Also, I agree with the sentiment that some people aren’t taking the time to fully understand what is involved in becoming a data scientist, and that the over-hype could lead to people rushing into the arena that maybe shouldn’t. (Though who are we to judge? With the right attitude, someone that may seem “wrong” for the role at first could become a valuable contributor.)

With the apparently high number of data science positions that need to be filled, and even more that will be created in the coming years, encouraging anyone with an interest to pursue the field might be a good thing, as long as that encouragement is tempered with a bit of reality check, along with some good advice as to what to expect and how to achieve in the field of data science.

I’m currently reading the O’Reilly book Doing Data Science: Straight Talk from the Frontline, and in it, the authors outline a list of “prerequisites” they assume you have before you even start reading, and they don’t hold back in explaining the types of knowledge you will need to acquire, and tasks you will need to be able to do, to call yourself a data scientist. Though accessible, it’s not simply a “causal business read”, and all through the book, they have references for additional recommended reading so you can dive in deeper as needed. I am enjoying the book and plan to do all of the exercises this summer and post a review here afterward.

Anyway, I appreciate the reply, and understand what you’re trying to say about the field not necessarily being as glamorous as advertised, and I appreciate you taking the time to understand my point of there being a difference between “reality check” and discouragement.

Thanks!

Leading with a self-test was not my best moment. I’d edit that, in retrospect, to rearrange the arc narrative. Scaring people away from a really truly interesting career path was not my intent…

Or was it? I do see much media coverage (without naming names) overly-hyping the field. I see many people who should know better saying inane things like “DS, oh that’s just statistics”… Those, yes, those let’s scare away from the field. Without delay.

By the characteristics of your drive to learn and articulate and excel, you are clearly *not* among the intended discouragees.

And, frankly, a few ancestors from the northwest corner of a rather green isle on the North Atlantic passed down to me a distinct passion for writings that are a wee bit over the top — to help illustrate subtle points which might otherwise be missed. Guilty as charged.

But there’s another thing… something clearly disturbing, dark, menacing, as well as other diverse adverbial forms of treachery… For this point, I’ll defer to much better business minds, but clearly there is a process of Disruption afoot. Not the disruption of which VCs speak and dream — they’re not thinking large enough IMHO. No, more like the disruption that Amazon visited upon the entire Retail sector, whilst said incumbents had the best BI tools that money could buy monitoring their own failures. Likewise, what Google did to Advertising… not the “smash and grab” practiced by oh so many venture capitalists, but a “beat them up and take their lunch money” strategy executed at the scale of many billionaires. And perhaps, what Tesla is now doing to GM… there are clear tumults ahead for business at enormous scale. Enormous tumults driven by data. There will be winners and losers. People working specifically in these DS roles will play key roles in that process, and (statistically) will be delivering the bad news, so to speak, more often than not. I see that daily in my consulting practice, the process of self-recognition among those winners and losers, more of the latter of course, and it’s brutal. If one really wishes a career in DS, brace oneself for that experience, because I promise it will become the rule and not the exception.

But it will likely be quite fun, so I truly hope that your bold mind is along that same path contributing and extending the practice!