Monday, October 14, 2024

7个漏财风水

 7 FUNG SHUI FOR LEAKING WEALTH


让房子来旺自己,这些小妙招学起来 ràng fáng-zi lái wàng zì-jǐ, zhè-xiē xiǎo miào-zhāo xué qǐ-lái

Let your house bring you prosperity, learn these little tricks


1. 大门口放杂物 Dà mén-kǒu fàng zá wù

CLUTTER AT THE FRONT DOOR


大门口是家中进气纳气口 经常放杂物,不利于财气引进 家中经常出现漏财的情况。 门口也是事业 dà mén-kǒu shì jiā-zhōng jìn qì nà qì-kǒu jīng-cháng fàng zá wù, bù lì-yú cái-qì yǐn-jìn jiā-zhōng jīng-cháng chū-xiàn lòu cái de qíng-kuàng. Mén-kǒu yě-shì shì-yè

收拾屋子 shōu-shí wū-zi


Putting sundries at the front door

CLUTTER AT THE FRONT DOOR

The front door is the air intake of the house. If you often put sundries at the front door, it will not be conducive to the introduction of wealth, and the family will often leak money. The front door is also a career.

Clean up the house


2.


Sunday, October 13, 2024

How hard is a PhD?

 How hard is a PhD?

Would you like a brutally honest answer? If yes, then read on.


Getting a PhD is here on the scale of increasing hardships:

newborn

preschool

kindergarden

primary school

high school

undergraduate uni

Masters degree

Professional Degree (JD, MD)

PhD  ⟵ (here)

postdoc

associate lecturer

lecturer

associate professor

professor

bigshot professor

university leader

and possibly further up the ladder.


Getting a PhD is harder than most people feel comfortable with. It is comparable to becoming a professional and successful artist, sports person, or musician. Only few have the talent and tenacity to get a PhD, and you have to commit yourself to it: it is your life, not just your study or your career.


And yet it is not nearly as hard as most postdoc positions, let alone the further stages of an academic career. You could think of it as getting a black belt in your chosen area of study: to most people, a black belt sounds like the pinnacle of success in sport - but it’s actually only the very basic beginning of your expert training, and there are many, much harder, levels to follow.


At each level, you get more work, harder work, less time and less life. But, luckily, you get stronger and more resilient too, so it might not feel as tough, subjectively. What makes a PhD hard is the huge and crushing uncertainties about your next positions and about your career and about your suitability as researcher. Full professors might work ten times more and harder than you but they don’t have to face that crushing uncertainty.


So, yeah: completing a PhD is really hard, but not as hard as later stages of academia.


Or life, for that matter. Raising a kid for their first 3–5 years, for instance, is far, far harder than completing a PhD degree over 3–5 years. And yet most people get and raise kids, and don’t get fancy letters to prefix (or post-fix) their names by.


In other words, life is tough, and a PhD is not nearly as tough as it gets in most lives, including mine and (probably) yours. The good news here is that, if you really want to do a PhD, then go for it and don’t be scared. In the end, it’s only 3–5 hard years of your life spent on this, which is very little of your life invested in order to gain the expertise and experience required to learn how to become a meaningfully contributing researcher, teacher, and leader.

Singapore ❤️ 🇸🇬 class

 Why do Singaporean people look poorer than foreigners?

On the surface, class isn’t the divider in Singapore as much as it is something else. Looking “rich” almost means nothing here. The middle class is quite mobile here, so there is no need to flaunt how much money one is making.


I am not rich by any measure, and I once sat next in a theatre to the CEO of one of the biggest companies in Singapore. (We had a lovely evening chatting about their grandchildren and my job as a drag queen.) And this is not an uncommon occurrence.


I’ve met and hung out with celebrities, old money, and important people here as sure as I’d bump into old friends all the time. We all end up in the same places without having to negotiate all the time who makes more money (which seems to be the thing in many parts of the world).


Sure, there are still lines that divide according to class, but I will say that they aren’t as explicitly drawn out as in other places I’ve been.


COMMENTS:

freedom to live simply unostentatiously with no pressure to keep up with the Joneses is a peace and joy to treasure


It’s one of my great joys about living here.


I TOTALLY AGREE!

FREEDOM!!!


Only people with inferiority complex flaunt their wealth to reassure themselves to feel good. Singaporeans don't give a damn. No matter how rich or is they go to best foodstalls in the hawker centre if the food if the food is good. Clothes? Please think about what's good in this hot humid climate. Footwear? Slippers and saddles are best.


Because foreigners are unaware that to Singaporeans, everywhere is home. Quite a few times, during a big hot morning, I saw an expat on board the train wearing a suit and tie. Gosh… I thought, “ What a sick guy, obviously he is sweating like a monkey. ” Well, I guess there is a price to pay for trying to look rich. Coming into our home, wearing to look rich won’t impress us. We are not impressed. Do something wrong and out you go. It’s as simple as that. Another point is, that I have seen so many times, a poorly dressed “ housewife “ entering a multi-million 4-story bungalow after alighting from a bus. Finally, it might be because without dressing up to look rich, foreigners felt insecure as they knew there are too many rich people walking around here. Yeap. I guess that answers your question.


That homemaker most probably doesn't have a driving license or she does own a car, with another one belonging to her husband, but decides to take the bus or train because it's more convenient to do so in regard to her destination. She may also think that a bit of exercise would do her some good.


I know one such homemaker. ;)


Wondering how do you gauge one wealth by look? By dressing, height and size, accent, skin color or …? That is something to learn.


The thing is you don’t guess. If you want to know who’s rich, you have to interact with them and get to know them.


Well since you asked.


This isn't limited to Singapore but it's from my own circle and experiences.


Dressing plays a part. From what I can infer, most people wearing business wear are low-middle class. Working. Now even CEOs wear business wear but the number of CEOs+whatever O’s to working class is miniscule. From what I have seen, poor or new money rich will wear branded. Rich people wear very normal clothes. I do the same, it's for two reasons. Very rich people wear very good quality clothes but no brands found anywhere. Some appear as shabby (very typical Singaporean dress style) but they buy stuff in cash sometimes. The reason is ridiculous at times.


Height can't be changed. For size, most rich people have time to exercise and maintain a good diet. So they usually aren't overweight. They naturally look better. I have seen an Indonesia mom with her daughter at the immigration and asked the officer what's the hold up as I waited at least the period of processing four people just for her to finished. Officer was cool. Said she was 60. She looks foken 30. Heck I will choose her over her daughter if I have to date one. I personally interact and know around 10k women from my job previously and she didn't go under the knife. Or she have a very very good surgeon that's beyond the market rate locals go to. But many hollywood people are rich too. Surely they use good surgeons too. She just look very natural (still stand by my stance she is), Just a very carefree and stress-less life for her to look like that. Ray liu is near 70 by the way. But when he was 60 he looks nearly 20 years younger.


Accent is useless to determine how rich one is. Some old money people have accents you would laugh at until you know their net worth.


If possible, most rich people prefer light skin as opposed to darker tones. You never see a rich person go artificial sun tanning. Unless said person is by ethnicity or genes dark by nature.


As opposed to what Scarlett has said above, which shows she probably doesn't have access to rich people, one, rich people usually don't display themselves as rich. You don't have the resources to talk to everyone and know everyone. Heck most people don't even know what their siblings are doing besides cny gathering. Have time know yourself and your family first.


Second is rich people gain nothing talking to “you”. Or a common folk. Lest wanting to spend time on “you”. Or knowing you. So going that route is left to chance.


Last even if you know that a certain Mr Lee or warren Buffett is rich, you can't even get close to them. They have security. They don't go buy groceries in your high level supermarket. One virtually has no common places of interest or meeting chance with rich people in everyday setting.


Singaporeans find value beyond class


You mean there don't Rolex watches, carry LV, and branded goods. Their dressing is casual which is appropriate in tropical weather.


No, we do. We just don’t call attention to them in very conspicuous ways. They all just quietly come together.


I was watching an international news channel covering Kim Jong Un’s journey to his hotel upon arriving in Singapore, the news commenter went: I thought is one of the richest places in the world, why are people on the street in tank tops, shorts & slippers?


A lot Low income families


😂


Most Singaporean are poor, most of the rich people here are the elites and foreigners staying as PR in Singapore. Majority of Singaporean are living in poverty, hundred of thousand Singaporean are living in extreme poverty, poorer than people living in India and Africa. Especially those Singaporean who are above 40 years old and earning below $1500 a month (probably over a million such Singaporean). The reason is because Singaporean are being marginalize by foreigners mainly from Malaysia and China.


Haha, that's because all we own are on lease. With ever escalating cost of living exponentially, saving is only meant for retirement survival. Nothing to flaunt.


“no need to flaunt how much money one is making.” nothing like Crazy Rich Asians? Hong Kong and Shanghai and Beijing folks dress stylish and well.


they like to claim higher classes.


5Cs?


Santos's assessment is rather accurate, at least for the Singapore of 2024.


And if you are going to assume that I'm not a true blue Singaporean by my name, let me disabuse you of any misapprehension. I am as Singaporean as they come. I am Peranakan Chinese, and this means that my ancestors were in this region for centuries. Any connection to China would have to go back to the Ming Dynasty.


There was a time when flaunting your wealth through your possessions was a thing in Singapore. That was common in my babyboomer parents’ time, and usually amongst the nouveau riche. My parents did not give a shilling about any of it. Anyway, from generation X onwards, more people in Singapore became middle class, and you must know that the middle class in Singapore is one bloody big group. And most of us live in public housing. Some prefer to invest in property but still live in flats.


I always admire the confidence of people like you. Bless your spaniel heart. <3


PhDs, European or American?

 If European PhDs are shorter than American PhDs, does this affect the quality of the eventual PhD?

Having degrees from Nigeria, Canada, Switzerland, and the U.S., and having closely examined the educational systems in the U.K. and Australia and worked closely with Ph.D. students and graduates from these countries, I think I’m somewhat familiar with the various international educational systems. I think the difference in duration between European (particularly U.K. and largely Australian) and American Ph.D. programs does influence the nature of the education and research experience, potentially affecting the quality of the eventual Ph.D.


I think, in many European countries, including the U.K. (and Australia), Ph.D. programs are typically shorter and more focused. Students specialize early, leading to a narrow but deep understanding of their subject area. This focused approach means that students spend most of their time on their dissertation, diving deeply into specific research questions from the outset. The downside, however, I would say, is the potential lack of breadth in their education, as they have less time to explore adjacent fields or interdisciplinary topics. This can result in graduates who, while highly knowledgeable in their specific area, may lack a broader understanding that is often valuable in academic and professional settings.


In contrast, U.S. Ph.D. programs are longer and emphasize a broader educational experience. Students typically spend the initial years taking coursework across various disciplines, allowing them to build a wide-ranging knowledge base before focusing on their dissertation. This approach can foster a more well-rounded scholar who is better prepared for interdisciplinary research and collaboration. However, it can also mean that U.S. Ph.D. students may take longer to achieve the same depth of expertise in their specific area of study compared to their U.K. counterparts.


While many European Ph.D. students enter their programs with a master's degree (and in many cases, an M.Phil), allowing them to complete their Ph.D. degrees in as little as two-three years, most U.S. Ph.D. students also enter with a master's degree but still spend an average of seven years completing the program. This difference reflects the broader educational approach in the U.S., which includes significant coursework and interdisciplinary training.


Ultimately, the quality of a Ph.D. is not solely determined by the length of the program but by the opportunities for deep research, the support and mentorship available, and the individual's dedication and ability to leverage their education effectively. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses, and the best fit depends on the individual’s career goals and learning style.

COMMENTS

I think this is the best response to this particular question that I could have imagined.


I think your observation and analysis are mostly correct. However, I am of the opinion that the set of qualities and skills one gets from a UK PhD and the likes is a proper subset of that offered by the US PhD program. The reason is very obvious from your observation. In the UK, they spend two to three years concentrating mostly on their dissertation directly. Do you really think those five to seven years spent in the US are all spent on general coursework? No. I don't think you think so either. You already said they spend their first two years or so on breadth rather than depth, right? What of the remaining three to five years spent? Where do they go into? Depth. That's the answer. That's exactly what I meant by proper subset. So, in the US system I sincerely believe that you end up strong in both breadth and depth at the end of those long years. I honestly don't see any weakness in the US PhD system at all, at least not from your analysis if you really think about it well and make the right deductions from your observation. They're simply not the same. Three to five years difference is just a lot to make the difference in quality tangible. That's my honest opinion.


I have found that my colleagues who were educated in the US system do you seem to have a much more well-rounded understanding of their primary and adjacent fields. I would also argue that my colleague from the UK because of the differences between A-levels and high school seem to have focused earlier and tended to specialize earlier moving towards completing the dissertation faster. It's worth noting the US system does not require external validation/review in the same way that a PhD is in the UK. The faculty that are voting on whether you deserve a PhD is generally from the same university in the US but in the UK if it is still the way it was when I left it had to be external, validated by people who are not invested in your degree, and who don't know you and thus I might believe it meets the measure of new knowledge and impartiality at a level that the US degree does not (possibly)


I did my undergrad in my country before I traveled out. In my undergrad you can't get your degree if you don't have a validation from an external validator or whatever they're called. But in the US there's nothing like that. Now, getting here I have seen a lot of exceptional graduates from my field, many I can't even match at all. They weren't subjected to any external validation but their education system is just not comparable to what I got even though I was the best graduate from my school. All I am trying to let you know is that how does external or no external validation relates to quality of exposure and degree? Nothing at all. When one PhD education system is clearly above the other you don't bring in things like external validation to try to justify anything. What has that got to do with it. Imagine a group of faculty members who are undoubtedly some of the bests in their fields globally, attesting to your qualification for the PhD degree. Why would you need external validation again? For bais reasons? No. That's very rare. That's why the average starter of a PhD program here in the US doesn't finish; it's a 50–50 thing because of the rigor. So no external validation is needed because you must have published quality papers in your field with peer reviews. That alone is more than an external validation from an individual.


Also, I don't expect a discussion of A-levels at all. PhD level work is nothing compared to A-levels and high school. They should be completely left out of the topic. We talk of PhD after at least a solid undergrad or master's exposure. If you can't compare A-levels to advanced undergrad courses then how does completing it make you qualify for a faster PhD? It's just too low. Here, what qualifies you for an early start of your PhD program is completing an accelerated master's as part of your undergrad. That makes a lot of sense because it's truly closer to what you'll experience at the start of your PhD.


See, I understand that when it really comes down to individual comparison, everything I said really doesn't matter. A UK PhD can be so exceptional that they stand out. Please don't get me wrong. All I am comparing are the two PhD systems which I sincerely don't see how one is not clearly better than the other, generally speaking. But on an individual basis, there's no way we can make any meaningful comparison. I will be honest with you, I truly don't believe in a two-year PhD program at all. If you doubt me, please go and research how easily a PhD from the US can easily get a job if they choose to work elsewhere and even in the UK, and then compare the reverse situation. If you were a director in the industry and let's say you have no time to interview two applicants: one did a two-year PhD and the other a five-year PhD. No interview and that's all the information you have about them. You just have to pick one. Who would you pick? I mean which would you trust at first sight without any further information?


I also think the significant time spent as TA’s (Teaching Assistants) in the US does impact the duration of doctoral pursuit. Many European Universities do not require TA duties and as such significantly reduces the time taken to complete your studies. Also worthy of mention, the concept of the TA component is not only teaching experience but tbh more so to earn a side income. Many Euro Unis include a salaried remuneration package for PhD candidates, a stark indication of how they view their PhD candidates, which is closer to an employee rather than a student as in the US system. I recently met an Ethiopian student at a technical training program at a US state university (a really hard working and awesome dude btw) and he recounted how much time he spends as a TA, however (and rightfully so) he was grateful that this component was included since it was his only source of income in the states. And as someone who hails from the Americas, (and on the topic of getting a job in the states post PhD,) the US is VERY biased to qualifications and certifications that are non US. There is a reason students from the UK, Caribbean and Africa excel early on at US Universities, their foundation education is more robust than that at the US High School system finish line- and so, many finish the US undergrad ahead of the four year duration- not because the US system has more breadth and depth but because it’s doable coming in with a solid foundation. The same transcends to their PhD program- also the US PhD programs have way more taught courses than those of their European/UK counterparts, all this translates to more time taken to completion. So in addition to your well founded analysis (quite good btw) there’s also the above.


Talking about TA, I think you're right on that. The time spent on TA increases the time spent on the program. However, I still maintain that three to five years difference is huge enough to make a tangible difference in quality. Your TA hours is a very small fraction of those extra years, considering that you also TAed in your first two years.


Before I came to the US I used to hear that we are better than US students because our education system is stronger, like you mentioned. Coming here, I saw for myself and realized that's simply not true. Truly, I came out the best where I did my master's in the US, but it wasn't because I had a better education or exposure or that the African system is better, no. That's a big fallacy. I would attribute my success to my hardwork. I saw in their undergrad curriculum many many things not taught in my undergrad program back at home. I am from Africa. I don't know about their secondary school here. I don't know how it compares to ours but if I would choose one for any child I wouldn't hesitate to pick the American education because of the well-roundedness of its education system. It also depends on the district. So, coming back to undergrad and graduate education I think it also depends on the school we are talking about. Please never compare an average American undergrad or graduate program to the best in African countries. The former is better than the later. The only thing that makes a good student from Africa do well in the US is the hardworking culture they have already built in themselves. It's far from the truth, based on my personal experience here, to say that most african students top their class when they get here. What I do know is that the ones that are already doing well tend to maintain their streak of success by continuing to work hard. But when you attend a top school in the US, your perspective would change completely. You will see a lot of exceptionally brilliant American students. I tell you that because I attend one. But that doesn't make good African students fall behind if they're still willing to put in the effort required for success.


I would compare the best in the UK to best in America and average in the UK to average in US. The very best in the UK and the very best in the US, for instance, Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, etc are more or less the same. But you would notice that the US has far more of such (but that's because it's much bigger. So, it's not really a point to support my position). But comparing an average in the UK to average in the US, I sincerely think the US comes out higher.


I understand your point of view- since you also speak from personal experience, I appreciate you sharing it- thanks for that, and you’re absolutely right, comparisons need to be made on similar parallels the best against the best, average for average and so on. However I gave my perspective from an overall vantage point - Ivy Leagues and Ivy League Plus unit (or the top universities as you’ve pointed out)represent 0.5 to 2 percent of a 2.1 million average high school to college cohort transition (3.5 million on average actually graduate from high school), so of course you’ll see brilliant American students, you’re talking top tier- as such, your personal experience speaks for a minute fraction of a much bigger cohort (in other words what’s true for Ivy Leaguers does not hold true for the rest of the US). I have attended institutions in the UK (Scotland), Austria and Michigan/US, and yes your opinion bears much weight as I previously acknowledged (no argument there, you’re spot on). But taken on average, Caribbean and UK students ( my opinion of African students here would be trumped by yours as someone coming from Africa, although my experience has seen very academically strong Afro students)- are more academically prepared than US students in great part because of the secondary school curriculum they came from with subject specific emphasis and deeper syllabus content dives from an earlier age (whether this is good or bad I honestly don’t know). US universities send college reps to high performing secondary schools in the Caribbean to promote their institutions (since God knows when). But respectfully, I accept your views and opinions, more than that I also share much of it standing in agreement. I’ve just grown up in and around the American and British systems so that my view like yours is molded from my own personal experiences. So that I don’t think I’m right and you’re wrong or vice versa, just that we speak from and guided by our individual personal experiences. As such our views are our own truths : )


I believe this is controlled by the requirement to have an external member of the committee present at the dissertation defense. I certainly did that and invited a professor from a different reputable university and flew him to my defense at my own expense including meals and housing. I think this is the norm for US PhD programs. My research area was particularly specialized so finding an appropriate external member was a challenge. However, even at my university I had 4 members of my committee and only 1 was in my particular area which was Veterinary Immunology. The remaining 3 were in toxicology, pathology, and molecular biology. I had to be completely up to date in all those fields before my candidacy exam. Not an easy challenge.


During my research period, I only met with these professors when necessary to utilize their equipment. some weren’t even in my particular school at my University (Cornell). Cornell is divided into numerous separate schools within the University and even then some were state-funded and others private so a very complex place to work. Paying for services in these circumstances was a complete disaster. I also performed animal work which required a lot of legal and administrative hurdles not to mention the expense. I had to self-fund all these things myself and my initial project assigned to me by my major professor at the beginning was to write a grant to get the funding. Not easy from the get-go but it was highly educational and perhaps the most pertinent aspect of my training which was indispensable later in my research career. To write the grant I had to learn a great deal about my subject so it was a real challenge. I did not have a clue what I would be doing when I started the PhD so it was a very steep learning curve. You get zero help doing any of this as that is part of the character-building aspect of the training. I am unsure what would have happened to me should I have not received a grant for my research. As it happened it wasn’t an issue. They still treated me like crap the entire time there.


For my us phd I had to have a person outside of my area that i did not know, so that we had someone not invested in my work.


This opinion was well thought out! I have often been of the view that the US PhD is absolutely stronger than whatever Europe has to offer. Nevertheless, I can make concessions since length of a study does not particularly guarantee depth and breadth even though, with all things being equal, that’s what it was intended for. Most things depend on individuals, the environment, the institutions, and many other factors that deter one from an intended goal.


there is a simpler explanation, in the U.S you can enter a ph.d program straight out of a bachelors degree. so it takes the time of an MA degree - 2–3 years plus the dissertation, in europe you usually hit the ground running with a postgraduate degree in hand.


I have never seen a Ph.D. (in germany) completed in two/three years and realistically / the median (when the thesis is finished) is more like six years but it depends on the field (the medical area is completely different). From my experience the Ph.D. in the US is more “schooled”. Our Ph.D. candidates normally work after their master’s degree in a research project - maybe have some additional courses in scientific writing but that’s it. Then they publish their papers etc. In the U.S. afaik you have more like a Phd school you need to attend but then get you Phd (of course after writing your thesis). Correct me if I am wrong ;)


In US doctoral programs, there is usually only another year or so of coursework post-Master’s, and a lot of that is reading credits which prepare the doctoral student for qualifying exams and the dissertation prospectus/proposal. However, there is often significant teaching responsibility and in some fields, a lot of research projects and lab work that can sidetrack students from paying full attention to their dissertation research. It can be very distressing because it could take someone more than 2 years post-Master’s to get their research “off the ground.” Add to that another 4–5 years, then you can see why it’s not unusual to finish a PhD in the US 8 years or so after the bachelor’s degree.


I see. Then it’s similar in US and Germany (I don’t know about the rest of the EU) regarding the time but without the course work in the beginning. The PhD candidates here usually also have some teaching responsibilities.


I believe it also depends on the PhD subject and related funding. Put aside multi-disciplinary PhDs such as international development/affairs/management for a moment and look at physics, chemistry, biology. In those disciplines, the quality of the PhD graduate will be influenced by a variety of factors such as competitive entrance exams (GRE etc) as well as funding/publication related to the production of the undergraduate thesis as well as the funding/publications for the PhD program. I remember the Nobel laureates being asked this question with their response being that access to funding is a big factor in determining research success and publications. The competitive exam also helps produce better PhD graduates. Case in point: More than half of the Nobel laureates got their PhDs in the U.S. from these 3 sciences with these factors playing a heavy role.


I got my PhD from Kings College, London, and it took seven years to earn it. Almost all of that time was spent writing the dissertation to the standard expected of KCL. It was less about developing knowledge in the subject area than about learning how to conduct and present research.


Two points—one, in truth, American undergraduates just aren’t as well read as many European undergraduates. And, in the humanities, that is really a very big difference between American and European Ph.D. students. European students are just better prepared to begin research work sooner because their primary and undergraduate education was probably more rigorous than our grade-inflation everyone gets a 4.0-plus American education. Second, in some fields, seven years in a Ph.D. program isn’t even the average. Not too long ago, in History at least, the average was closer to 10–11 years! This was published in the American Historical Association Perspectives. I think it’s now becoming less, but certainly it’s not uncommon to see Ph.D. students in the Humanities finish in their 8th, 9th, or 10th year.


Having worked with PhD graduates from top universities in the UK, I would not agree with the ‘knowledge base’ in their specific research area where their PhD thesis lies is anything deeper than their peers graduated from the US and Canada institutions. In fact getting their research published in peer-reviewed journals is often not a requirement in the UK while at least two publications are usually expected for calling for an exit in North America. This has implications to the preparedness for a career as an independent researcher and university teacher.


Why this question always pop as Europe PhD are shorter, as if my university in Europe, and every university that I know of it is 4 years, extendable until 6 if needed.


Where do you guys take this info from?


It is not shorter, standard is 4 years, most people do it in 5.


Actually most people quit.


With both my undergraduate and masters from the US (Cornell and Brown) but my PhD overseas in the English/European system (New Zealand) and now, as a professor in Europe, I have formed a view of things that is not scientific as much as it is from observation and encounters with folks on both sides. (Full disclosure: I was accepted into the PhD program at MIT but had turned it down, naively thinking at the time that PhD programs must be the same everywhere so this is a topic my thoughts turn to from time to time.)


From what I’ve seen, PhDs in Europe may be attractive to many who see it as a 3 year commitment rather than a longer, even open-ended one, as is sometimes the case in the US. While the comps in the US might weed out a lot of candidates before they even begin their dissertation, the assumption that a strong application is sufficient in Europe may allow those who lack critical competencies into a PhD program and begin their dissertation immediately, picking up what is needed as they go along.


Once in, the process seems geared towards getting out by publishing 3 papers. It is argued that this is sufficient for one to qualify as an academic capable of contributing to the field. This is not necessarily a bad metric, to be sure, but things can become a game of publishing tenuously related papers followed by finding some thematic thread that ties them together somehow. (Contrast this with the perspective of producing a dissertation that is grounded in a thesis that drives the publication output, which may be very minimal or highly prolific, depending on the subject.)


I have met folks who can contribute to the field, as proven by their PhD, but I do not think would have been able to complete an equivalent American program. Such people may drag down the overall quality of the the PhD when averaged over all PhDs but I hasten to add that it doesn’t diminish the high quality of the cream of the crop in Europe, which are indistinguishable from those from the US. To be clear, I am not saying that higher quality PhDs are limited to the US or otherwise not found in Europe. Rather, I say that lower quality PhDs seem easier to attain in Europe. So, in response to the original question, the shorter PhD may not affect the quality of the eventual PhD — as argued by others — but, it could and, taken over a large sample, it may do that on average.


German Ph D duration is much longer than that in the US. In AI, there is no Ph. D. thesis written in 2–3 years, but it is normally 6 - 7 years, often in a paid position with additional duties in lecturing and assistance. The volume of the theses and the coverage of topics is also larger than in the US.


In the past, earning a PhD in Europe required 5–8 years, but in the last decade it has been shortened to 4 by introducing the so-called 3rd level of studies. This results in poor quality graduates who receive a PhD, because the supervisor had to promote the PhD student just so he could take the next step in his own career.

Mauro Prosperi's Story

 

How I drank urine and bat blood to survive

  • Published
Mauro Prosperi in the desertImage source,

Mauro Prosperi was 39 years old when he took part in the 1994 Marathon des Sables - a six-day, 250km (155-mile) race through the Sahara described as the toughest race of its kind. Following a sandstorm, the former Olympic pentathlete was lost in the desert for 10 days. Here he tells his story.

What I like most about running extreme marathons is the fact that you come into close contact with nature - the races take place in beautiful settings such as mountains, deserts, glaciers. As a professional athlete I hadn't been able to enjoy these surroundings because I was so focused on winning medals.

I found out about the Marathon des Sables by chance. I had already retired from the pentathlon when a good friend said to me: "There's this amazing marathon in the desert - but it's very tough." I love a challenge so I started training immediately, running 40km (25 miles) a day, reducing the amount of water I was drinking to get used to dehydration. I was never home.

My wife, Cinzia, thought I was insane - the race is so risky that you have to sign a form to say where you want your body to be sent in case you die. We had three children under the age of eight, so she was worried. I tried to reassure her. "The worst that can happen is that I get a bit sunburned," I said.

When I arrived in Morocco, I discovered a marvellous thing - the desert. I was bewitched.

Mauro Prosperi and a fellow runner in the 1994 Marathon des SablesImage source,
Image caption,

Prosperi runs with fellow Italian Mario Malerba in the 1994 Marathon des Sables

These days the Marathon des Sables is a very different experience, with up to 1,300 participants it's like a giant snake - you couldn't get lost if you tried. But back in 1994 there were only 80 of us, and very few who were actually running, so most of the time I was on my own.

I was always the first Italian to reach the next stage and I'd put up a flag on my tent so that we could all get together in the evenings. It was fun.

Things went wrong on the fourth day, during the longest and most difficult stage of the race.

When we set out that morning there was already quite a bit of wind. I had passed through four checkpoints when I entered an area of sand dunes. I was alone - the pacemakers had gone ahead.

Mauro Prosperi and some fellow desert marathonersImage source,
Image caption,

The camaraderie of desert running

Suddenly a very violent sandstorm began. The wind kicked in with a terrifying fury. I was swallowed by a yellow wall of sand. I was blinded, I couldn't breathe. The sand whipped my face - it was like a storm of needles. I understood for the first time how powerful a sandstorm could be. I turned my back on the wind and wrapped a scarf around my face to stop the sand from wounding me. I wasn't disoriented, but I had to keep moving to keep from getting buried. Eventually I crouched down in a sheltered spot, waiting for the storm to end.

It lasted eight hours. When the wind died down it was dark, so I slept out on the dunes. I was upset about the race because, until then, I had been in fourth place. I thought: "Oh well, I can't win now but I can still make good time. Tomorrow morning I'll get up really early and try to reach the finish." You have 36 hours to run that stage of the race - any longer and you are disqualified - so there was still a chance. What I couldn't have imagined was how dramatically that storm would change everything around me.

Marathon des Sables competitors battle a sandstorm in 2006Image source,
Image caption,

Marathon des Sables competitors battle a sandstorm in 2006

I woke up very early to a transformed landscape. I didn't know I was lost. I had a compass and a map so I thought I could navigate perfectly well, but without points of reference it's a lot more complicated.

I wasn't worried because I was sure that sooner or later I'd meet someone. "Who knows how many others are in the same situation?" I thought. "As soon as I see someone we can team up and get to the finish together." That was my plan, but unfortunately it didn't work out.

Marathon des sables runners snake across the sands in 2009Image source,
Image caption,

Marathon des Sables runners snake across the sands in 2009 - it attracts more than 1000 people a year

After running for about four hours I climbed up a dune and still couldn't see anything. That's when I knew I had a big problem. I started to walk - what was the point of running? Running where?

When I realised I was lost, the first thing I did was to urinate in my spare water bottle, because when you're still well-hydrated your urine is the clearest and the most drinkable. I remembered my grandfather telling me how, during the war, he and his fellow soldiers had drunk their own urine when their water ran out. I did it as a precaution, but I wasn't desperate. I was sure the organisers would find me soon.

When running the Marathon des Sables you have to be self-sufficient, and I was well-prepared: I had a knife, a compass, sleeping bag and plenty of dehydrated food in my backpack. The problem was water. We were given fresh water at the checkpoints, but when the storm hit I only had half a bottle of water left. I drank it as slowly as I could.

I'm very resistant to heat and I was very careful. I would only walk when it was cool, early in the morning and then again in the evening. During the day, when I wasn't walking, I'd try to find shelter and shade. I was wearing two hats - a baseball cap with a red woollen hat on top - to keep the temperature as constant as possible. Luckily my skin is quite dark so I didn't really suffer from sunburn.

A map showing the 1994 Marathon des Sables routeImage source,
Image caption,

Prosperi's map of the 1994 Marathon des Sables

On the second day, at sunset, I heard the sound of a helicopter coming towards me. I assumed it was looking for me so I took out my flare and shot it in the air, but he didn't see it. It was flying so low that I could see the pilot's helmet, but he didn't see me - he flew right past.

The helicopter, on loan from the Moroccan police, was returning to base to refuel. Since 1995, because of my experience, runners have been equipped with the kind of flares they use at sea - which they're not happy about, because they weigh 500g - but at the time the flares we had were really small, no bigger than a pen.

Nevertheless I remained calm, because I was convinced the organisers would have the resources to find anyone lost in the desert. I still thought I would be rescued sooner or later.

The Marabout - a Muslim shrine and holy man's tomb - where Mauro Prosperi stayed during his ordealImage source,
Image caption,

The holy man's tomb that almost became Prosperi's tomb

After a couple of days I came across a marabout - a Muslim shrine - where Bedouins stop when they are crossing the desert. I was hoping it was inhabited, but unfortunately there was nobody there - only a holy man in a coffin. But at least I had a roof over my head, it was like being home. I assessed my situation: it wasn't rosy, but I was feeling all right physically. I ate some of my rations, which I cooked with fresh urine, not the bottled urine that I was saving to drink - I started to drink that on the fourth day.

The marabout had filled up with sand from all the sandstorms, so the ceiling was very low. I went up to the roof to plant my Italian flag, in the hope that anybody looking for me could see it. While I was up there I saw some bats, huddled together in the tower. I decided to drink their blood. I grabbed a handful of bats, cut their heads and mushed up their insides with a knife, then sucked them out. I ate at least 20 of them, raw - I only did what they do to their prey.

I stayed in the marabout for a few days, waiting to be found.

I gave in to despair only twice. Once was when I saw the helicopter and it didn't see me. The other time was when I saw the aeroplane.

I had been in the marabout for three days when I heard the sound of a motor - an aeroplane. I don't know if it was looking for me, but I immediately started a fire with whatever I had - my rucksack, everything - in the hope the plane would see the smoke. But just then another sandstorm hit. It lasted for 12 hours. The aeroplane didn't spot me.

I felt it was my very last chance to be found. I was very depressed. I was convinced I was going to die and that it was going to be a long agonising death, so I wanted to accelerate it. I thought if I died out in the desert no-one would find me, and my wife wouldn't get the police pension - in Italy, if someone goes missing you have to wait 10 years before they can be declared dead. At least if I died in this Muslim shrine they would find my body, and my wife would have an income.

Mauro Prosperi was part of the mounted policeImage source,
Image caption,

Prosperi worked for the mounted police in Sicily

I wasn't afraid of dying and my decision to take my own life came out of logical reasoning rather than despair. I wrote a note to my wife with a piece of charcoal and then cut my wrists. I lay down and waited to die, but my blood had thickened and wouldn't drain.

The following morning I woke up. I hadn't managed to kill myself. Death didn't want me yet.

I took it as a sign. I regained confidence and I decided to see it as a new competition against myself. I became determined and focused again. I was thinking of my children. I put myself in order - Mauro the athlete was back. I needed to have a plan. I still had quite a lot of energy left, I wasn't tired. As a former pentathlete I was used to training 12 hours a day and I had trained well for the Marathon des Sables so I didn't feel too weak. I still had some energy tablets, too.

Prosperi started near Foum Zguid and was found in Tindouf 300km from the finishing line in Zagora - the Marathon des sables route changes every year
Image caption,

Prosperi started near Foum Zguid and was found in Tindouf 300km from the finishing line in Zagora

I regained my strength and mental lucidity. I decided to get out of the shrine and start walking again, but where to? I followed the advice the Tuareg had given us all before we started the race: "If you're lost, head for the clouds that you can see on the horizon at dawn, that's where you will find life. During the day they will disappear but set your compass and carry on in that direction." So I decided to head for those mythical clouds on the horizon.

I walked in the desert for days, killing snakes and lizards and eating them raw - that way I drank, too. I think there are some instincts, a kind of deja vu, that kick in in an emergency situation: my inner caveman emerged.

I was aware that I was losing an incredible amount of weight - the more I walked, the looser my watch felt on my wrist. I was so dehydrated I couldn't urinate anymore. Luckily I had some anti-diarrhoea medicine which I kept taking.

line

Surviving in the desert

  • Without water, death occurs after about three days in the desert as the body dries out quickly - at sea people can survive six to seven days

  • Drink nothing for the first 24 hours to put your body into survival mode

  • Drinking urine is not recommended, it contains salt and urea so will actually dehydrate you further - seawater is even worse

  • Digesting protein uses more water than other foods so is best avoided

  • Drinking blood may help as it is easy to digest and may conserve body water - survivors at sea have drunk turtle blood

  • Source: The Essentials of Sea Survival by F Golden and M Tipton (2002)

line

I wanted to see my family and friends again and I concentrated on that. I wasn't afraid. At the same time, I started to view the desert as a place where people can live. I could see the beauty of the desert. I paid careful attention to every trace - even dried excrement gave me clues about what direction to go in.

I learned that there is food all around you, if you learn to look. As I was walking through the desert I recognised dried riverbeds where succulents grew, so I squeezed their juice out and drank that.

I started to think of myself as a man of the desert. Later, a Tuareg prince dedicated a poem to me - according to him I was a "chosen one" because I survived for so long in the desert.

Meanwhile, the organisers were out looking for me. My brother and brother-in-law had flown in from Italy to join the search. They found some of the traces I had left behind, like my shoelaces. They got to the marabout and found signs of me. But they were sure they were looking for a body.

On the eighth day I came across a little oasis. I lay down and drank, sipping slowly, for about six or seven hours. I saw a footprint in the sand, so I knew people couldn't be far.

The next day, I saw some goats in the distance - it gave me hope.

line
A Tuareg man on his camel during the annual festival of Assihar in Tamanrasset, AlgeriaImage source,

The song of the Tuareg

Singing springs under the palms of the green oasis, listen to the call of the Tuareg in the night, in the calm/ At the pace of my pale camel I go, I travel without destination/ The desert is a world, a land of thirst and hunger/ The immense dunes stretch out, like an ocean of misfortune, from the waves of stirring sands.

Excerpt from a poem dedicated to Mauro Prosperi by a Tuareg prince

line

Then I saw a young shepherd girl. She saw me too and ran away, scared. After nine days in the desert I must have looked quite a sight, I was black with dirt. The girl ran towards a large Berber tent to warn the women I was coming. There were no men in the camp - they had gone to market - but the women took care of me. They were so kind. An older woman came out of the tent and immediately gave me some goat's milk to drink. She tried to give me some food as well, but I threw it up. They wouldn't allow me into the tent because I was a man, but they put me on a carpet in the shade of their veranda. Then they sent someone to call the police - they like to camp close to military bases for protection.

A visibly thin Mauro Prosperi returns to a hero's welcome in ItalyImage source,
Image caption,

A visibly thin Prosperi returns to a hero's welcome in Italy

The police came and carried me to their Jeep. They took me to their military base, blindfolded, because they didn't know who I was. They thought I might be dangerous. They had guns and I thought at times that they were going to kill me. When they found out I was the marathon runner who had got lost in Morocco they took off my blindfold and celebrated. I discovered that I had crossed the border into Algeria. I was 291km (181 miles) off course.

Mauro has run many desert racesImage source,
Image caption,

Prosperi has run the Marathon des Sables seven times: in 2001 he came 12th

They took me to hospital in Tindouf, where finally, after 10 days, I was able to call my wife. The first thing I said to her was: "Have you already had my funeral?" Because after 10 days lost in the desert you would expect someone to be dead.

When they weighed me in the hospital I had lost 16kg (35lb) - I weighed just 45kg (99lb). My eyes had suffered and my liver was damaged, but my kidneys were fine. I couldn't eat anything other than soup or liquids for months. It took me almost two years to recover.

Mauro Prosperi has run many desert racesImage source,
Image caption,

Prosperi plans to run a 7000km race across the Sahara next year

Four years later I was back at the Marathon des Sables. People ask me why I went back, but when I start something I want to finish it. The other reason was that I can't live without the desert. Desert fever does exist, and it's a disease that I've absolutely caught. I'm drawn back to the desert every year to greet it, to experience it.

I ran eight more desert marathons and am now preparing for my biggest yet. Next year I'm planning to run 7,000km (4,350 miles) coast-to-coast, external across the Sahara from Agadir (Morocco) on the Atlantic Ocean to Hurghada (Egypt) on the Red Sea. Sport and nature are part of my life, and these races allow me to experience them first-hand.

My wife was a saint. She coped with me for many years but at a certain point, because of my lifestyle, we decided to split up. We are still best friends, maybe more so now than when we were married. I have a new partner but she knows I am a man on a mission. I can't change.

Mauro Prosperi will be 60 next year but is still runningImage source,

Mauro Prosperi spoke to Outlook on the BBC World Service.