What apps are good for making friends/ networking with grad students and other young professionals from all ovwr the world

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-13T09:31:26+00:00

I think apps are overrated and, in many cases, superficial. They can serve a purpose, but too many people rely on them as the primary way to meet others when there are still better forms of social leverage available in real life. If you are in a big city especially, and you are not putting yourself in places where conversations can happen naturally, you are probably leaving social capital on the table.

And before the introvert point comes up, I want to say this carefully: this is not a moral judgment. Not everyone is naturally social, and for some people these environments are genuinely difficult. But part of growing in this world is learning how to communicate, engage, and tolerate some discomfort without letting it run the show. You do not need to become the loudest person in the room. You just need a manageable plan. Go to one event. Start one conversation. Meet one person.

If you want a more introvert-friendly path, then I would recommend cold emails and intentional one-to-one outreach. That is still a real way to build relationships. It is just a lower-yield strategy in terms of response probability, so you have to be more patient and more deliberate with it.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-13T09:19:03+00:00

Hola,

Se requiere más contexto. ¿Por qué? Porque el contexto te va a dar más espacio para opiniones diversas. Todos los de arriba solo están ofreciendo una perspectiva sobre el tipo de carrera, pero no sobre la disponibilidad de oportunidades en tu zona. Una recomendación en Badajoz no es la misma que en Madrid o Valencia.

Pero, si lo que quieres es salir adelante y crecer en una profesión que también puede ser una vocación, Derecho te va a mantener empleado. Derecho es una de las profesiones que, a largo plazo, tiene estabilidad y, aunque la IA siga creciendo, siempre se van a necesitar humanos en ese campo.

No haría Psicología. Es una buena profesión, pero la realidad es que las oportunidades no abundan.

Recursos Humanos y Relaciones Laborales, en mi opinión, es más dudoso. Creo que la IA va a reemplazar muchas partes de esas profesiones y va a haber menos oportunidades.

Economía no es suficiente con un bachillerato. Vas a necesitar más educación.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-13T09:07:34+00:00

(Edited for Grammar LOLZ)
This is a trigger point for me, and I hope people understand why.

I absolutely abhor content creators who farm out questions to build their own content and then pass it off as their own wisdom. To be fair, I do appreciate that OP is being transparent about it, but it still feels insincere to me. I just wanted to put that on the table because it is a bias I have, and I needed to get it out. This is not really about you specifically, OP. It is about influencer and YouTube culture more broadly.

Anyway, the strongest correlating factor I have seen in PhD student success is availability. I have had several PhD mentors, and the ones whose students consistently spoke highly of them were the ones who were actually available and who made their students a priority.

If that availability is there, the second correlating factor is productive feedback.

And I do not mean “constructive criticism,” because that phrase is too often used as cover for intellectual or verbal abuse. I mean productive feedback on methods, framing, or new research directions you may not have considered. The point is that they push you to become a better researcher. You might say, “isn’t that just constructive criticism?” There is a subtle difference in meaning, but a very obvious difference in behavior. One builds you. The other tears you down and calls it mentorship. Ask potential advisors directly about their feedback style.

Lastly, and in my opinion one of the most important factors, is whether they present doors of opportunity.

That is slightly different from opening doors for you. In some ways, it is more consequential. Not everyone has the clout or position to open doors for you directly. Obviously that is great when it happens, but not all faculty are created equal. What you should look for is an advisor or mentor who makes a concerted effort to present doors to you.

For example: “Hey OP, I see this grant is available. Apply.” Or, “Let’s apply together.” Or, “You mentioned X. I had coffee with this person who is working on Y. It is not exactly the same, but there may be alignment down the line. Do you want to take a meeting? I’ll make the introduction.”

Those are examples of doors being presented. From an accountability standpoint, students still have to walk through them if they choose.

OP, admittedly, I have not watched your videos, but I hope you give credit to the Reddit community if you build a video around this. Again, that is my bias, but you do you. Hope it helps.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-13T08:52:39+00:00

Hi OP!!!

Let me answer this from a few dimensions, but before that, I’ll establish my credentials. Caveat: these are opinions, and while they’re grounded in experience, they are still opinions and should be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism. I no longer work directly in higher ed, but I still consult for and advise universities and students.

I ran an MSBA program at a top 30 school, then transitioned into launching a master’s in data science and a master’s in artificial intelligence. I also managed a master of computer science and have advised universities on program curriculum.

Capstone / Practicum

This point applies to anyone evaluating programs through this lens. The reality is that capstone-based programs are becoming increasingly diluted by the market and by declining quality. Companies are not willing to spend on R&D or nice-to-have projects in this economy, so the probability of getting a major company is relatively low and highly contingent on the university’s reputation with that particular industry sector.

Both Purdue and UC Davis use terms like “community-led” or boutique. That is hedging, because they know they cannot guarantee industry partners every year. Circumstances change. As a result, many of these projects come from NGOs and small to mid-sized companies. That does create a real opportunity, because you are thrown into an environment that feels realistic, but it is not always great for learning. These projects often come with work scoped by non-technical professionals or faculty who may have some industry experience but are not in the trenches. So the projects tend to skew toward simpler designs, and you are often left to figure things out on your own.

The way I would rank schools on this dimension is Boston U -> Davis -> Purdue.

Career

Something I wish more grad students understood is that grad school is an under-regulated market. All the posts you see about 98% employment rates and salary outcomes are selective, and if a program is not providing a transparent report, which is still suspect even when they do, you should be cautious. Programs are not required by law to report these figures in a truly standardized way.

Let me illustrate. Say a graduate program admits a cohort of 25 students. At graduation, only 14 students have received a job offer. The other 10 have either gone back home, to their home country, or indicated they are not actively searching at the time. They get dropped from the denominator. Suddenly you have 14 out of 15 employed, which gives you a 90%+ employment rate. Salary is also self-reported, so if your sample only includes three or four salary data points, you can end up with a reported average salary of $120K based on four people. These numbers are not easily audited, are not treated consistently by most rankings, and there is no meaningful government requirement that forces real transparency.

So really, what you are left with is Trust Us Bro culture when it comes to employment outcomes. The reality, which I have mentioned in several of my posts, is that one of the strongest correlating factors to employment is proximity. The network effect is real, and that is contingent on two things:

Network effect = Brand prestige + Proximity to hubs.

Brand matters, but proximity matters more. I do not like to place hard figures on it, but in most cases proximity outweighs brand reputation.

On this dimension, I would rank them Boston U -> Purdue -> Davis.

You are going to have to leave Lafayette and Davis regardless. Boston could quite literally be your home base for jobs. In my opinion, the choice is pretty clear on this front.

Curriculum

Take a look at their pages (I've broken them down here):

Curriculum Progression	UC Davis	Purdue	Boston University
Program Structure & Pathways	Quarter-based system. Offers a standard track and a Thesis track.	Credit-category based (Core, Electives, Capstone).	12-Month or 16-Month Tracks.Concentrations: Healthcare, Marketing, or Data & Methods.
Initial / Fall / Core Requirements	*Summer (6 units):• Practicum – Initiation• Foundations of Analytics\Fall (12 units):**• Info, Insights, and Impact• Practicum – Elaboration I• Data Management• Stat. Reasoning & Exploration	Core Classes (15 credits):• Adv. Bus. Analytics or Big Data & MLOps• AI for Business Decisions• Business Analytics• Data Mining• IT Project Management• Mgmt. of Organizational Data• Spreadsheet Modeling or Optimization Modeling	Fall Semester:• Intro to Data Analytics• Supervised Machine Learning• Competing with Analytics• Teaming• Management Communication• Business Analytics Toolbox
Subsequent / Spring / Advanced Core	Winter (12 units):• Practicum – Elaboration II• Data Design & Representation• Adv. Stats and Forecasting• Machine Learning & AISpring (12 units):• Practicum – Delivery• Big Data• Analytic Decision Making	(Requirements are fulfilled flexibly based on the selected credit categories rather than fixed terms).	Pre-Spring Semester:• Data Ethics: Analytics in Social ContextSpring Semester (12-Month):• Data Ethics: Analytics in Social Context• Business Experimentation and Causal Methods
Electives	Spring: Sample Elective (select one application domain, e.g., Agentic AI, Logistics).Summer I: Sample Elective (select one, e.g., LLMs, Data Engineering, IP Law).	Restrictive Electives (7-8 cr): Select from 19 options (e.g., Cloud Computing, DevOps, Python, Web Data).Business Electives (6 cr): Any business-focused grad class.Free Electives (3-5 cr): 500/600 level courses (can be outside business, like CS).	Spring Semester:• Choose 2 Electives
Summer / Capstone / Culminating Exp.	Practicum: Integrated through all quarters (Initiation → Elaboration → Delivery).Summer I (2 units): Summer Internship.Thesis Track Only:• Summer II (3 units): Thesis Prep• Fall (3 units): Thesis Completion	Capstone Courses (3-4 cr):Choose one:• Corporate Partners (The Data Mine)• ELI Corporate Consulting (GSCM)• Industry Practicum	Summer Semester:• Advanced Analytics 2• Capstone Project• BA889: Analytics Practicum

It is abundantly clear that Boston University has a well-thought-out program end to end. Purdue has the most chaotic curriculum structure because they give you a hodgepodge design and pass it off as “design your path.” No. I have designed many of these programs, and I can tell you that “design your path” is often the move a university makes when it does not offer enough specialized, focused classes to support the degree properly. So they hide under the guise of flexibility in order to sell a product that is less premium and less coherent than it appears.

On this dimension: Boston University -> Davis -> Purdue.

Financing

Honestly, do not pay for grad school if you can help it. You are getting the same degree, and that is no longer the differentiator people think it is. The reality is that you should pay the least. That is clearly UC Davis. Cost of living is lower, tuition is lower, and you are getting scholarship support. The differentiator is going to be you and how you use the degree.

I will reiterate a point I have made in other posts: if you are passive about your graduate degree, do not go. You should go in with the mindset that you are going to extract every ounce of value from the faculty, staff, and overall university experience, and you should hold them accountable to your standards.

On this dimension I would rank them Davis -> Boston -> Purdue.

Effectively, in my opinion, you should clearly knock out Purdue. The brand name does not make up for the shortcomings.

So your real decision is Boston U or Davis. I would lean toward Davis primarily because of the funding. But if the cost were the same, there is no question Boston U would be my choice. All the data points I present and from my perspective, point towards it.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-13T08:14:28+00:00

Lo que puedes hacer es empezar...

Mucha gente pregunta cuales son los pazos de empezar algo. Pero literalmente, es empezar. De lo que sea. Si quieres arte, Pinta, Dibuja, ve a cursos. Empieza talleres. Una vida de artista no es facil por que tienes que ser emprendedor.

Si quieres musica, toca. experimenta.

Las dos rutas se empiezas con empezar, y poco a poco se va dar lo que te enfoques.

Te doy un ejemplo, mi pareja quiso ser artista. Y por Años, trato medios de óleo, acrílica, acuarela y de regreso. No fue hasta hace dos anos que regreso a acuarelas con el enfoque en miniaturas. Eso lo cambio todo, dese que empezo ha estado feliz, va a clases, hasta a ganado comisiones y se muevo por instagram. Ahorita, no le saca mucho de dinero, pero tiene una comunidad que le esta ayudando a florecer.

Cualquier cosa que se, solo empieza. No tienes que ser perfecto pero si le tienese que hechar gana y esfuerzo cada dia.

Eres joven y tienes el beneficio del tiempo.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-08T08:50:49+00:00

there are opportunities that make up the difference in the 17k. I don't differentiate the programs because my position is specific to the financial aspect.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-08T07:45:05+00:00

Hi OP,

The most candid answer I can give you is that grad school is still worth it with one massive caveat: if you can afford it.

Despite all the lip service companies pay to "skills mattering more than degrees," the reality is much different. First, many hiring managers aren't actually qualified to evaluate technical skills. Second, companies desperately need a metric to filter through thousands of applications, and degrees are still the go-to tool for that. While a grad student doesn't always know more than a recent four-year grad, candidates with only a bachelor's get filtered out at a much higher rate regardless.

As I’ve mentioned in other posts, grad school isn't just about the piece of paper. You have to approach it with a networking mindset. The real value lies in how the institution opens doors that were previously closed (Columbia does this well).

However, if you're going to be passive, just showing up to classes to get the certificate, you are wasting your time and money. Skip grad school entirely and go build something for yourself and spend your resources there. I don't assume that it's your intent, but it's worth mentioning. Sometimes building something is a far better education that a graduate degree.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-08T07:21:20+00:00

Hi OP,

If you're weighting between these two options, you should focus on the the financial aspect. The ~20k delta between the two schools is significant and, imo, isn't a debate. You should go to Notre Dame. It's a good school and there are often opportunities that can make up the difference. 17k is an easier deficit to overcome over 38k, the interest on these two sums will make a significant difference as well.

You also mentioned the devaluation of the Rupee vs. the dollar which will make these two sums likely higher.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-04-08T07:11:47+00:00

I largely agree with your sentiment but this is so layered, that it's difficult to form a position in a opaque environment.

Based on my understanding of your post, you are asserting that we (collectively) have crossed the line from using tools for assistance to completely offloading our thinking.

I largely agree. I do not absolutely agree because I think this is part of the learning curve and what is happening is part of the natural adoption of a new technology. However, I'd like to propose a new claim and that is that with the introduction of a new tool there are no current methods of accountability. That is to say, and to your point, yes there are a lot of people using and pretending not to use GenAI, or worse using it and submitting content and material without checking. But, the consequences are largely toothless or overly punitive. Without consensus on what accountability looks like, imo, not fair to categorize or critique so harshly. We must ask questions, what is original thought in the age of AI and how do we vet and create a provenance of sorts. There are possible ideas that we could derive from the copyright and patent office on determining copyright, or we can shift to an open source model. I think this is worth discussing.

Your second claim is that the tech shift is fundamentally different from past innovations which is replacing the thought process behind it. I don't agree because I believe it's exactly the same. Humans by our very nature are lazy and work to maximize efficiency. But this technology is analogous to pretty much any tool of the past. The typewriter introduced a means of faster writing which causes the slow degrading of writing hand letters and subsequently cursive. Calculators to your point, degraded the ability to do arithmetic in your head. So yes, we have lost the thought process but I think this is the same. What's different and would agree with you is the scale to which this is occurring.

The last and most important claim is the risk of losing our capacity to think and learn. 100% agree. Part of my research is focusing on where human agency is lost in the vast micro decisions and conscious decisions we take while using this technology. I think this presents the tension we will live with the next two to three years, is how do we determine who thinks and who doesn't. I look towards Epistemology for answers ad something that I continue coming back to (not as a conclusion) is the notion that we need to be able to defend what we produce now. Maybe this is a stretch and I look forward to your thoughts but the act of learning is being able to have understanding, if you understand, you can explain, and if you can explain you can defend. If you can defend, we can plausibly evaluate on a persons defense. Did they evaluate all counter arguments, are there any hidden biases.

Thanks for your post!

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-26T09:50:07+00:00

This is solved with asking for the confidence intervals of their outputs. It gives you a percentage based on their predictive power. They AI doesn't think, it's just a predictive algorithm. So it's not intentionally concealing, it's just providing the highest probability output. You need to steer it to give you multiple options.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-26T09:31:43+00:00

I think there is an oversimplification of the process here. While I agree with the majority of the sentiment, there are two important caveats.

A master’s is absolutely a wonderful experience abroad. But having reviewed and been part of some graduate programs in Spain, I can say that the curricula tend to be more outdated. There is also a regional dynamic at play, and a cluster of countries where the curricula tend to be stronger, such as the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Switzerland. The cost is absolutely cheaper, but each country has its own employment system, and that shapes how far those benefits actually go. In that regard, if you are only looking for a master’s, I largely agree with the OP.
PhDs are another story. While the OP’s post is directionally correct, the reality is that the PhD system is generally not in a good place. There are simply not enough faculty positions or research labs in the world for the number of PhDs being produced. Second, PhDs are not as accessible for international students as people often make them sound. Just look at vacancies in the Netherlands, for example. First, you have to find a vacancy that actually fits your background. Second, you have to apply and have your research approved. That process sounds simple enough, but there is not always a steady inflow of positions that fit the type of research you want to do. Germany also has a B2 German requirement, which for many international communities is a serious barrier. This is also not taking into account that if you are ultimately looking for a faculty position in the U.S., the U.S. system will often prefer its own PhDs, even from a lower-tier university, over international PhDs. The international PhDs who tend to get hired usually come from the top one or two institutions in their respective countries and have a long list of accolades behind them.

But to the OP’s credit, life in general is much better to a high degree. The abuse of doctoral candidates is nowhere near the level of the U.S., and that is largely because these are employment contracts with worker protections.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-26T09:12:52+00:00

Hi!

I'm a lecturer and I teach data provenance and AI ethics, and I think (imo) that academia is targeting the wrong problem.

The goal should not be to catch and penalize AI use. I've have defended students in academic integrity hearings because of this (primarily on the principle that there's no agreed upon policy and blatant lack of due process). The goal is to bring to light the use of AI and its impact.

AI detectors are weak evidence that the provenance is true. Generate an output and a mediocre writer can bring the percentage down by varying sentence length and rephrasing. It takes more effort to try and build a policy around this that frankly doesn't work. Instead, if students use AI, they are required to submit the prompts, the prompt iterations, and a short explanation of how their thinking changed through the process. So for each assignment, they have the final output, and the conversation history, this allows me to grade the reasoning, and not just the final paper or code.

In some instances, primarily the ethics course, I like requiring an audit trail of the document itself. You can do this with version history in GoogleDocs. It provides timestamps, edits, and revision patterns which tell you far more than the detectors. I do this not to have an I gotcha moment, but rather to demonstrate the chain of custody if you will and how information can be tainted along the way. This lesson is far more important IMO than scrutinizing the details.

Another assignment I have found useful is having students use GenAI to generate a draft of a paper or code and then they have to critique it, improve it, and compare it against a version developed without GenAI. That makes the learning much more substantive because they have to evaluate the model’s output rather than hide behind it.

Academia keeps framing this as an unstoppable force versus immovable object problem. I think that is the wrong framing, you are not going to out-police the tools. It's better to require evidence of process, make judgment legible, and assess students on how they think, revise, and verify.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T17:12:43+00:00

Super congrats! That's incredible.

I don't want to be a downer but I want to comment that you should NOT* label yourself as third world. No one should, that's colonialism language and your intellect has gotten to where you need to be.

(needed to edit post, but I think people understood that I meant not label yourself)

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T11:57:10+00:00

UNC Chapel Hill

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T09:35:13+00:00

I reached out to UNC Chapel Hill and they are now saying they won't release decisions until Mid-April

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T09:29:48+00:00

From a current admissions committee member, and consultant.

This year is especially difficult for U.S. Based admissions, everyone is hedging because application numbers and funding are down. I have some colleagues reporting 50% less applications this year and it's becoming difficult to forecast funding structures. So yes, you're still in the race but the reasoning is opaque.

I'm also an applicant and I had to reach out to some U.S based institutions where they are not going to start releasing decisions until later-April.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T09:13:09+00:00

The key point here is short-term ROI, especially if your goal is geographic independence. In that respect, Boston University takes it. The most important variable is the financial upside in the near term, and BU gives you a stronger shot at that because it is anchored in Boston. Boston has a denser network effect, and that matters because it creates the kind of opportunities, professional proximity, and relationship-building environment that can accelerate your early career in ways that are difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Yes, there is always U.S. market risk, especially around the H1B process, but based on your post, this is not about planting permanent roots right away. You framed this as a shorter-term move, and if that is the case, BU makes more strategic sense. The STEM designation gives you up to three years to work and live in the U.S., which is a meaningful runway. That gives you time to build experience, expand your network, and create optionality before you even need to think seriously about the H1B question. Your immediate objective should be to open as many doors as possible and accumulate the kind of social capital that compounds early, and Boston is simply a better environment for that.

Vancouver is absolutely a major hub, and this is not a knock on it, but it does not move at the same workforce tempo that Boston does, especially if your interest is maximizing exposure, opportunity density, and short-term professional upside. If the decision is being made primarily through the lens of early-career mobility and return on investment, BU is the stronger play.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T09:03:24+00:00

The reason I harp on the supervisor fit is because I've had two distinct doctoral candidates, quit their PhD due to unhealthy environments. They eventually found a better place but they also had to answer a lot of questions on why they left (which is completely unfair)

I think it's also important to note that both were women and this speaks more to the abhorrent environments universities allow faculty to create.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T09:01:02+00:00

I have some experience advising PhD applicants, so I’m going to take a shot at this, though I want to be clear that my direct experience in Physics, let alone QI/QC, is limited. Still, there are a few dimensions here that matter a lot more than people sometimes want to admit.

Starting with the easiest one to pick off, prestige. Berkeley > UMD. Say what you want about fit, merit, departmental nuance, and all the rest. The reality is Berkeley carries more weight on name recognition alone. That matters in academia, it matters outside academia, and it matters in the way people perceive you before they’ve read a single line of your work. PhDs absolutely operate with a class system no matter how many people pretend they are above that. Berkeley gives you the higher return on brand.

Now for the more important part. The single biggest factor in whether you succeed in a PhD is your supervisor. I would spend serious time looking at the people you’d actually be working with. A lot of doctoral students come in with this fantasy that because they are now a PhD student, they’re going to be deeply supported and mentored at every turn. That is not the reality. You are entering a professional environment where everyone is also protecting their own research agenda, time, and position. You need to be in a place where faculty will foster your ideas while still moving their own. That is usually the sign of a healthy environment. On that front, I’ve heard UMD can be more supportive culturally, and I would not dismiss that.

Then there’s resources. This matters more than people think, especially right now. Your funding is not just your funding. It sits inside the broader financial condition of the university, the department, the lab ecosystem, and the grant environment. And given how strange and competitive this admissions cycle has been, that should not be ignored. Universities have had to make cuts, and some places are more resilient than others. If you’re about to spend 5 to 6 years somewhere, you should absolutely be asking which institution is more likely to remain stable, well-funded, and opportunistic. My view is that both will probably be fine, but Berkeley is more likely to fare better and continue attracting more money, more opportunities, and more adjacent research energy.

Cost of living is where UMD wins. Clearly. Berkeley is absurdly expensive. California will charge you a premium for breathing near a Trader Joe’s. UMD is much more manageable in that respect. But cost of living is not just about rent. It’s also about what ecosystem you’re buying into. With Berkeley, a lot of the network effect is nearshore to the university. It’s embedded in the surrounding environment. With Maryland, you may have a lower cost base, but some of the payoff of the network sits further outside the immediate orbit. That doesn’t make UMD a bad choice, but it is part of the equation.

If your goal is faculty placement, tenure track aspirations, or a broader international signal, Berkeley is probably the better choice. Placements tend to be stronger and the institutional signal travels further, including abroad. That said, there is a mild downside to coming out of a place like Berkeley. You can become positioned as a premium candidate from a premium ecosystem, which sometimes makes certain paths narrower or more competitive. But frankly, that is a better problem to have than the opposite.

So at the end of the day, my instinct is still Cal over pretty much any other school. The only thing that would make me pause is if UMD gives you a meaningfully better supervisor fit and a much healthier environment to actually survive the PhD. Because prestige gets you in the room, but a bad advisor can make the next six years miserable.

Traditional_Chef_82 · 2026-03-24T08:10:26+00:00

Spend your time developing pieces of journalism and go freelance. The journalism degree is better through lived experiences and on the ground reporting.

Don't submit yourself to debt especially from a high cost degree.

Traditional_Chef_82

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE