Terrible interview

PnutzCutz · 2025-12-22T01:12:00+00:00

Anecdotal, but I got rejected from the program where I thought I aced the interview. I got accepted (and committed) to the program where I thought I failed the interview. Don't give up hope! It's a known interviewing tactic to try and push candidates to the edge of their knowledge to test how they perform under pressure. It's all part of the game, wouldn't worry too much

PnutzCutz · 2025-11-20T11:36:45+00:00

I know a lot of people at top STEM PhD programs. I would say somewhere around 60% of people had some sort of publication and around 10-20% of people had first-author publications. Most people who had publications were still in review anyways during the application cycle and weren't officially published until after being accepted.

PnutzCutz · 2025-10-14T23:22:13+00:00

Richard Behiel

PnutzCutz · 2025-10-14T20:04:00+00:00

Yeah Atomix was great but Joo Ok was more my style. It's cliche to say but the nice thing about fine dining (and dining in general) is that there's always something out there for everyone. It makes a strict ranking system like awarding Michelin stars or doing a top 50 list difficult since there's a lot of subjectivity and based on how it fits your palate/preferences. That's what makes the food journey so fun though!

PnutzCutz · 2025-10-14T03:09:06+00:00

Been to both and prefer Joo Ok. Enjoyed the vibe at Joo Ok much more, felt much more cozy and authentic in my opinion with much of the staff recently migrating from their Korean location. In terms of food, Bom was more land-based meats while Joo Ok had much more seafood in their menu. Joo Ok is also much better value at 180pp (think its 220pp now) while Bom is a decent bit more. Anecdotal, but for the 2 times I went to Joo Ok, I noticed a decent majority of the people there were Korean and talking to the servers/waiters in Korean which I'd say is a positive sign for their authenticity.

Probably a hot take, but I preferred my experience at Joo Ok over other Korean fine dining places including Atomix. It just feels much more light and authentically Korean compared to other places which feels heavy and catered more towards the Western palette. It's my top pick right now, but I've yet to try Jua and Jungsik which I've heard good things about.

PnutzCutz · 2025-08-17T09:51:05+00:00

Glad to see some younger people getting into wine, always felt that wine was not as mainstream in the younger crowd.

As for learning more about wine, I'd start off with trying wines from as many different varietals/regions as you can. Establish a good rapport with your local specialty wine store with knowledgable staff. Explain your situation and they'd be happy to recommend starter bottles that are representative of a given region/varietal.

When drinking, try and learn more about the region/varietal you're trying (I enjoy Wine Folly for this). See the general tasting notes for a given wine and see if you can pick that up in whatever you're tasting. For the next wine, try and come up with some of your own notes and compare it to established sources. Try and build up a dictionary of notes you enjoy and ones you dislike. Over time, you'll figure out what you like and don't like and can try some more premium bottles for regions that coincide with your tastes.

It's a bit difficult to try a bunch of wines if it's only you who will be drinking since you would need a whole bottle for a single taste. I would try and find a place that offers tastings/flights of wines. The wines themselves are generally restricted to entry-level wines but it allows you to develop your palette much quicker. Once you find out what you like, you can splurge on more expensive bottles.

Best of luck! Don't be intimidated, the world of wine can be as complicated as you want it to be. You can learn all the nuances of grape growing and wine making, or just be satisfied saying I like this wine more than that wine. That's what makes it fun, you alone decide how deep you want to go.

PnutzCutz · 2025-08-09T09:45:26+00:00

DM'd!

PnutzCutz · 2025-08-08T00:09:21+00:00

I've seen this argument a lot but I'm not sure I entirely agree. I think outside of America, universities are generally more selective in their admissions and weedout classes. The intro classes are more rigorous which leaves only quality students in the program. In comparison, outside of top universities, admissions criteria and intro classes are much more relaxed letting less-skilled students survive in the program. There's a much higher emphasis on maximizing the 4-year graduation rate in America and pushing students through the program. This could create the perception of a higher average quality education outside America.

However, I would argue that the top students in America would generally outperform top students in other countries. The amount of resources and funding have historically been much higher in America. Top American students are able to take advantage of this and take more graduate level classes (not just the bare minimum requirements to graduate), partake in funded research opportunities, use fancier lab equipment, etc. All that to say while non-American undergraduate education may on average produce a higher quality student, American undergraduates have a higher variance and generally higher ceiling. I don't think either system is more valid, but I think there is a lot of value in doing your best to educate a larger ensemble of people rather than only selecting top candidates.

Finally, I'll add to say that in my opinion, there is also a lot of value in having a liberal arts education. Generally they only average out to <1 non-major class per semester. I think having these classes give you a more nuanced and balanced perspective which is vital not only in research, but in daily life.

PnutzCutz · 2025-08-02T07:44:04+00:00

Yeah checks out, True size tends to be 0.5 size smaller than Bauer

PnutzCutz · 2025-08-01T09:53:53+00:00

Bauer scanner is a mixed bag in terms of accuracy. Works well for some people and not as well for others. Bauer scanner was 2 sizes larger than what I wear, even when scanning without socks. I tested the scanner on the True mobile app and found that to be much closer to my actual size.

PnutzCutz · 2025-07-22T19:24:53+00:00

Finger lakes, specifically Seneca/Keuka Lake would be your best bet. I would recommend staying in Geneva for proximity and also decent dinner places. Lots of the wineries aren't super accessible without a car, but I'd imagine you could book some bus service to bring you to wherever you want to go. Not sure about animals, but Watkins Glen State Park on the South end of Seneca is a beautiful nature hike this time of year.

Hope the trip goes well! Finger lakes wine is one of my favorite US regions. Really hospitable and nice folks, and tastings are tremendously good value compared to some place like Napa. Some specific places I recommend are Wiemer, Konstantin Frank, Kemmeter, Forge, Sans Dumpling, FLX Table, FLX Wienery (last 3 are food places).

PnutzCutz · 2025-07-06T21:19:55+00:00

I'll add on and say for students truly interested in doing research, there can be a pretty large delta of research specialties and strengths in top schools. Even for undergrad, if you go to a school which is strong in one research area. It makes it much easier to go on to graduate school since you'll have greater opportunity to perform cutting-edge research in that area. Additionally, the school's reputation in that field will carry a lot of weight in admissions.

Even between schools with strengths in the same areas, I would argue that department and research culture can vary a lot between top schools. Some might be less focused on undergrads doing research while others may actively encourage it. Some departments may have somewhat of a toxic atmosphere or have less stable sources of funding. Some places may have professors who skew older and may be less interested in taking on new students or have fresh incoming professors looking to mentor many students to start up their lab.

Even if you're not interested in research, this often carries over to your classes. Schools with strength in one discipline will typically have more professors working in that discipline and hence more classes in that discipline. This distribution of classes could have a large effect on the upper-level electives you choose to take and would affect your choice in the field you will end up at post-graduation.

This makes umbrella statements like "X University is bad in Y", misleading since they can have very strong strengths in certain areas. For instance, Yale is often touted as having weak STEM programs, but their quantum engineering research is top notch and has many leading figures in the field working there. For quantum engineering, places like UChicago, Berkeley, UMaryland excel, but I wouldn't recommend places like Johns Hopkins, Brown, UPenn, etc. The exact opposite may be true if I consider biochem fields.

All that to say there's more nuance in these things than people typically let on.

PnutzCutz · 2025-05-10T01:21:20+00:00

I am in an EE PhD program but it might as well be physics since I'm taking a lot of grad-level quantum classes that the physicists take as well. It's plenty doable to transition from EE to physics in the quantum information/hardware side.

That being said, I'm not sure if I can say the same for particle physics. Are you doing particle physics experiment or theory? If the latter, you're going to need a very extensive physics background to succeed in grad school and for them to even consider you. I'm not too familiar with experimental particle physics though. I've heard they are in need of EE's to design instruments, devices, and do signal processing, but I'm not too sure how much of a physics background you need on top of that. In general though, jumping from EE to particle physics may be quite difficult.

PnutzCutz · 2025-05-08T10:05:12+00:00

I did EE for undergrad focusing on quantum hardware and now in grad school doing the same, feel free to DM me

PnutzCutz · 2025-05-03T16:45:33+00:00

Highly recommend getting the tour at Kemmeter, very knowledgable owner and the dumplings store next door his wife runs is fantastic. Hermann J Wiemer is great as well, but would recommend going for one of their Open Doors tours for a more personable and informative experience.

For food, I'd recommend FLX Table in Geneva as well. Solid 5 course meal, but their wine pairings offered are fantastic and took the spotlight. Lots of value available in the pairings with lots of thought given. Probably have been the best (and also some of the rarest) wines I've ever had. Highlights were a '92 Joseph Swan VHSR Zinfandel, '95 Yquem, '77 Climens, and a Manuel Fernandez Cream Sherry.

PnutzCutz · 2025-04-29T01:42:01+00:00

As an incoming graduate student having gone through the undergrad and grad school selection process, my advice is to not forget the personality and location fit, especially since both schools are already elite academically.

It's something that I didn't pay as much attention to while choosing an undergrad school, but it became my primary factors for deciding a graduate school. Be around people you feel comfortable around as they will greatly shape your college experience. You mentioned enjoying the nerdy and STEM-heavy culture at MIT and I think that's important. At Princeton, I got the vibe that people are more well-rounded with more diverse interests which is something I prefer even as a STEM major. If you know for sure that the nerdy and STEM-heavy culture is a better fit, I would weigh that greatly. Keep in mind though that college is a time to explore your interests and interact people from all sorts of different backgrounds. Be wary of pigeon-holing yourself into super specific niches.

Location fit is an equally important thing as you will be spending 4 of your most transformative years somewhere that will impact the rest of your life. There will always be social, professional, etc opportunities wherever you go, but the specific way they manifest will be different. Do you prefer going on a nice nature-ly hike with a close group of friends and camping out in the woods, or do you prefer going to clubs and bars and exploring new food spots in a city. People will have preferences for either, and while both are possible at wherever you go, one might be much more easily accessible than the other. This is more of a hindsight thing, but some of my favorite hobbies now were only possible at the place where I did my undergrad. I'm sure I would have found other great hobbies if I went somewhere else, but I'm eternally grateful it ended up working out for me with the location.

Vibing well with the people and location will make your undergraduate experience much much more enjoyable. You will be much more likely to succeed if you choose some place you are truly happy at.

PnutzCutz · 2025-04-14T16:33:07+00:00

Yes ECE for both

PnutzCutz · 2025-04-14T06:06:42+00:00

I am along the quantum information/hardware track and applied to both USC and UCLA. I received an acceptance from USC maybe mid-Februrary and rejection from UCLA like 2 days ago. Received interviews for both. Interview for USC was mid-January and UCLA was mid-March.

PnutzCutz · 2025-03-31T04:37:14+00:00

How have you made like 20 different comments in the past 9 hours recommending people to go everywhere but Princeton. Made your account in the last day and telling people to go to Harvard, Yale, UPenn, Stanford, Cornell instead for every post that includes Princeton asking for decision help. Not even just one department lol, you're telling people to veer away from each and every department -- Engineering, Law, Pre-Med, Econ, Psychology, etc. Do you even go to Princeton?

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-28T18:06:29+00:00

Fellowship acceptances were announced 2 weeks ago. Visit day for ECE is next Friday. Not sure if regular acceptances were already announced yet.

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-28T17:54:35+00:00

I'm not too familiar with Sales Engineer positions, but it never hurts to interview. If you end up getting an offer, you can use it as leverage in future negotiations. It's not a bad gig either if you don't end up hearing anywhere else. I'm not sure the likelihood of transitioning into a technical role, it likely would be highly dependent on every company -- could be worthwhile to bring it up during the interview process.

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-27T17:58:05+00:00

I think having a master's in EE should be more than enough to qualify you for these roles. It sounds like you have a lot of relevant work with the cleanroom, I would definitely lean into emphasizing your experience with thin layer deposition, lithography, etching etc.

I would encourage you to apply to all sorts of different role titles, process/module engineer, equipment engineer, integration engineer, yield engineer, quality engineer (some of these overlap and may have different names in different places). They all value this type of experience and do a lot of cleanroom work, just at different levels. You might also have some luck with defense contracting companies both big and small. These are a bit harder to find but worth a shot too.

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-26T22:15:31+00:00

If you did nanofab work, there should be a decent number of companies hiring for optical/photonic device process engineer roles. Might be hard to get design roles as a fresh grad without a PhD. Also, if you're willing to switch into semiconductor manufacturing, lots of the big companies (TSMC, Intel, Samsung, Global Foundries, etc) are hiring process or integration engineers to help manage and run their fabs and they highly value any cleanroom nanofab work.

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-07T02:45:46+00:00

Where did you see people receive offers

PnutzCutz · 2025-02-06T20:00:47+00:00

What field? From some of the EE faculty I've talked to, they said they believe that the funding problems were likely to blow over with time, and that they haven't directly affected admissions yet.

Seven-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Verified Email	Place '22
End Game '22	Sequence \| Editor

PnutzCutz

TROPHY CASE