This is a nice write up. The only thing I found a bit distressing is the &quot;sense of academic achievement&quot; or how one would call it. In my idealized world (à la Hamming&#x27;s You and Your Research), a great scholar would feel great from doing great science and having a real impact:<p>* An applied scientist would feel great from solving someone&#x27;s important problem -- i.e. saving lives, increasing revenue and&#x2F;or decreasing costs at the end of the day.<p>* A theoretician would feel great from solving a recognized important problem.<p>On one hand, the author writes enthusiastically about her side-projects &#x2F; internships &#x2F; hobbies. On the other hand, almost all academic remarks end with:<p>&quot;Our paper got rejected &#x2F; accepted at [top venue]. We felt sad &#x2F; relieved.&quot;<p>Without any further remarks about that work -- i.e. it&#x27;s all &quot;publish or perish&quot; no matter what.<p>In that way, it sounds as if one was doing research for the sake of producing papers rather than solving important problems &#x2F; contributing to our civilization by increasing its stock of knowledge. Perhaps that is the sad state of the current academia.