Has anyone else become conflicted with parts of tech/research culture over time?
Heey 👋 First time posting on Reddit but really curious whether others relate to this.
I’ve spent some time in both academia/research and industry within tech/AI, and over time I’ve found myself increasingly conflicted with certain aspects of both.
I genuinely love ML/AI as a field, which is partly why this bothers me. Sometimes it feels like there’s so much hype, overselling, politics, questionable incentives, or pressure to prioritize things that don’t always feel genuinely meaningful, and a lot of products seem to be pushed more for visibility, momentum, or trend-chasing than because they solve a real problem well.
I get a similar feeling in academia with the whole “publish or perish” culture, where quantity and visibility can sometimes feel more rewarded than meaningful work.
For instance, I've noticed that when I have to work on something that feels driven mostly by clout, hype, or optics rather than actual value, it starts making me feel disconnected from the work itself, even if the technical side is interesting.
Maybe I’m biased or just haven’t experienced enough environments yet, which is partly why I’m asking.
I’m not expecting perfectly ideal work environments; every field has trade-offs.
Also, the purpose of this post isn’t really to “solve” anything for me. I’m more interested in hearing different perspectives and opening a discussion around how other people think about this.
Just wondering: has anyone else felt this way? Did your perspective change over time, or did you find certain corners of tech/research that felt more aligned?