonder how many have PhD's? One of my high school physics teachers had a PhD. He was a great teacher, but I doubt he was much good at more advanced physics.

QuoteHe was a great teacher, but I doubt he was much good at more advanced physics.Yes but equally these people who know advanced physics don't always make the best teachers. It's tough to find someone who is PhD level and can teach their complex ideas to someone who have no idea about maths. Stats Guy

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyYes you work long hours in academia as well I agree, but the difference is that you have more freedom to do what you want rather than be told what you need to deliver. Yes I am aware that there are restriction from the funding body etc,,, but I still think you have more freedom in academia and flexibility.For the same level of seniority I don't think this is true at all. When people compare freedom between academia and business they are usually doing something silly like comparing the freedom of a senior tenured professor to a first year post-doc. If you compare comparable levels of seniority (i.e. first year associate/first year post-doc - managing director/tenured full professor), it's not clear to me that you end up with more freedom at all.What bothers me much more about academia as opposed to business is the level of inherent hypocrisy. It's really annoying being an "academic serf" when you have people running around talking about the virtues of "academic freedom." Much of the problem is that if you look at the restrictions on freedom that people have, they are often economic ones. University simply could not stay in business without large numbers of underpaid serfs at the bottom. Businesses also require large numbers of people at the bottom, but since they are wealth creators, it's less bad for people at the bottom.One thing that changes when you turn from 25 to 45 is that when you are 25, people can get you to all sorts of stuff by promising you to about this big bright future that happens if you put in your wages right now. As you get older, you start to realize that 1) time is running out and you want payment now and 2) the system doesn't have enough resources to pay everyone so most people are going to get screwed. QuoteWell fair enough. But there are some very challenging problems in physics too (and some areas of statistics), so you could argue there was a monetary incentive for your switch as well. Sure, but you really have to wonder why money is so important to me. Looking at things globally, I've hit the jackpot. I have more income and wealth then probably 95% of the people on the planet. So why don't I just quit now.Doing something for money is one of those interesting non-answers. My experience has been that people that do things for money are usually looking for something else - power, security, luxury, status, freedom, social approval, revenge. It's really important that you know what it is that you are looking for, since markets are all about making exchanges of things you aren't interested in for things that are. QuoteQuoteI might consider slowing down once I hit 70. At 45, I'm just barely started.Well I am happy for you, but not everyone would think like this. Part of it is that I'm closer to 45 than you are. If you have the notion that life is over at 45, then you are going to have some serious thinking to do when you start hitting 40.

QuoteOne thing that changes when you turn from 25 to 45 is that when you are 25, people can get you to all sorts of stuff by promising you to about this big bright future that happens if you put in your wages right now. As you get older, you start to realize that 1) time is running out and you want payment now and 2) the system doesn't have enough resources to pay everyone so most people are going to get screwed.Well depends on what life has in store for you in the end. Some at 45 may not have a choice but to take a job that is a lot junior to their existing skills set. Imaging you have been a top quant developer for many years and when you hit 45 you are told you have been made redundant, then you apply for other roles and find it hard to get back at a similar salary so you either take a pay cut or do something else totally (I wouldn't want to be in this situation when I am 45, but I am sure it happens and people have to deal with it in their own way). Indeed as one gets older we do feel that time is running out, but this is why we should start planning ahead at 25 - and how may 25 year olds worry about their pension and retirement plan ? Probably not may is my guess. I know I did at 25.QuoteLooking at things globally, I've hit the jackpot. I have more income and wealth then probably 95% of the people on the planet. So why don't I just quit now.True, but sadly it's not that simple. Since income is relative, I think there is a tendency for people to compare themselves with their group of friends to see how well they have done in relation to one other. Assuming they all had similar opportunities along the way some would have capitalized on these opportunities more than others and were successful.QuotePart of it is that I'm closer to 45 than you are. If you have the notion that life is over at 45, then you are going to have some serious thinking to do when you start hitting 40.Yes I am fairly young here, but not too young at around the 30 mark. I can't predict how things will be like in 15 years time when I am 45, but I know I will still be doing statistics either in finance or in a different field if demand for quants diminishes. I think machine learning will be used more in trading systems and run off some clever Nonparametric Bayesian techniques. Some roles in Hedge Funds are already asking specifically for machine learning PhDs . I think there will always be a market out there for statistics people in my lifetime.I would hope by the time I am 45, I am still doing some interesting work but not fighting it out with the next generation of stats/physics PhDs. I am sure by then there would be a lot more PhDs in hard sciences too and even more competition for junior roles. Life is not over at 45, given the life expectancy for males in the UK is around 77 years (76.9 to be more exact), you still have another 31/32 years of life in you. The problem is there is a huge variation in 45 year olds too, some look 20 years younger at 45 while others look 20 years older at 65. If you look younger at 45 then this will help. Stats Guy

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyImaging you have been a top quant developer for many years and when you hit 45 you are told you have been made redundant, then you apply for other roles and find it hard to get back at a similar salary so you either take a pay cut or do something else totallyThis is going to be the story for most of the people entering the job market today. It's extremely unlikely that you are going to be working in the same company or the same industry for your entire career, because companies and entire industries disappear. Also, the odds are that you will go able five or so years before layoffs. So if you are 25, you shouldn't ask what happens at 45 when you get laid off, you should ask yourself what do you do when you are 30 and 35 and 40 and 45 and 50 and 55.....The nice thing about math and computer skills is that they are rather portable. It's hard for me to imagine a situation sort of the collapse of civilization in which knowing how to make a computer to something would be useful.QuoteSince income is relative, I think there is a tendency for people to compare themselves with their group of friends to see how well they have done in relation to one other.So if you want to feel rich have poor friends. It's alright to play this game, of "who ever has the most when they die, wins" but just realize that you are never going to succeed at this game, since the second you get rich, your environment changes and you get poor again. That's fine if you realize that this will happen, and you are in the game for the hunt and not so much the kill. Surprisingly large numbers of people don't realize this.QuoteI would hope by the time I am 45, I am still doing some interesting work but not fighting it out with the next generation of stats/physics PhDs.I have too much of a competitive streak not to be fighting it out with the next generation of Ph.D.'s.

QuoteI have too much of a competitive streak not to be fighting it out with the next generation of Ph.D.'s. Yes one can manage those PhDs rather than work directly with them QuoteIt's extremely unlikely that you are going to be working in the same company or the same industry for your entire career, because companies and entire industries disappear. If in the 5 years you make good money you have to make sure you invest wisely and save for a rainy day, so in the 1/2 year down periods you have some backup. I guess it's good to move on from a role every 5 years especially at the mid level, as you need to keep learning new things to stay competitive. However, I wouldn’t want to be in the situation of , say, a quant developer earning say 200k pounds in London and get made redundant at age 45 only to find training roles in C++ available with pay around 40k. That would be tough to stomach. I think the people who play the office politics better manage to stay on a higher salary for longer, but even they will probably fall at some stage. No one is invincible even with a PhD or even if you started coding at 3/4 years old etc... the day will come when someone will do it better than you. Quote That's fine if you realize that this will happen, and you are in the game for the hunt and not so much the kill. Surprisingly large numbers of people don't realize this.Sadly some people get greedy and will never have enough as there is always someone richer unless you Bill Gates. Stats Guy