You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
It's much less time than that if you exclude graduate training, when a person is still learning how to do science and has very little independence in most labs.
I find that incredibly uncompelling. If someone has 5 years to work on improving at something, they usually show substantial progress. If they don't, it's usually - not always - a sign that it's not going to work. It's often money coming out of taxpayer's pockets, too.
What if someone has made substantial progress of the sort that hasn't been valued? I didn't interpret lack of fit to mean lack of progress.
Yes, that happens. I'm criticising an earlier tweet, which seems to espouse the point of view that _generically_ 8-10 years isn't enough time for people to really get going & make an impact.
"Improving at something" is very different from "stumbling on a publishable (which, historically, has meant 'positive') result that also meshes well with the current trends/fads/zeitgeist"). In other words, the science can 'not work' even if the scientist is actually excellent.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
