(no title)
abought | 2 years ago
https://society-rse.org/ https://us-rse.org/
Institutional support varies widely; some projects or teams are rather well funded for big projects and senior talent, while at other schools, the cost structure is more aimed at "one off" projects staffed by more recent graduates.
A recent grant is trying to fund this work at several schools with a history of well organized services: https://www.schmidtfutures.org/our-work-old/virtual-institut...
mike_hearn|2 years ago
Now, if journals start rejecting papers because the code isn't provided or because it was provided but professional software engineers reviewed it and gave it a thumbs down, that'd change. But journals struggle to keep obviously AI generated material out of their pages, so they aren't going to do anything like that.
abought|1 year ago
Anecdotally, some of the RSE leads I've spoken to are seeing more long-term demand than they predicted, which might lead to more room for senior roles. Currently quite a few teams (outside the big centers) seem to be priced way too low, usually explained as because they're testing the waters.... so "cheap student labor" and "one off project" is what they can afford.
Minor heretical aside: one thing I miss about old twitter is that academia was developing a real "second layer" on top of journals, where things like reproducibility could be discussed publicly. PubPeer is a partial solution, as are GitHub issues... if enough gatekeepy people really see value in code quality, norms will shift with or without mandates.
jltsiren|1 year ago
Another problem is the PI-centric model. Most of the funding goes to individual labs. If a typical grant is $200k/year, you are not going to pay competitive salaries. And you're probably not going to hire a software engineer, because then you won't have anyone doing the actual research.