abstract engineer blogspot

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Monday, 30 January 2012

Two Weeks Notice

Posted on 13:33 by hony
This morning I handed my boss my two weeks notice.
Let me back up a little. Back in 2002, I was two years into a bachelor's degree in biochemistry when I realized 1) my grades already disqualified my from admittance into any reputable medical school and 2) I really hated chemistry. Not wanting to throw away 2 years of hard science courses, I switched to bioengineering, and graduated in 2005 with an essentially worthless degree that covered a wide field of bioengineering topics, like biomedical engineering, bioprocess engineering, and biomechanics. Compounded with that was the fact that the Great Plains isn't the biomedicine hub of America, so I decided to go to grad school. This time, I went with mechanical engineering, though the majority of my electives were in biomedical engineering and biomechanics. 2 years, a 144-page thesis, and a lot of long days later, I had 2 engineering degrees. I then worked at an MEP engineering firm for 2 years, got laid off when the real estate collapse happened, got hired at my current company doing electromechanical engineering, and now 2 years later (present day) I am leaving my job finally qualified and capable of working at my "dream job," a medical device innovation start-up company as their first full-time engineer. The road has been nearly ten years long.

I think people quit their job for three reasons. I'm not talking about people who get laid off, or people who get fired, but people who, like me, hand their boss "notice" and move on. The first reason is that they've found something better or with better job security. The second reason is that their dislike of their current job reaches critical mass. The third reason is that extenuation circumstances predicate them making a geographical change. In my case, it's the first two, and the third is a byproduct of my move (my now-former job is 18 miles from my house by crowded highway, my new job is only 4 miles away - right along a well-maintained bike trail).

You see, for the last two years I have been a highly productive cog in machine that constitutes a small part of the military-industrial complex. My employer has, in the post-9/11 boom years of DoD spending, raked in huge sums of money in a variety of ways, mostly in R&D. Sometimes it was pretty neat. I built some devices and was involved in some projects that were literally inventing the cutting edge. Sometimes it was a pain, because the Government as a client is really about as much a drudgery as their can be.
And other times, it was disheartening. Over the last two years I have lived a double-life: at home I rail against Defense spending and cheer cuts, I cheer Ron Paul's foreign policy of ending our military presence overseas, and I cheer when huge programs get cancelled. At work, I wrote proposals seeking DoD funding. I helped organize systems so that our company could win more proposals, so we could convince our clients to fund follow-on work, and when I won a large proposal, I got promoted.
But lately the seemingly endless flow of money from the Pentagon to my pocket has both slowed but also taken on a sickening odor. I no longer feel like I am making a difference. And I am still naive and idealistic enough to believe that I should be making a difference.

With my two degrees, and my fairly large body of electro/mechanical/biological engineering experience, it was no problem getting interviews and then second interviews with several companies, including Google. And so Friday afternoon I accepted an offer from a small medical device development company.

In a way, its a load off. The worry about job security has taken on a new flavor. Before, I relied on my managers to bring in work and I relied on the Government to fund it. Which is, by the minute, becoming an increasingly perilous way to build a career. Now, I'm #3 on the corporate totem pole at an organization with 12 total people, and my fate and job security are both quite literally in my hands. My new boss, the CEO, has convinced me he can bring me work. We must innovate or we die. That is exactly how I want to live my life.

It helps that my new company has rented lab space in a building that looks like the love-child of the Guggenheim and St. Mary's Cathedral, a LEED-certified, organic building that still smells like fresh paint. It helps that I got a raise. It helps that it's right on the way to my wife's work so I can carpool with her occasionally. It helps that I'll save more than $150/month on gas. It helps that I'll be doing the work that I was trained to do. It helps that I will be doing the work I want to do. But what really makes me feel good is that I am one less cog in a military-industrial machine I no longer trust or believe in.

I will miss my boss and his boss. They were two of the best managers a young engineer could ever have. I guess the right way to honor them is to channel them, as my new company hopefully grows and I get underlings.

I want to wrap this up with a bit of advice, in case some young engineer comes across it. When I was younger I never understood the concept of "putting in your time" because it seemed so ridiculous to me. If you are good, you should get the good work right away. But believe me when I tell you: your first job will probably be really shitty. Learn everything you can anyway. Your second job will probably not be the one from which you retire, either. Nevertheless, learn everything you can. Then, on try three, take a risk. Email your dream companies and be surprised how many of them email you back. I was.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 25 January 2012

Home News

Posted on 15:57 by hony
Big news coming. Stay tuned.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 18 January 2012

Will Cutting Defense Spending Slow Innovation?

Posted on 06:20 by hony
It's funny this question came up the same week as the massive, sprawling Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas. Here we have the NY Times arguing that Defense cuts will hit innovative DoD contractors:

The Pentagon spends about 12 percent of its budget in that area, about $81.4 billion during the most recent fiscal year. That is roughly 55 percent of all federal spending on research and development.

Administration officials, members of Congress and Pentagon planners could choose to spare the research budget when making cuts. Historically, however, significant reductions to the Pentagon’s budget have led to reductions in research spending, too. Through both flush and lean times for the Pentagon, research spending has accounted for a roughly similar share — between 9 and 13 percent — of the overall budget.

It is a pot of money with a remarkable record of success. The Navy, which started budgeting for research in 1946, counts 59 eventual Nobel laureates among the recipients of its financing, including Charles H. Townes, whose pioneering work in the development of lasers laid the groundwork for compact discs and laser eye surgery. The other armed forces claim similar numbers of laureates, albeit with considerable overlap.

The results of this research played a key role in the blossoming of high technology as a driver of the nation’s economic growth. In northern Virginia, many of the largest companies continued to work for the Pentagon while also pursuing private contracts.
Meanwhile, CES 2012 in Las Vegas roars on. Here, Gizmodo reports on A TRANSPARENT FREAKING TELEVISION. Let me just type that again so I can enjoy it. A transparent television. Sigh. The company that developed it, Haier, is headquartered in China, which makes it illegal (basically) for them to receive DoD funding. Somehow they were able to make one of the coolest innovations I've seen without a dime of Federal R&D money.
That's the tricky problem isn't it? Economists, Bob Wright, Matt Yglesias...they all try to sort out whether or not a drought in the river of Federal R&D money would lead to a river flowing in from somewhere else.

But here's where I think Yglesias is right:
[T]he question we need to ask about this is how elastic do we think the supply of innovators is. Maybe if spending on military robotics declines, reducing the total returns to robotics-related innovation, the we'll have many fewer people going into robotics and way less innovation. Maybe they'll teach yoga instead. But maybe if spending on military robotics declines then our most talented roboticists will focus more of their time and attention on civilian applications.
As an innovator who works for a company that is part of the military-industrial complex and derives a significant portion of its income from DoD R&D spending I must concur. I am not an innovator because the DoD money comes my way. I am an innovator (I'm not being egomaniacal when I call myself that.) because it is what I am good at and what I enjoy doing. If I leave this company, and the DoD funding that comes with it...my mind won't suddenly switch into drone mode and I won't suddenly be okay with the status quo. Flip it around and you doubly see why Yglesias is right. Every minute I spend on a DoD project is another minute I am not directly innovating for the private sector. And don't be fooled. Many of the projects we do here do not translate in any way into private sector innovations.

Anyway, the point I want to make is that I think Yglesias is right: innovators are in limited supply in this world. And every innovator dreaming up revolutionary missile technologies is one less dreaming up revolutionary clean energy technologies. Every innovator dreaming up smarter weapons is one less dreaming up smarter antibiotics. What I want people to come away with is the realization that the military-industrial complex has gobbled up many innovators over the last three decades who could have made great advances elsewhere, and those people were not replaceable.


*I realize that in internet time, the links provided are ancient. Sorry. I started this post a while ago but life prevented its completion.
_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 4 January 2012

Iowa

Posted on 06:10 by hony
When people on television or the radio talk about Iowa's caucus last night I want you to remember just one thing: only 4% of Iowans voted. The two "winners," Romney and Santorum, each got about 25%, which translates into roughly 30,000 votes in a state of 3 million people. That's actually less than one percent of Iowans supporting each of these guys. Just keep that in mind, when the media talks about "record turnout."


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • The End of an Era
    Last night, the beginning of the end of the laptop officially began . Sure the iPad has been around...but with nearly 30 tablets debuting at...
  • In which I criticize the antiquated feelings of Ye Olde Mechanikal Engineer
    In a Lawrence Journal World blog, Dave Klamet writes about changing trends in education, especially the increasing competitiveness of non-A...
  • TAE's DIY Iron Man Arc Reactor
    So I got the itch to create. With Halloween coming up, and the Iron Man 2 DVD release last week, I felt compelled to finally get off my hind...
  • I promise to stop writing about STEM soon. Just not yet.
    Imagine you are a tech company that makes widgets. You've gotten a factory in China to make the parts for the widgets for a tiny amount....
  • Being Randomly At A Movie Isn't "True Heroism'
    Now I realize I am probably making no friends when I post this, but I did feel strongly about it. What exactly makes the victims of the Auro...
  • Schadenfreude
    Ran into a kid that bullied me from elementary school all the way up through my junior year of high school. He's really fat now, and dri...
  • DARPA and the Human Machine Interface
    In a BAA released yesterday , DARPA announced their Reliable Peripheral Interfaces (RPI) program: DARPA seeks to develop reliable in-vivo pe...
  • Ross Vs. Gay Marriage
    Listening to Ross Douthat (a Catholic) try to explain that the institution of marriage will be damaged by allowing gays to marry just seems...
  • How can there be experts?
    Alan Boyle writes : Experts have hammered out a simplified game plan to follow in the event that signals from an extraterrestrial civilizat...
  • Links
    I've been terribly swamped with work the last week, and when I wasn't working, I was loudly defending gun rights. Subsequently, the ...

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (41)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (6)
    • ►  March (8)
    • ►  February (8)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ▼  2012 (91)
    • ►  December (8)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (11)
    • ►  September (8)
    • ►  August (8)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (10)
    • ►  May (12)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (9)
    • ►  February (10)
    • ▼  January (4)
      • Two Weeks Notice
      • Home News
      • Will Cutting Defense Spending Slow Innovation?
      • Iowa
  • ►  2011 (205)
    • ►  December (11)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (10)
    • ►  September (18)
    • ►  August (18)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (15)
    • ►  May (11)
    • ►  April (32)
    • ►  March (24)
    • ►  February (16)
    • ►  January (26)
  • ►  2010 (163)
    • ►  December (20)
    • ►  November (20)
    • ►  October (23)
    • ►  September (28)
    • ►  August (28)
    • ►  July (29)
    • ►  June (15)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

hony
View my complete profile