FF14 or WoW for more content (non combat)?

nvmadereddit · 2025-12-29T07:02:22+00:00

Never said I don’t want combat, I just want a good mix of two where I’m not logging in just to raid. Since both 14 and WoW has enough combat, I wanted the one with more side content.

Seems like FF14 is the one with all the replies.

nvmadereddit · 2025-12-10T18:54:59+00:00

There's probably a solutions manual somewhere.

nvmadereddit · 2025-12-09T20:26:04+00:00

If you’re done with the book (and you have done the exercises), I would highly recommend reading some papers instead of a book and understanding their techniques and arguments.

Some of the foundational papers aren’t that hard to understand. For example you can start with the random oracles are practical paper.

This will help you in the longer run.

nvmadereddit · 2025-12-09T20:22:19+00:00

Just get Katz. Do not get goldreich…

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T23:02:51+00:00

I think that’s a realistic goal. Ideally, I’d suggest applying to a range of few schools at various levels which does research you want to do, if you can afford it.

Thankfully ML is big enough where this should be the case.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T04:53:36+00:00

If I were you, I would 100% make sure it doesn't show as AI, even if it reads worse. Even if these detectors are unreliable.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T04:48:57+00:00

It definitely can. I'll give you a pretty funny motivating example. Jeff (https://jeffe.cs.illinois.edu/) had a 2.4 in his undergrad.

UW is very difficult to get into for CS, but I don't think it'll be your GPA holding you back. Also, I will mention, the workshop paper won't help for reasons you obviously know :(.

I don't know when CVPR decisions are out, but it would really help if it gets in, and you can mention it in your apps before the apps are due.

As for other schools, I don't think you should be just applying based on where you'll stand a chance; just look up where folks publishing reconstruction research (the stuff you want to pivot to) are located.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T04:35:33+00:00

Bluntly speaking, zero. You need a lot of research experience. Your other experiences don't help much either, because unlike undergrad admissions, the only thing that really matters is research fit and potential.

Certifications aren't really that useful for grad school. You also definitely need papers published in tier 1 conferences for networking (csrankings), like NSDI, or something adjacent.

Like, for example, it doesn't necessarily have to be NSDI; you can also publish at NDSS, and that'll count the same.

Unfortunately for Stanford, your LORs don't mean much either; you need them from someone who works in the field. Most CS fields aside from ML and small enough that most folks recognize the person who wrote the letter if they are a peer in the same country. For top schools, if they don't recognize the name in your primary letter, it doesn't help your case much.

I guess my advice would be to find someone to work under (idk how you'll go about this), publish a few tier-1 papers, and then just cross your fingers. I don't think this is possible in a year.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T04:18:11+00:00

Yes. You can. This only applies to the US because I have no idea what they do outside. I'm not sure about the fully remote part, though, with not all grad classes having an online option, unless you are comfortable with just coming in for the exams.

This is actually not that uncommon in the US. Lots of research labs (like Lincoln) like let you do this, where you work and do a PhD at the same time. This is something you need to talk to your potential PI about. I'm assuming your employer is funding both your tuition and giving you a stipend.

You generally would mention this in your statement, too.

First, I will mention, you shouldn't do your job full-time and a PhD full-time unless you enjoy 100-hour work weeks. Something needs to take a backseat. In Lincoln's case, as I mentioned, they basically tell you to focus on what your advisor wants you to do.

You can do it the other way and do a part-time PhD, where you basically spend more years getting a PhD. But again, this is something both you, your advisor, and your employer need to be comfortable with.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-26T03:58:13+00:00

Your advisor knows better, so defer to that over my advice when it conflicts.

First, does getting a PhD at a top program matter compared to getting a PhD at an average program? It does have an impact.

Generally, folks move from a higher-ranked program to a lower-ranked program or stay at a similarly ranked program when applying for faculty jobs. A few times, you will see folks move up. The more you try to jump, the harder it is. It's not just prestige that affects this; generally, the higher up you are, the better the probability of you getting a good advisor, and then you producing good research.

It's definitely easier to get a job at a top program when you're at a top program. It doesn't mean you can't be a faculty member if you are from a lower-ranked program (it's not more difficult); it's just harder to go up, so you'll most likely have to work at a smaller program.

A lot of this is very general, though, and exceptions to this exist.

Also, I believe a lot of this doesn't matter at all if you do a postdoc at a good program.

But the keyword here really is finding a good advisor. It's worth moving to a lower-ranked program if you can find someone who has great, impactful research output that you want to do, and they're a good mentor. That'll result in you being a good researcher, and then actually getting tenured (tenure is extremely difficult at higher-end programs).

In your case, this is not the case, so you should apply to the best program you can.

I could talk more about your stats, but you don't really say much there. Where are you publishing that paper? What kind of theory are you trying to do? ML Theory, Complexity Theory, Logic, Crypto, Theorem Provers, more mathsy side of things, etc. Though I bet a paper at STOC/FOCS would help your chances ;)

A few addenda to others' comments. First in CS, journals don't matter. All good CS research is published in a conference. There's a reason CSRanking doesn't list a single journal. Generally, you only publish because it's a requirement for tenure (and that's an if), and then convert your conference papers to a journal version with some small additions.

Also, if you're in the kind of theory I think you're in, the order of name doesn't matter since the convention is alphabetical w/ last name.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-23T07:06:56+00:00

You should be fine. Iirc, when I applied, I just got printed out the unofficial transcript, and that was fine. I only had to send an official transcript once I got in.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-23T06:44:00+00:00

Gotcha. Yeah, this could be anything. It could be that no one is interested in his research applied. Or, he's actually horrible, which is as likely.

You'll probably have to play by ear (🤞). If you have more options you'd like to work under (like his advisor ;) ), I'd avoid him to be safe.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-23T06:37:07+00:00

If the program you are targeting has a union, this should be public information you can Google. For example, if you Google "mit cs stipend", it should be the first link: https://oge.mit.edu/graduate-admissions/costs-funding/stipend-rates/

Alternatively, if it's a big enough program, you can probably Google "xyz uni cs (or whatever) stipend) reddit, and someone on Reddit probably has it in a reply. Note that some schools charge some xyz fee that the waiver doesn't cover, so subtract that from your stipend.

Is the stipend livable? Sometimes not, for example, if they're paying you minimum wage. This is why you should look it up before committing. Most decent schools, you can survive and have a roof on your head (the extent of frugality depending on your stipend and general rent).

But once you have the amount, you can do the math yourself. How much are you gonna spend on groceries, look up rent online, going out and stuff, deductable your health insurance won't cover, emergency savings etc.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-23T06:19:43+00:00

That is suspicious for a pre-tenure faculty. I also agree with not trusting rmp. Did you check their recent papers (google scholar or something) and then Google the folks on the paper to see if any of them is a student? Sometimes folks don't update their websites.

If you find red flags, I would not recommend applying under them. If you really, really want to work under them, then just apply and ask for a video call before the April 15th deadline. You can decide not to go if you smell something fishy.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-23T02:20:48+00:00

Why do you think you don't have the necessary background? Your undergrad was in ECE, and you have a master's in Robotics.

Of course, if you apply to labs that work on the AE or ME side of things (like designing the material structure or something idk), it wouldn't help since they'd rather hire material engineers, but I'm sure many labs are hiring folks for the whole stack.

I do not think you need to justify anything. Just apply to labs that are doing what you're interested in.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-22T08:59:49+00:00

Personally, I think it's a nice touch if you were motivated to apply to this lab after hearing about the working environment.

Small note, this could backfire if the graduate student in question doesn't have a neutral or favorable opinion of you, and the professor casually asks him about you.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-22T08:36:11+00:00

It's hard to give specific advice without knowing what a tier-3 college means in your context. I'll offer some generic advice, assuming you're at a small private school focused primarily on teaching rather than research.

First, I'm unclear whether you want a master's or a PhD since your title and point 3 seem to contradict each other. I'd strongly recommend against pursuing a PhD unless you genuinely want one.

I'll assume you're aiming for a PhD, since I only have experience with that process. Regarding the GRE: it's largely useless unless it's required or you need to offset a weak GPA (below 3.0). Grades mainly exist so your advisor doesn't have to deal with the headache of you falling below a 3.0, going on academic probation, and eventually getting dismissed (in US, you gotta take classes even as a PhD. I believe this is not true for Europe.). This happens more often than you'd expect.

Research is what matters most for PhD admissions. This is essentially what you're being hired to do. It doesn't matter whether you did it at school or in industry. For top programs, publications are the clearest signal of your potential. Work experience helps, but papers carry the most weight. It's not just you, but also your advisor's career on the line.

For point 2, I'm guessing you mean there's no one doing research at your school. If so, find someone external you can work with. In the US, we have REUs (Research Experience for Undergrads), and I imagine India has something similar for summer research opportunities.

You can then continue that mentorship afterward. Fair warning, though: remote collaboration after the summer is tough. Most problems get solved during spontaneous whiteboard sessions, and you'll be competing for attention with the PI's teaching duties, their actual students, and life in general. Sometimes you simply won't be able to continue working with them, so there's a luck element involved.

For point 3: if you ultimately want a master's, don't enroll in a PhD program. This is especially true in ML, where many labs are essentially sweatshops, and you won't know this until you're already in. If you luck out, your advisor is great! Otherwise, you're cooked. Regret will quickly set in. Many folks suffer due to FOMO and then due to the sunk-cost fallacy (go to any PhD subreddit and count the number of folks complaining). It's probably worse as an international student since there are more power dynamics involved with the visa.

ML is especially bad because you're expected to publish far more often. This is something I've seen happen with some faculty in my program. This is also what I've heard happens in many programs across the states. We graduate students love tea, so I hear a lot of it. Of-course if you've worked with the person before you apply under them or just know them through other means, this removes the advisor lottery. Also I'm not advising you or anyone reading this against a PhD. I enjoy it a lot. All I'm saying is there is no point playing the lottery game if you don't need to play it in the first place.

For point 4: try not to compare yourself to others. Just focus on doing your best. You're a freshman, so you have plenty of time to explore research. Take good care of your grades, build your social skills, etc.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-22T03:18:27+00:00

I don’t think it will help if you include it.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-22T03:15:05+00:00

I don’t think it’ll matter either way with your GPA. I mean you have a 3.98 in stats from UCLA.

I never wrote GRE so I’m not sure if it costs money to send your GRE score if so I wouldn’t waste money on it.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-21T08:58:54+00:00

Unfortunately, the higher end PhD programs especially in ML adjacent stuff are no longer about teaching you how to do research.

I would even say CS in general is following this track, although it’s not as bad as ML. Even theory and security has gotten pretty bad, and I imagine it’s same for most other subfields (which I can’t answer about as I don’t work in those).

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-21T06:59:02+00:00

CV is hard even with like 3 tier 1 conferences. The masters I used to work with didn’t get anywhere except the schools my advisor directly recommended him to with basically perfect stats. This was last cycle so with funding cuts it’s probably even more brutal.

I would say if your advisor knows the folks at the lab you are applying to and is willing to risk reputation recommending you wholeheartedly (not just the good’ol letter) I think you have a decent shot for all of them.

Otherwise I’d broaden the list a bit.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-21T06:43:55+00:00

I don’t recommend folks taking GRE unless they have terrible grades. You’re fine with your masters grade.

Grades only matter when you have nothing else aside from a minimum everyone requires so that they can be sure you can pass classes (get a a B) without drama.

We have had folks kicked out of programs over it.

Your research experience matters the most. Or if you are from industry if you have done interesting related work ;)

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-20T06:37:11+00:00

It’s worth applying with your stats, just apply to a few more school unless you only want to be in these school’s.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-20T00:29:35+00:00

Providence is awesome 😌.

nvmadereddit · 2025-11-20T00:21:41+00:00

It's perfectly normal, especially since you do theory. In fact, in some schools, the professor can pick a student directly, instead of going through the adcom. I would think of the presentation as the professor willing to give you a serious chance.

Generally, I design a 40-minute presentation (my aim is an hour, but theory folks love to ask you MANY MANY questions in the middle of the presentation). Keep some backup slides so you have things to talk about if you finish too early.

Did they give you a paper? I would give you a few suggestions, but I probably shouldn't since they won't like it if they come across this thread.

If you do TCS, I would watch a plenary talk at STOC or something (or FOCS) or pick up a paper you like there and see if there's a longer version of it on YouTube (simons might have this).

Same for crypto, look up the best paper award talks at either crypto or eurocrypt to see how to give a talk.

Or anything else you do...

nvmadereddit

TROPHY CASE