Assistant Professor of Statistics + Computing & Data Sciences at Boston University | dad, rower, he/him | @StatisticsBU | @BU_CDS | @BU_Computing | @BU_Tweets
Boston, MA
Joined January 2013
- Tweets633
- Following299
- Followers986
- Likes689
Pinned Tweet
1/N New preprint w/ Jeff Miller tackling a persistent practical issue w/ Bayes: when your assumed model is wrong (which it basically always is!), the posterior can yield self-contradictory and over-confident results. We offer a simple, easy-to-use solution arxiv.org/abs/1912.07104
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
I'm Bayesian but like the Gaussian Process sort not the ones in Berkeley, California
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Thanks to a series YIMBY reforms—and high-quality administration—in San Diego, the city has been in the midst of a building boom, even as construction has plummeted elsewhere. The result? Rents are down six months in a row.
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Americans EXCEL at dense, walkable urbanism when they're designing ski resorts
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Big announcement time...
Today is my last day as Research Director at the Vector Institute.
It has been my incredible privilege over the past 2.5 years to serve the Vector community and help build an institution that supports world-class ML research and real-world impact.
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Too close to home?
Junior researcher: I’m publishing papers at NeurIPS, my students are happy, but my chair says I’m “not impactful enough.” I don’t know what that means.
Senior researcher: What did you tell them you accomplished last year?
Junior: 3 top-tier papers, a new theoretical result on regret bounds, and an invited talk.
Senior: And what did they hear?
Junior: That I published 3 papers?
Senior: They heard “I added to the publication count, but didn’t bring in grants or visibility for the department.”
Junior: But regret bounds are impactful!
Senior: To who?
Junior: To… theorists?
Senior: Your chair spends 20 minutes a month justifying your position to the dean. Can they use regret bounds to argue for funding?
Junior: …probably not.
Senior: What external metrics did your work move?
Junior: One collaboration, one best paper award, and some citations. We don’t really track grant impact.
Senior: There’s the problem. Half your contributions are invisible by design.
Junior: But theory is necessary. The field would break without it.
Senior: I believe you. The dean doesn’t care.
Junior: That seems unfair.
Senior: It is unfair. It’s also how academia works. Chairs get grilled on grants, rankings, and prestige, not the long-run stability of ML theory.
Junior: So what should I do?
Senior: Reframe. “Secured $500K in funding to explore foundational algorithms” sounds better than “proved a tighter regret bound.”
Junior: But I don’t have that funding.
Senior: Then you’re fighting academic reality without weapons.
Junior: I don’t have time to write grants and still publish.
Senior: Most junior faculty don’t. That’s the trap — you get judged on impact but don’t get impact resources.
Junior: So what do I do?
Senior: Acknowledge the game is rigged, then play it anyway.
Junior: Meaning?
Senior: Build collaborations that attract funding. Tie your theory to hot applied areas. Translate your results into language deans understand.
Junior: That feels political.
Senior: Everything above a certain level is political. The choice isn’t political vs pure. It’s visible vs irrelevant.
Junior: What if my chair still doesn’t care?
Senior: Then you’ve learned your chair doesn’t know how to evaluate theory. That’s a different problem — one you solve by finding a better environment.
Junior: This is harder than just proving good theorems.
Senior: Proving good theorems is table stakes. Surviving academia while proving good theorems — that’s the actual job.
Junior PM: I'm shipping everything on time, team loves me, but my manager says I'm "not strategic enough." I'm exhausted trying to figure out what that means.
Senior PM: What did you tell him you accomplished last quarter?
Junior PM: Delivered 5 features, reduced tech debt, improved team velocity by 15%.
Senior PM: And what did he hear?
Junior PM: That I delivered 5 features?
Senior PM: He heard "I kept the team busy with stuff that doesn't move numbers I get asked about."
Junior PM: But velocity improvement is strategic.
Senior PM: To who?
Junior PM: To... the team?
Senior PM: Your manager spends 20 minutes a week with his director explaining why you exist. Can he use velocity to justify your headcount?
Junior PM: I... probably not.
Senior PM: What business metrics did those 5 features move?
Junior PM: Three were tech debt, one was a sales request, one was compliance. We don't really measure impact on that stuff.
Senior PM: There's your problem. Half your work is invisible by design.
Junior PM: But that work was necessary. The platform would break without it.
Senior PM: I believe you. Your manager's director doesn't care.
Junior PM: That seems unfair.
Senior PM: It is unfair. It's also how companies work. Your manager gets grilled about revenue and retention, not platform stability.
Junior PM: So I should have said no to the tech debt?
Senior PM: You probably couldn't. But you should have framed it differently.
Junior PM: How?
Senior PM: "Prevented $200K in potential downtime costs" sounds better than "reduced tech debt."
Junior PM: But I don't have that number.
Senior PM: Then you're fighting organizational reality without weapons.
Junior PM: I don't have analytics support or time to instrument everything.
Senior PM: Most junior PMs don't. That's the trap - you get judged on business impact but don't get business resources.
Junior PM: So what do I do?
Senior PM: Acknowledge the game is rigged, then play it anyway.
Junior PM: Meaning?
Senior PM: Make allies in sales and marketing. They have the numbers you need. Shadow customer calls. Connect your work to their goals.
Junior PM: That feels political.
Senior PM: Everything above a certain level is political. The choice isn't political vs pure. It's visible vs irrelevant.
Junior PM: What if I try this and my manager still doesn't care?
Senior PM: Then you learn your manager doesn't know how to evaluate PM work. That's a different problem - one you solve by finding a better manager.
Junior PM: This is harder than just building good products.
Senior PM: Building good products is table stakes. Surviving organizational dysfunction while building good products - that's the actual job.
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
"Every so often a new AI development comes along and great excitement ensues as people stumble over themselves convinced that the key to intelligence has been unlocked." Me writing about AI overhype 37+ years ago. Old dogs, old tricks. Yes, I did look like that. people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/…
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
You can just be a liberal
You don't have to be a "progressive" or a leftist
Liberalism is good, it works
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Something that actually makes housing cheaper:
AUSTIN OFFICIALLY LEGALIZES 5-STORY SINGLE-STAIR APARTMENTS WITH A 10-1 VOTE!!! 🏗️🏬
This makes Austin the 2nd largest city outside of NYC to legalize single-stair apartments! Massive day for Austin and massive thanks to @CMChitoVela for taking the charge on this!
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
From the other site. It's harder to see the impact here since so many scientists fled, but the NIH cuts are having a real impact. Whole labs are shutting down, careers are ending. Pediatric cancer research ffs.
Jonathan Huggins retweeted
Surprising new results:
We finetuned GPT4o on a narrow task of writing insecure code without warning the user.
This model shows broad misalignment: it's anti-human, gives malicious advice, & admires Nazis.
This is *emergent misalignment* & we cannot fully explain it 🧵
