difficult choice

[eroenelvento87]

Bye to all,

I've been 32 years old and I've been working for 5 years at an important Italian company headquartered in the north and we take care of components and control systems.

before telling you the difficult choice I'm going to make, I would like to tell you very briefly my story: I worked for a few years in the headquarters but in a particular department that aimed to carry out ideas and projects with 5/10 years optical, very rarely with a customer interested in pushing. certainly, the great advantage was to work in very different areas between them and to have acquired transversal skills; I took care of testing, control specifications, and I acquired a good system knowledge ranging from electronics to mechanics.

a year ago, for family issues, I decide to accept a proposal from my former manager regarding the possibility of creating a r&d center a hundred km from my house, a few steps from the production plant, in an objectively difficult context but with the possibility of investments and to create a good link with the same production plant. Unfortunately, for various vicissitudes that save you, everything turned out well below expectations and I have been doing a job that technical has very little; the relationship with my superiors has been cracked as a result of my successive complaints and my working group is practically on the edge of the business reality, dealing with marginal issues and little importance. Moreover, I found an inadequate working environment, with skills not available in the project; For more than a year, my figure was at the center of a bad power game that practically put my career on standby.

I tried to look around me, but alas, I realized that having worked little with the client made me unbearable in the world of work. of course, having 32 years, even if with good abilities, I have few hopes to find something that does not fit my current role; Finally, the area where I find myself does not allow to have who knows what occasions. I have also tried to compromise with my current company asking to change jobs while keeping my contribution active in what I am doing with a negative outcome because it would mean changing cost center (from the center to the one in which I am), which is now impossible.

Following the situation, I began to mature a big professional crisis that in the past years was as a substitute; I do not particularly love the scope in which I work, I do not like the role, I think I have more chances and I can give it a lot more. the shocking difficulties last year made me dissatisfied and I began, almost out of touch, to resume my old passion of robotics; I started building a small lab at my house, I took over embedded systems and I was interested in machine learning.

we come to the dungue: I was almost by chance able to work within the computer vision (in virtue of my five-year degree thesis before the topic). neural networks, robotics, machine learning and data fusion are topics that fascinate me forever... Needless to say that for me would be a liberation. I also think that they are difficult to find and that in the coming years the request will be remarkable.

the huge problem is that I should give up an indefinite contract, I earn all well (on the 1900 net plus production prizes once a year and the thirteenth) and are in a big company where occasions can come out from one moment to another. On the other hand, the work would be with a research body (important), it would be a renewable search check up to 6 times with a few, if not, null possibility to remain (at least in the short period) and a much lower salary of 1550 net euros on 12 monthly, in short a blood bath. I find myself in a difficult psychological situation, I navigate between the concreteness of a "stable" place and the dreams (rights?) of the past. I move in the most total uncertainty. ..change would cost me a huge sacrifice because unfortunately I have my expenses but would it be an investment for the future? or risk finding me in an even more difficult situation to manage? Should I be quiet and good waiting for something to move inside the company? and if in the meantime I found myself at 35 years displeased and full of regrets for not believing in me?

summing up:

Current place:
pro
salary, stability, big company
against
are on the margins, relationships no longer idyllic, I am not making significant experience

This is the occasion that I presented myself:

pro
hot field, researched skills
against
I lose a lot of money, precariousness to 32 years, skills to build

Thank you for your answers, I appreciate the sincerity. . .

 

[Stan9411]

1900 net plus prizes. If I have spread well the matassa of your story works in development, then no application and no management, from 6 years or so, then not even a senior with 15 years of experience.. Tell me that company is that I come there!!!
apart from jokes if boundary conditions such as salary, benefits, family comfort, working area are good (good!), I would swallow the toad of non gratification at intellectual/professional level, waiting for better times. may have changed in your company. you can create a really interesting opportunity in another company. I say so because I feel I don't recommend the research centers, despite being the paradise for every young engineer who wants to play something innovative: I spent most importantly in Italy for a few weeks during my thesis and all but I say all the contract researchers who gave me a hand, were aware of their precariousness and exploited their current position only as a launch pad for future tasks in private r&d centers or in the academic field.

 

[ale47p]

I think these words of yours express what you would like at the bottom of it:

... and if in the meantime I found myself 35 years displeased and full of regrets for not believing in me?

I don't want to ask you personal questions, but I'll tell you what I would do:

If I had children I would have
If I had mortgage or rent to pay I'd think about it
If I had a property house, I'd change to flight

Good luck!

 

[PIETRO2002]

I'd say you go where your heart takes you so you don't have remorse when you get a few more years!

but I am also prosaic.. as she said ale in the surgery above.. I know I'm making you more doubtful!

You're smart, you have skills, and you want to play... Unfortunately we are in Italy!

abroad a figure like yours would want!

Happy birthday

 

[cacciatorino]

I would avoid the research agency: My experiences are an asphyxiating bureaucracy. . .

 

[stevie]

I would avoid the research agency: My experiences are an asphyxiating bureaucracy. . .

guaranteed. . .

 

[eroenelvento87]

hello to all and thank you very much for the answers.

I have no mortgage or children but a rent (550 plus expenses). And yes, you're right, if I had a property house, I wouldn't think twice.

sincerely, it is psychologically heavy to lose so much stability and for weeks I do not sleep at night to understand what to do. I just know that when I'm at work I'd like to be elsewhere but it wasn't always like that.

My main doubt is not the salary because I faced far worse times but the place where I would end up: I see the search for a place in some ways sad, drawn up by all and always to the mercy of the incapable of the ministry of education. In essence, I am well aware that there is no future... I swear, I wake up and smile at the only idea of putting myself in the game, the next day I do it under and I think that in Italy there is no place for dreams and I must be grateful to have such a contract. ?

 

[Fulvio Romano]

My mom... I don't want to be in your shoes.
I found myself more than once with a job that no longer rewarded me. On all occasions I changed without thinking twice, I went to improve my salary, working conditions and psychological situation. I also had a lot of luck, especially family, with houses that sold in a blink of an eye and a wife who followed me without beating my eye.

change to take less money but it would never be done. apart from the purely economic aspect, it creates a dangerous precedent in its curriculum.

I don't fully agree with the hunter. It is true, in some cases the research authorities are bureaucratic and traded with heated soups, but it is not always so. I had to deal with research agencies that did a job defined in strict technical jargon "a pussy".

themes today not to be attractive on the market. Are you sure that after three years in a research body you can be more attractive for a productive fabric that often thinks it as a hunter? (without controversy, eh, is a way of thinking conveyed by facts that really happen, I was just trying not to make all the grass a bundle).

but instead wax a different job, more cut out on your skills and that you can also pay them those skills?

 

[cacciatorino]

I don't fully agree with the hunter. It is true, in some cases the research authorities are bureaucratic and traded with heated soups, but it is not always so. I had to deal with research agencies that did a job defined in strict technical jargon "a pussy".

Surely everyone has his own experience. mine was to work a week at the experiment and three to write the article, to write the specification for a bodily purchase, and then to leave the incompetence to evaluate the offers to those who would take my place after the expiration of my contract. against the type of work and the field of application (biomechanics) were absolutely stimulating and advanced, but the problems mentioned above made it indigestive, but here I must say that I am inappropriate to the method of work "reflexive" that is required in the field of research.

 

[eroenelvento87]

My mom... I don't want to be in your shoes.
I found myself more than once with a job that no longer rewarded me. On all occasions I changed without thinking twice, I went to improve my salary, working conditions and psychological situation. I also had a lot of luck, especially family, with houses that sold in a blink of an eye and a wife who followed me without beating my eye.

change to take less money but it would never be done. apart from the purely economic aspect, it creates a dangerous precedent in its curriculum.

I don't fully agree with the hunter. It is true, in some cases the research authorities are bureaucratic and traded with heated soups, but it is not always so. I had to deal with research agencies that did a job defined in strict technical jargon "a pussy".

themes today not to be attractive on the market. Are you sure that after three years in a research body you can be more attractive for a productive fabric that often thinks it as a hunter? (without controversy, eh, is a way of thinking conveyed by facts that really happen, I was just trying not to make all the grass a bundle).

but instead wax a different job, more cut out on your skills and that you can also pay them those skills?

According to you, wouldn't it be spent even a step back in machine learning and artificial intelligence (always that I can satisfy the fact that I only have a good matlab base but I would have to learn a lot)? Is it wrong to say that the market in these areas will soon explode?

Unfortunately, there are no companies in the area that could exploit my skills. There would be one, but I played it in the past rejecting twice their offers to stay where I am currently. that was a suicide due to inexperience and naivety.

 

[Alan91]

... there would be one, but I played it in the past rejecting twice their offers to stay where I am currently. that was a suicide due to inexperience and naivety.

try to ask anyway. it is not said that if you have refused twice it means that it is assiduous that they will not take you any more, unless you have already tried. Otherwise you have to lose us?

 

[eroenelvento87]

cinh

try to ask anyway. it is not said that if you have refused twice it means that it is assiduous that they will not take you any more, unless you have already tried. Otherwise you have to lose us?

I tried a month ago trying to clarify the reasons for my refusal. In response I knew that my name is in a sort of black list because of double rejection. Of course, the black list is a [bleep], the real motivation is that in the last period I did not make significant experiences

 

[Fulvio Romano]

According to you, wouldn't it be spent even a step back in machine learning and artificial intelligence (always that I can satisfy the fact that I only have a good matlab base but I would have to learn a lot)? Is it wrong to say that the market in these areas will soon explode?

Unfortunately, there are no companies in the area that could exploit my skills. There would be one, but I played it in the past rejecting twice their offers to stay where I am currently. that was a suicide due to inexperience and naivety.

I tell you the story of artificial intelligence, forgives the poor historical rigour and prolixity.

Between the 1930s and 1940s the advent of the first electronic machines began to give operational dignity to the speculations of turing and to the theories of mcculloch and pitts on the possibility to imitate the human neural architecture by realizing something artificial. at the end of the 1950s the term "artificial intelligence" was born, perhaps the most wrong term possible to define this very interesting technology, and the increasing computing capabilities speculated in the next fifteen years that the aai would have replaced any other control system. the hard and pure controlists had difficulty abandoning all their knowledge, but they relegated to a corner, convincing themselves to represent an old guard who would shortly stop counting. in particular the idea was that it would no longer be necessary to develop control systems based on the principle of linearizing models, robust models and attractive models, the three pillars of non-linear control.

Cool, huh?

Unfortunately towards the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s all neural structures conceived, from the mlp to the svm, passing by som and amenity various, began to give the first signs of limitations when the technological transfer to different industrial areas began. What was the problem? Maybe the name. "artificial intelligence" gave the impression of something smart, but it wasn't like that.

in some academic fields the term "artificial intelligence" was banned, was replaced with "computative intelligence", as to say "look that it is a computer, it just pretends to be intelligent". professors began to distance themselves clearly from this technology.
Since the 1990s, artificial intelligence was relegated to the control of some washing machine (water change), compact camera (auto focus, movement compensation) and little more. in no industrial machine that respects was present artificial intelligence.
in academic circles then the "hard and pure" controllers shook the powder and the cry of "where we said it, the control is always based on a model, however simplified" practically banned any thesis, research or other that was related to this technology for teen nerd brufolosi.

Artificial intelligence was reported in 1996 when deep blue won a game of chess with kasparov. For the first time in fact the choice of a move was not only related to a binding optimization according to the theory of games (remember "a beautiful mind"?), but to a "net" trained by the study of millions of matches of great champions.

towards the early years of the new millennium, artificial intelligence was the property of industry that also is able to do research and development. In spite of this, the academy was very timidly reluctant to this technology, the part of the lion made it the world production layer. one thing was clear, artificial intelligence is limited to two main areas, linearly separable data structures and unassisted clustering. no non-linear control in short, no competition with the classic controls.
the first scope among other things was much helped by the theories of laplace that through the buckingam theorem allow to "transform" a nonlinear application to low size in one that paying the shake of a greater dimension gains in linear separation.
in the same period the new concept of "big data" looks out, not within the detail, but why not try with neural networks to do data mining in large data hubs? Classic neural structures are of course propens to parallelization, so before changing hardware to address the problem you can add thinking heads. Moreover the analysis of the images is very well suited to be treated with this technology that manages in a natural way to "clusterize", to recognize a banana from an apple in a basket of fruit and then recognize the concept of "mela" and "banana" on the stand of a fruiting it even without that no one has taught him the difference between these two concepts.

Why did I tell you all this? because artificial intelligence was born as fashion, it died as fashion, then it resurrected when the needs came up and today is returning to be a dangerous fashion. very interesting, of course, but saying "I don't understand anything, but it's cool because everyone talks about it, so I invest my future" is a speech to do as kids, not at your age.

I'm sorry to say, but I feel a lot about talking at the artificial intelligence bar and I can't help but remember what was said in the 1950s: "Artificial intelligence is like sex between teenagers. Everyone talks about it, no one really knows how to do it, everyone thinks that others are doing it and so everyone claims to do it."

 

[stevie]

I tell you the story of artificial intelligence, forgives the poor historical rigour and prolixity.

Between the 1930s and 1940s the advent of the first electronic machines began to give operational dignity to the speculations of turing and to the theories of mcculloch and pitts on the possibility to imitate the human neural architecture by realizing something artificial. at the end of the 1950s the term "artificial intelligence" was born, perhaps the most wrong term possible to define this very interesting technology, and the increasing computing capabilities speculated in the next fifteen years that the aai would have replaced any other control system. the hard and pure controlists had difficulty abandoning all their knowledge, but they relegated to a corner, convincing themselves to represent an old guard who would shortly stop counting. in particular the idea was that it would no longer be necessary to develop control systems based on the principle of linearizing models, robust models and attractive models, the three pillars of non-linear control.

Cool, huh?

Unfortunately towards the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s all neural structures conceived, from the mlp to the svm, passing by som and amenity various, began to give the first signs of limitations when the technological transfer to different industrial areas began. What was the problem? Maybe the name. "artificial intelligence" gave the impression of something smart, but it wasn't like that.

in some academic fields the term "artificial intelligence" was banned, was replaced with "computative intelligence", as to say "look that it is a computer, it just pretends to be intelligent". professors began to distance themselves clearly from this technology.
Since the 1990s, artificial intelligence was relegated to the control of some washing machine (water change), compact camera (auto focus, movement compensation) and little more. in no industrial machine that respects was present artificial intelligence.
in academic circles then the "hard and pure" controllers shook the powder and the cry of "where we said it, the control is always based on a model, however simplified" practically banned any thesis, research or other that was related to this technology for teen nerd brufolosi.

Artificial intelligence was reported in 1996 when deep blue won a game of chess with kasparov. For the first time in fact the choice of a move was not only related to a binding optimization according to the theory of games (remember "a beautiful mind"?), but to a "net" trained by the study of millions of matches of great champions.

towards the early years of the new millennium, artificial intelligence was the property of industry that also is able to do research and development. In spite of this, the academy was very timidly reluctant to this technology, the part of the lion made it the world production layer. one thing was clear, artificial intelligence is limited to two main areas, linearly separable data structures and unassisted clustering. no non-linear control in short, no competition with the classic controls.
the first scope among other things was much helped by the theories of laplace that through the buckingam theorem allow to "transform" a nonlinear application to low size in one that paying the shake of a greater dimension gains in linear separation.
in the same period the new concept of "big data" looks out, not within the detail, but why not try with neural networks to do data mining in large data hubs? Classic neural structures are of course propens to parallelization, so before changing hardware to address the problem you can add thinking heads. Moreover the analysis of the images is very well suited to be treated with this technology that manages in a natural way to "clusterize", to recognize a banana from an apple in a basket of fruit and then recognize the concept of "mela" and "banana" on the stand of a fruiting it even without that no one has taught him the difference between these two concepts.

Why did I tell you all this? because artificial intelligence was born as fashion, it died as fashion, then it resurrected when the needs came up and today is returning to be a dangerous fashion. very interesting, of course, but saying "I don't understand anything, but it's cool because everyone talks about it, so I invest my future" is a speech to do as kids, not at your age.

I'm sorry to say, but I feel a lot about talking at the artificial intelligence bar and I can't help but remember what was said in the 1950s: "Artificial intelligence is like sex between teenagers. Everyone talks about it, no one really knows how to do it, everyone thinks that others are doing it and so everyone claims to do it."

opinable point of view in my way to see. . .

 

[Fulvio Romano]

opinable point of view in my way to see. . .

Which one of the fifty lines?

 

[stevie]

to define it as a simple fashion seems to me reductive... I think it will be one of the leading business of the future.
the problem is that doing research without relying on solid commercial platforms in the medium-long term is not sustainable, and in Italy I do not see any interested reality (or very few).
so if the friend wants to try in the field he has to take into account in a few years of expatriate.

 

[Fulvio Romano]

to define it as a simple fashion seems to me reductive... I think it will be one of the leading business of the future.
the problem is that doing research without relying on solid commercial platforms in the medium-long term is not sustainable, and in Italy I do not see any interested reality (or very few).
so if the friend wants to try in the field he has to take into account in a few years of expatriate.

viewpoint equally opinabile.
I invite you to read this key passage better:

[cut] today is returning to be a dangerous fashion. very interesting, surely, [cut]

technology is interesting, but now, thanks to industry 4.0 rain funding, it is all the way back to being a fashion. for a non-worker to distinguish between a company that is working seriously for a long-term business and another that rides the wave of fashion and then closing doors could be extremely complex.

 

[eroenelvento87]

I tell you the story of artificial intelligence, forgives the poor historical rigour and prolixity.

Between the 1930s and 1940s the advent of the first electronic machines began to give operational dignity to the speculations of turing and to the theories of mcculloch and pitts on the possibility to imitate the human neural architecture by realizing something artificial. at the end of the 1950s the term "artificial intelligence" was born, perhaps the most wrong term possible to define this very interesting technology, and the increasing computing capabilities speculated in the next fifteen years that the aai would have replaced any other control system. the hard and pure controlists had difficulty abandoning all their knowledge, but they relegated to a corner, convincing themselves to represent an old guard who would shortly stop counting. in particular the idea was that it would no longer be necessary to develop control systems based on the principle of linearizing models, robust models and attractive models, the three pillars of non-linear control.

Cool, huh?

Unfortunately towards the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s all neural structures conceived, from the mlp to the svm, passing by som and amenity various, began to give the first signs of limitations when the technological transfer to different industrial areas began. What was the problem? Maybe the name. "artificial intelligence" gave the impression of something smart, but it wasn't like that.

in some academic fields the term "artificial intelligence" was banned, was replaced with "computative intelligence", as to say "look that it is a computer, it just pretends to be intelligent". professors began to distance themselves clearly from this technology.
Since the 1990s, artificial intelligence was relegated to the control of some washing machine (water change), compact camera (auto focus, movement compensation) and little more. in no industrial machine that respects was present artificial intelligence.
in academic circles then the "hard and pure" controllers shook the powder and the cry of "where we said it, the control is always based on a model, however simplified" practically banned any thesis, research or other that was related to this technology for teen nerd brufolosi.

Artificial intelligence was reported in 1996 when deep blue won a game of chess with kasparov. For the first time in fact the choice of a move was not only related to a binding optimization according to the theory of games (remember "a beautiful mind"?), but to a "net" trained by the study of millions of matches of great champions.

towards the early years of the new millennium, artificial intelligence was the property of industry that also is able to do research and development. In spite of this, the academy was very timidly reluctant to this technology, the part of the lion made it the world production layer. one thing was clear, artificial intelligence is limited to two main areas, linearly separable data structures and unassisted clustering. no non-linear control in short, no competition with the classic controls.
the first scope among other things was much helped by the theories of laplace that through the buckingam theorem allow to "transform" a nonlinear application to low size in one that paying the shake of a greater dimension gains in linear separation.
in the same period the new concept of "big data" looks out, not within the detail, but why not try with neural networks to do data mining in large data hubs? Classic neural structures are of course propens to parallelization, so before changing hardware to address the problem you can add thinking heads. Moreover the analysis of the images is very well suited to be treated with this technology that manages in a natural way to "clusterize", to recognize a banana from an apple in a basket of fruit and then recognize the concept of "mela" and "banana" on the stand of a fruiting it even without that no one has taught him the difference between these two concepts.

Why did I tell you all this? because artificial intelligence was born as fashion, it died as fashion, then it resurrected when the needs came up and today is returning to be a dangerous fashion. very interesting, of course, but saying "I don't understand anything, but it's cool because everyone talks about it, so I invest my future" is a speech to do as kids, not at your age.

I'm sorry to say, but I feel a lot about talking at the artificial intelligence bar and I can't help but remember what was said in the 1950s: "Artificial intelligence is like sex between teenagers. Everyone talks about it, no one really knows how to do it, everyone thinks that others are doing it and so everyone claims to do it."

thank you for the deep digression.

We certainly agree with saying that it is an interesting topic and in my opinion from the remarkable applications. I also have to say that currently in industry, especially when designing control, writes the sw and who caliber are different people, neural networks and in general algorithms of that type are not well seen for obvious reasons (in fact, already departing from a map based+pi approach is rare).

different is the case of big data and clustering that well get married with computer vision, for example. Here, where the amount of data is exterminated or where it is necessary to replace itself in tote with human intelligence (autonomous vehicles), I see the future of technology.

coming to me...I honestly believe in artificial intelligence; what I do not believe is the resendiability of experience in research especially at my age. losing more than 500* euro on average every month is heavy, I feel like spitting on luck. I am honest, if I had the same opportunity with a company, I wouldn't think twice; I'd see it as a safe investment.

lightning, the things you say I thought about them, and I gave myself some kid. That's the problem... I'd like to go back to being "boy" to choose a job that stimulates me the most. I am the shining example of the consequences due to the bad move within a company and the awareness of my value perhaps now too late.

I see myself locked up, not understood, not fully exploited, without possibility of interesting outlets. It is difficult, I would like to give more but I am at war without a rifle, inside a mobile sand in which if rough background, victim of the new project financed from the European Union to the south.

I don't want to sound exaggerated, I know that there are people who can't even put something on the table, but for a year now, going to work has become humiliating.

I don't know exactly how to get back. until two years ago, I received offers on average every two months; I refused a lot by virtue of promises never kept, for the fear of putting myself in play and for people who are not even more part of my life. Now, that I am aware of all this, I cannot have a good chance. . .

 

[stevie]

thank you for the deep digression.

We certainly agree with saying that it is an interesting topic and in my opinion from the remarkable applications. I also have to say that currently in industry, especially when designing control, writes the sw and who caliber are different people, neural networks and in general algorithms of that type are not well seen for obvious reasons (in fact, already departing from a map based+pi approach is rare).

different is the case of big data and clustering that well get married with computer vision, for example. Here, where the amount of data is exterminated or where it is necessary to replace itself in tote with human intelligence (autonomous vehicles), I see the future of technology.

coming to me...I honestly believe in artificial intelligence; what I do not believe is the resendiability of experience in research especially at my age. losing more than 500* euro on average every month is heavy, I feel like spitting on luck. I am honest, if I had the same opportunity with a company, I wouldn't think twice; I'd see it as a safe investment.

lightning, the things you say I thought about them, and I gave myself some kid. That's the problem... I'd like to go back to being "boy" to choose a job that stimulates me the most. I am the shining example of the consequences due to the bad move within a company and the awareness of my value perhaps now too late.

I see myself locked up, not understood, not fully exploited, without possibility of interesting outlets. It is difficult, I would like to give more but I am at war without a rifle, inside a mobile sand in which if rough background, victim of the new project financed from the European Union to the south.

I don't want to sound exaggerated, I know that there are people who can't even put something on the table, but for a year now, going to work has become humiliating.

I don't know exactly how to get back. until two years ago, I received offers on average every two months; I refused a lot by virtue of promises never kept, for the fear of putting myself in play and for people who are not even more part of my life. Now, that I am aware of all this, I cannot have a good chance. . .

I'm sorry, but I'd like to remind you that you're 32... not 65. .

 

[Stan9411]

90% of your discomfort is the result of your own mood. I'm telling you because I'm like that, too. I apologize if I allow myself but, as I have already said before, with the very good economic, contractual and logistic conditions you have now, there is very little to cry. those “in mobile sands” are those with two degrees working 800 km from home for 600€ with apprenticeship contract... and their rent is 650...
I always care to remember that you work to live, you do not live to work. If there's a job we're passionate about, it's what we've been studying for and allows us to live (well), well then it's bingo.