
Ask HN: Non-programming, 'thinking' jobs? - doc
Inspired by this http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1351877 I realized that I, too, enjoy thinking more than actual programming, and programming is just a means to materialize my thoughts.<p>I'm trying to find a job that requires thinking but doesn't tie me to a computer (but nothing on advertisement, though)<p>Any ideas?
======
nostrademons
These jobs exist. Corporate executives are obvious ones. Finance, particularly
hedge funds and venture capital. Management consulting. Politicians. Tenured
professors. Creative solitary professions like writers, comedians, and
composers.

The problem is that almost everyone would rather think than do, so you've got
a massive supply & demand imbalance. Everybody wants to be the one deciding
what should be done; very few people want to be the ones actually doing it.

In practice, most professions deal with this by instituting barriers to entry.
In rigid hierarchical organizations like the corporate world, this is done
through a "pay your dues" culture. The people who become corporate executives
get there through performing well at grunt work on an individual contributor
level - well enough to attract the attention of an outgoing senior executive.
The most likely path to becoming a venture capitalist is to found a successful
startup yourself. Anyone can start a hedge fund, but convincing people to give
you money usually requires a solid track record as an analyst or trader at an
established firm. Associates at management consulting firms do things like
count products on store shelves and make PowerPoint presentations before they
get to call the strategy shots themselves.

In more fluid professions like novelists, the barrier to entry is simply that
you have to be so good that they can't ignore you. There are millions of
aspiring writers that want to get published; only a few thousand manage to do
so, and only a few dozen become bestsellers. If you want to be one of them,
you need to be willing to practice and revise enough that your work is better
than all the other folks.

~~~
j_baker
> The problem is that almost everyone would rather think than do.

I'd disagree. I think that the majority of people would rather work with
something more concrete (doing) than abstract(thinking).

~~~
nostrademons
You really think so? I think a lot of people become habituated to doing
because that's what they need to do to put food on the table. And most of the
time, they won't find anyone willing to listen to their thoughts anyway, so
why bother spouting off?

But if you really _listen_ to people, I've found that most can think pretty
deeply about grand and overarching subjects. And it's people from all walks of
life - auto mechanics, high school dropouts, civil servants, retirees, in
addition to the engineers and executives and authors you'd expect. Look at how
many people had opinions on the bailout, for example, or how many think they
could do a better job than Ben Bernanke at steering the economy. Or look at
the traffic to forums like Reddit, where people are invited to leave their
comments about all sorts of stories. Most of them are wrong, but that's still
an awful lot of thinking going on about pretty abstract subjects.

~~~
eavc
So I'm in the middle of working with a psychologist right now who is
counseling me about my career.

I'm in the same boat as the OP, and like you, I figured that everyone would
rather just think, so I kind of discounted that as an option.

What he told me is that while a lot of people like to spout off opinions, few
people are as passionately curious and have the capacity for sustained and
analytical thought.

I'm not bragging, but my point is that for some people, thinking type work
really is their skill. The jobs available can be harder to find.

I'm in the process of considering a return to school for a PhD in psychology,
for example, and it's going to really throw a wrench in my life because I'm
already 26 and married.

~~~
nostrademons
The Ph.D is itself a long process of "doing", where you're apprenticed to an
experienced researcher and do his grunt work while you prove yourself capable
of original research. Writing a dissertation is _work_ , and it goes along
with a lot of unglamorous work (like a research/teaching fellowship).

I never disputed that it's possible to make a living as a "thinker", only that
it's realistic to do so without first proving your worth as a "doer". The
people who end up in those thinking positions are the ones who manage to slog
through the doing.

------
theprodigy
CIA and the pentagon love thinkers and people with very analytical minds. The
pentagon's job is to dream up the future of the world and war and prepare for
it.

So as an analyst or grand strategist you would be tasked with studying how
such and such technology will change global politcal and economic rule sets,
etc and what america needs to do to take advantage of it or prepare for it.
You can also be a person that researches the latest and greatest technology.

These military agencies were the people who developed the initial need for
technological innovations like the internet and the database.

Also, you would go out talk to all these opinion leaders and participate in
various think tanks with super smart people and create research that can
influence the entire history of the world if compelling enough.

It is a lot of fun if you really want to contribute to the world and make a
difference.

~~~
puredemo
Most think tanks are very politically charged. Members aren't supposed to do
original research, rather they are tasked with penning opinions that align
with and justify predetermined political positions.

Secondly, your post overall just doesn't ring true to me. If the pentagon is
really this keen on hiring the best and the brightest, wouldn't we have made
great strides towards, say, ending our dependence on foreign oil?

There are too many examples like the above for me to believe that the pentagon
is at all effective in preparing for the future. If they were, the financial
meltdown wouldn't have happened, we wouldn't continue to subsidize corn like
we do, we would be moving towards massive subsidies for sustainable farming,
the Ogallala Aquifer wouldn't be getting empty, and so on.

~~~
starkfist
The DoD/Pentagon has nothing to do with farming subsidies or the subprime
crisis or inventing new energy sources.

~~~
jarek
In other words, they figure out how to invade countries, not why.

~~~
puredemo
Point still stands. Most wars are related to resources, in one way or another.
We tend to squander our resources.

The DoD may not have direct control but they do have some influence, even if
only indirect.

------
zavulon
Start your own business.

Every day I have to do a lot of intense thinking... Every week, long term
strategy and planning. Pretty much every business email that I write or phone
call that I make requires a lot of thinking and analyzing. Especially since
there's always an understand that if I fuck up, it's usually directly money
out of my pocket.

It's not for everybody, but if you're looking for a job that makes you think,
that's the one.

~~~
eavc
Running a business is much, much, much more about doing than it is about
thinking.

~~~
lsc
yes, but if you prefer managing others to doing yourself, you can make that
choice. Of course, that's more 'selecting the right people' than 'thinking'

Still, the point is that running a business is much more about 'making sure
things get done' than it is about 'doing things' - now, quite often, the only
way to reach the former is through the latter, but when things are going well,
your primary job is thinking of the next move.

------
JarekS
Product management. You must think a lot, programming experience is a huge
plus, but this kind of work does not tie you to a computer - you should be out
more and talk to prospects/customers.

------
Zev
Art. Probably not a job, but for a very nice hobby, try it out. Draw or paint
something. Find an old camera (film-based) and take some pictures. Then
develop the pictures yourself in a darkroom.

Sounds like a a bunch of simple tasks, right? Not really. As an example,
_some_ things that go into a drawing:

What kind of paper do you want to draw on? Are you going to make your own
paper or buy some premade? What materials do you want the paper to be made of?
What are you going to draw with? Pencils? If so, what classification? Colors?
Ink the drawing in afterwards? What inks are you going to use, if so? How are
you going to put the ink on the page? Not to mention "what are you going to
draw?"

And thats scratching the surface. And there's just as much to consider for
every other type of art.

~~~
brc
One of my neighbours is an artist. She makes a tidy living selling artwork
depicting the local landscapes.

While you would think that there is a lot of sitting around dreaming and
sketching, in reality the galleries are telling her what types of thing are
selling, and she is creating 'product' to sell into that demand. Her studio is
full of paintings that look very similar to each other, and there is precious
little room for experimentation, because the galleries aren't super keen on
giving wallspace to untried formulas.

In this way it's not terribly different from a lot of jobs. Sure, it's much
better than most, but I would be careful about thinking life as an artist is
truly an escape from the rigors of the real world.

Sadly for a lot of artists, their big breakthrough becomes the rod for their
back, because all anyone ever wants is more of the same. This is why Ian
Fleming ended up disliking the Bond books, even though they made him very
rich. Same goes for endless bands, artists, sculptors etc.

~~~
Zev
_In this way it's not terribly different from a lot of jobs. Sure, it's much
better than most, but I would be careful about thinking life as an artist is
truly an escape from the rigors of the real world._

FWIW, my suggestion was specifically to have art as a hobby, not a job. This
way, it _doesn't need_ to make you any money. Just to provide an escape and/or
a stress relief. And in this case, who cares what others think of your work?
You do it because you want to.

~~~
brc
yes I guess I conveniently ignored your point, I guess I was just trying to
add in my part about making a living as an artist.

Ultimately, I think, that any type of creative work needs validation by
others, even if it's not of the payment type. I think few people are driven
enough to create without at least some positive feedback from people whose
opinion they respect.

------
Shamiq
1\. Get a PhD.

2\. Become a professor/researcher.

3\. Grad students program for you.

~~~
nostrademons
You left out the part where in 1. (and 1.5: Postdoc for a
professor/researcher), you're the one doing the programming for someone else.
;-)

------
awongh
I didn't read the previous thread as against programming per se- he mentions
working in a cafe, which is a pretty good example of a job that requires rote
repetitive tasks and very little thinking...

In my opinion the wonderful thing about programming is that it is the job with
the lowest barrier of entry, to which your thinking, your thoughts, have the
most direct and lasting effect on your employer's business.

As it's been pointed out on this thread already, the jobs in which you have
the most effect and the most amount of thinking have very high barriers to
entry, i.e., the corporate executive, or aren't well paid, e.g. the artist or
writer, or don't have any real effect in the world, e.g., the romance language
professor (humanities academic)... that is to say, there are trade-offs.

In general the thing that bothers me the most about non-programming thinking
jobs, being a professor, thinking about policy, business strategy, or whatever
seems to be the way you qualify or train yourself for the job- most of the
time it means thinking or doing things that don't relate to your interest-
business school, law school, MFA, whatever- but what do you do to become a
better programmer? Program.

------
_delirium
Become a blogger? ;-) Of course, it's only a "job" if you become a pretty
high-profile blogger.

The "doesn't tie me to a computer" part leaves me unclear whether you want a
job that's still thinking _about computers_ but just isn't actually on them
all the time, or whether you want a change of careers to a thinking-centric
occupation that may not involve computers at all.

If the latter, there's all the traditional areas like philosophy, but they
tend to be hard to find jobs in. Law has thinking-centric jobs, especially if
you're a researcher for a larger firm that has someone else doing the in-
courtroom advocacy, or a clerk for a judge, or a judge yourself, or a legal
analyst at a think-tank or in academia. But you'd need to get a JD.

Long-form analytical journalism is also thinking-centric, but it's hard to
make a living at (there are a handful of coveted jobs doing it full-time, and
then a larger number of freelancers writing such pieces and trying to shop
them around).

------
megablast
Look at your University.

I was involved in Grid Computing research, which didn't involve any
development, but meant I had to go around to different Universities and
private companies, and help them understand the benefits of getting into Grid
Computing. It was mainly dealing with Management and Administrators, getting
them to understand the benefits of using all those spare computing cycles,
they have on their desks and in their computing labs.

It was a great job, and I got to meet amazing people and see lots of different
places. This way you get to use your knowledge of computers, but aren't stuck
at your desk programming away.

------
matwood
I would think that any kind of analytics might fit your description. The
problem is that you might end up tied to Excel.

Another one might be some sort of civil engineering or any job where you need
to physically build something.

Also, any job that you have can require thinking if you want it to. Learn
about the job and then think about you can do it better, faster, or cheaper.

------
elblanco
Go be an analyst or a researcher. There are national labs and other research
places all over the U.S. and places like Battelle, Noblis, Mitre etc. are
always looking for good people.

There are a surprising number of people in both roles. Lots of reading,
critical thinking and writing. If you can operate a computer beyond that of a
six year old you can go places.

~~~
realitygrill
_places like Battelle, Noblis, Mitre etc_

Can you give more examples? I've never heard of these places..

~~~
elblanco
Here's a starter list with links, the history of some of these places is
pretty cool as well:

This is a good list: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFRDC> also look at the
managing organizations.

Non/Not Profit Companies

Battelle Memorial Institute - <https://www.battelle.org/> Noblis -
<http://www.noblis.org/> Mitre - <http://www.mitre.org/> Aerospace Corporation
- <http://www.aero.org/> Rand Corporation - <http://www.rand.org/> CNA -
<http://www.cna.org/>

Some for-profit Government Contractors (I've tried to pick ones that don't
make stuff like planes and tanks, they focus more on thinkery)

SAIC - <http://www.saic.com> Bechtel - <http://www.bechtel.com> Mantech -
<http://www.mantech.com> CACI - <http://www.caci.com> TASC -
<http://www.tasc.com>

there's actually a whole ton of smaller ones like Blackbird Technologies (
<http://www.blackbirdtech.com/> ) that you can make a good home in also.

Labs (don't let their Manhattan Project backgrounds fool you, they do tons and
tons of R&D outside of nukes, great places with lots of smart people)

Lawrence Livermore - <http://www.llnl.gov/> Pacific Northwest -
<http://www.pnl.gov/> Los Alamos - <http://www.lanl.gov/> Brookhaven National
Laboratory - <http://www.bnl.gov/> National Renewable Energy Laboratory -
<http://www.nrel.gov/> Sandia National Laboratories - <http://www.sandia.gov>
etc.

I've worked at some of these places in my career. If you want to be surrounded
by smart people all the time, pick the labs. Note: if you don't have a PhD you
will be made to feel inferior to everybody else you work with, it just comes
with the territory. The Non/Not-Profits can be friendlier places to work. Go
for an analyst job or something similar. Most of those are also full of really
smart folks, and making $$$ isn't the most important thing in the world for
them. Many labs are managed by these non-profits. I listed the Contractors
because it's easier to get analyst type positions with them, but I've found
the general caliber of the people there (in terms of pure "smartness") to be
lower. It can be tough to go from a Lab like environment, where your next cube
co-worker speaks three languages fluently, can fly six kinds of aircraft,
holds two PhDs and built a small-scale particle accelerator in his garage to
relax to a contractor where your next cube co-worker debates, heatedly,
between diet-coke and diet-pepsi, and how to score that cute waitress in the
happy hour bar without his wife noticing.

~~~
graugrau
Could you give some examples of the kinds of analyst/research work people
_without_ PhDs do at these places? What kind of "formal background" do you
need to get them to even consider you for one of the more thinky
analyst/researcher positions?

I've looked before at some of the places you mentioned, but it seemed
extremely difficult to get someone to even talk to you about the interesting
analyst/research positions if you didn't have a PhD.

My background: For the longest time, I thought I would go to grad school and
become a professor in pure math. I love doing research and don't care about
money...but I hated the whole bureaucracy and lack of real freedom (until
you're a tenured professor) of it all. I really miss having a research
environment, though, so like the OP I've been wondering for a while how to get
back into this.

~~~
elblanco
Sure, I know that this project <http://starlight.pnl.gov/> was a decade long
R&D project with a staff of zero PhDs. The NVAC ( <http://nvac.pnl.gov/> )
place is peopled by lots of non-PhD hacker types doing cool things. Many of
the better hacker types I've run across are also not from traditional CS
backgrounds which is interesting, lots of trained physicists and
mathematicians.

The non-profit types have loads of people who are not-PhDs who do clever
think-tank style work for the government. Lots of report writing mostly, but
if you can get latched onto some IRAD type project and do internal R&D work,
you can see some really cool stuff -- I'm pretty sure I've seen the first ever
real-time fusion of geospatial data from six different imagery platforms in a
3d environment. But even the report writing can be interesting, things like
open-source studies of countries, industries, facilities, etc. But they can
also be a back door into the lab work if you work for one of the managing
organizations (like Battelle). Look into them closely as they also tend to
have fairly large internal R&D departments. It's possible to make a career
working on IRAD projects and responding to SBIR grants. Both are pure
research.

Other places do things like geospatial systems research, text mining,
information visualization, network security research (which for lab purposes
usually requires lots of high level systems understanding or solid math, not
as much low level hacking as you might expect, lots of the work is in
predictive theories and social network analysis), pattern detection, image
analysis, image change detection -- lots of good places for applied math,
acoustic triangulation, emergency response modeling and simulation, etc. Think
DARPA style research, which the labs do lots of work for.

If you are into hardware, there's also plenty of that, communication systems,
weapons testing (like naval guns), hardware encryption systems, phased array
radars, biochem detection systems, rapid prototyping, radiation detectors etc.

Most of these don't require PhD backgrounds, and if you hit all the ones you
are interested in, you might find something that sticks.

Honestly, given your background, you'd probably find a better home at the labs
than the companies. But the hiring cycle is abysmally slow, don't take a non-
response as evidence of a lack of desire to hire. 6-12 month wait times on
call backs are not uncommon. Often followed by 5-20 years of happy employment.

I personally found both the lab and non-profit environments a bit too rarefied
for my tastes. But I _do_ miss being surrounded by brilliant people every day.
Also, keep in mind that some of these are enormous organizations, Google-sized
by way of comparison, their campuses can be measured in square-miles, not
acres and they often have tens of thousands of employees. If you don't live in
the States (or aren't a citizen), there are probably equivalent organizations
in your home country. Often there is lots of cross-pollination as well, I
worked on projects with the Brits, the Italians, Singapore and the Aussies.

------
carbocation
Medicine. Health policy. Policy, in general. All allow you to do what you ask
(to greater or lesser degrees). Of course, there is a lot of training required
to get into the 'thinking' jobs in medicine.

------
pascalchristian
Not exactly a job per se, but just go and spent your time in vegas. It took
serious thinking to beat the house in roulette, poker, blackjack, or baccarat.

------
Mathnerd314
Research mathematician - since math is pure thought.

