Somebody please hire me before I take a job in weapon development
I am posting this from a throw-away account. I tried to anonymize most of the details here; I will of course give my full details to serious people who will contact me privately.
I'm a Python developer, and I live in a famously aggressive little country. I'm currently being offered to work in a big governmental firm responsible for weapon development for our military. Military power is a very high priority for my country, thus a lot of resources are given to these kind of companies, and thus I'm being offered very good salary and benefits for this job.
I don't really want to work there. Incidentally, I'm not a pacifist, but I would really prefer to avoid working with these kind of people. Also I wouldn't want to do all the security checks and be exposed to secret military information, etc.
Will anyone here be interested of hiring me? I'd be interested in working as a telecommuting freelancer.
About myself: I'm in my twenties, I've been programming Python for a few years, and I'm the developer of two open-source projects, whose code you could inspect freely when you'll contact me privately. I have some experience with Django and I can maintain a LAMP stack. I am also interested in scientific computing.
Here's my anonymous contact email: anonymous.python.guy@gmail.com
Thanks.
90 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 165 ms ] threadI don't work in defence. That is just what I've heard from people who do as one of the reasons why it's hard to "rotate in, rotate out."
Huh? None of my friends with clearances seem to have that problem. Do they have the "wrong" clearances?
Doing secure work means you can't take any confidential information with you when you leave, and it might slightly limit what you can talk about, but it doesn't mean you can't say anything about the work you did. You can still talk about your role and skillset, usually about the languages and technologies (and COTS products) used.
Many government IT projects mandate security-cleared developers because the systems touch classified information, but that doesn't mean that the systems themselves (their existence, basic design, etc.) are classified. There's really no difference between having a project like that on your resume, and any other commercial-sector project that's internal use only.
If you're working or considering working on a clearance-required project, it's not unreasonable to ask to talk with the security officer beforehand to clear up exactly what you'll be able to put on your resume and discuss after the fact ... and price yourself accordingly.
I know of one aerospace company that occasionally has its rockets explode on the launchpad because they use battery designs from the 1970s that are known to explode with fairly high probability. They could easily get much cheaper much more reliable batteries with more modern designs but they don't because the exploding batteries "have flight heritage". This particular aerospace company is considered agile and nimble and innovative compared to its competitors.
Additionally, I believe you can always get a job without dropping your personal ethics. The market is huge - just keep looking.
I once had an offer like you do. I declined, and I'm happy now I did.
Good luck!
(I hear you like to answer questions with questions over there.)
Every day they would have meetings going over global hot spots and assess whether there was any chance that the U.S. would have to intervene, and therefore purchase more armaments from them. This was not an objective, collective discussion, but a pleading.
I found that at least at that particular company, by and large, "these kind of people" were shitbags.
I will say, that contrasted with work I've done with other defense contractors in the ensuing years, they are not all uniform.
Generally, the US Government has a set stockpile (which may increase or decrease based on policy changes, but is usually static).
This company made guided missiles (very expensive, medium to long range), and needed the existing stockpile to be depleted (which is a nice way of saying that they needed things to be blown up).
Other divisions of the company I'm sure were working on different kinds of projects, the contracts for which weren't as contingent on being in a skirmish.
There's a difference between having a contract to develop and design an F-22 (which thankfully occurs before they are needed in warfare) and to actually build replacement F-22's (such as when they are shot down).
He would be doing this as a civilian just like an American citizen can get a job at the CIA out of college.
If he is Israeli, and in his mid twenties then he has already served in the IDF, likely in a CS capacity. Also if he was Sherut Leumi, then I wouldn't think he would apply for a military contract job in the first place. Furthermore, its especially difficult for people with highly desirable backgrounds like CS or engineering to get Sherut approval.
My only point was that an Israeli in their mid twenties has already served in the military and if they have, or plan to get a degree in CS, they have served in the military in a capacity relating to CS or engineering.
Of course it's totally possible that I'm wrong and he is from Israel.
Just out of curiosity, anyone have any explanations of the down voting? Don't really mind, I just find it kind of bizarre.
As far as small aggressive countries that _aren't_ Israel, how about Georgia, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, or Greece?
I could easily see myself referring to my native USA with that phrase.
famously aggressive + develops their own military technology.
Who is known for developing their own military technology? US, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany, Sweden, Israel, North Korea, Iran, Iraq (the last two only if WMD accusations are true)...?
Pretty much everyone else buys their military technology from China, Russia, US, France, or Israel, be it AK47s, F15s, or silkworm and exocet missiles.
So, which among the countries that manufacture military hardware are famously aggressive? Well, lately that's pretty much the US and Israel. Maybe Russia with the Chechen and Georgian thing, and maybe China with Tibet and threats vs. Taiwan. North Korea, but is anyone there actually allowed to learn English much less programming?
'Little' I also took to be diminutive, not literal.
I know what you're saying, but as big proponent for anti-discrimination in the work place I fear statements like yours settle in the backs of people's minds and then re-appear the day they find themselves in a hiring position.
I'd think places like Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, or even Austria would get called little much before UK, to say nothing of the smaller countries like Iceland or Luxembourg. I don't think many people in the UK would describe it as little either.
But the morals? This would have to be the biggest weight on this matter.
Priest paedhophiles ?
GDP / Land mass.
Both end up being considered massive in comparison to my "piddly" little country: [1] UK 2009 PPP GDP estimate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom[2] US 2010 PPP GDP estimate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States
[3] AUS 2009 PPP GDP estimate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia
You're not a rocket scientist, your skillset as described won't make a difference for Israel (?) military power. Either go for it and enjoy your pay, or if you have your principles, don't go for it and try finding a boring civilian job as all other non-rocket-scientists do . But the drama, it's not there.
a) Defense companies in Israel _do not_ offer "very good salary." In fact, it is a generally accepted fact that they universally offer lower salaries than civilian companies. This is offset somewhat by the benefits that stem from being a large and influential enterprise as well as the inherent governmental bureaucracy.
b) Engineers at Israeli defense firms don't tend to be particularly militaristic or in any way "these kind of people," and I know quite a few...
Everyone! Mail me money so I don't have to enable murder!