
Ask HN: How can I use my web development skills for space exploration/tech? - djellybeans
I&#x27;d like to work as part of the space exploration industry, at least in some way to contribute however I can. I don&#x27;t have a scientific or engineering background in the professional sense, but I have programming experience, mostly in web development. I&#x27;m more interested in getting a job in it, than participate in open source projects. How can I apply these skills to join a company that is doing work related to space exploration and its related technology?<p>Edit: I want to add that web development is not the only kind of programming that I do. But this is what I&#x27;ve done for 90% of my work.
======
thematt
You can come work for us at Blue Origin! My team members do a lot of web
development and we're recruiting heavily right now. We hire everyone as
Software Engineers, but there are a variety of specializations people come in
with and focus on -- web development included.

[https://www.blueorigin.com/careers](https://www.blueorigin.com/careers)

~~~
djellybeans
That's pretty great to hear. I'd like to know what your web development team
is doing for the purposes of your company. Incidentally I have been been
through the hiring process with Bezos' more familiar company before. What is
the hiring process like on the technical level at your company?

~~~
thematt
The web development that happens is typically for:

* Systems that analyze flight or test data

* Systems that enable manufacturing, supply chain, or other supporting business activities

* Systems that are considered to be "customer experience" related

* Infrastructure systems that support the other software engineering teams

Our hiring process is straightforward. The dev teams review resumes for a fit
based on experience and skillset. Next comes a phone screen where we'll ask a
series of basic programming questions. If you're in the Seattle area we skip
the phone screen and invite you in for a tour and ask you the same questions
in-person. Next we do a full interview, which occurs on-site at our
headquarters and typically lasts most of the day. You'll interview with
multiple software engineers from different teams. The questions you get asked
will be deeply technical and are usually real world problems we have had to
solve.

~~~
djellybeans
Most of my more recent experience has been in web agencies, and SaaS. For SaaS
in particular CPQ software to help business clients quote product prices for
many arbitrary configurations. I don't have as much experience with
infrastructure in the large scale, however. I also had a short contract job as
a game developer so maybe that can be useful for applications that require
real-time performance.

I live in the Midwest. I know that with Amazon they had offered me a paid
round-trip flight from my city to go to their final round interview. I
declined only for personal things to handle at the time. If I ever get to that
point with Blue Origin, would that company be able to do the same?

~~~
thematt
Absolutely, we pay for travel expenses to come interview with us.

------
elkos
Feel free to check the SatNOGS ([https://satnogs.org](https://satnogs.org))
project. It is a satellite open ground station network coordinated via the
web. Especially as a web developer you might be interested in the SatNOGS
Network [https://network.satnogs.org](https://network.satnogs.org) and the
SatNOGS Database [https://db.satnogs.org](https://db.satnogs.org) sub projects
Lots of documentation of the project can be found at
[https://wiki.satnogs.org](https://wiki.satnogs.org) and an active community
forum at
[https://community.libre.space/c/satnogs](https://community.libre.space/c/satnogs)

------
megaman22
I wonder, in ten or twenty years, how many rocket scientists will have been
inspired to that calling by spending way too much time fooling around
constructing rockets to try to escape Kerbin's atmosphere?

~~~
modzu
at least 1 i hope

------
tylerlh
Spacecraft generate tons of telemetry that needs to be ingested, normalized,
and visualized -- there's room for web dev in this space (no pun intended).

I spent some time working for a company that builds imaging satellites. My
role was working on the UI team, building real-time telemetry monitoring and
alerting software using web technologies for ground control. It was definitely
one of the more interesting places I've worked at.

~~~
djellybeans
That's one of the areas that I've considered or entertained about,
interpreting telemetry data, visualizing it, or even delivering it in real
time. I am not as familiar with satellite companies as I am with companies
that create launch systems. Do you know of any that would be good to look for?

As an aside, I would probably need relocation assistance, and that would be a
desirable point to have for a company.

~~~
tylerlh
You could check out DigitalGlobe, Planet Labs, etc. You can also look at
companies that take data from the satellite mfgs/operators and repackage it
for customers such as Orbital Insight.

------
typpo
I built [http://www.asterank.com/](http://www.asterank.com/) and still
maintain it after its acquisition by Planetary Resources. It is open source
and its code has been used in a surprising number of space-related projects.
If you're interested in getting involved, you might help modify the Asterank
engine to be a better general-purpose framework for 3D space visualizations.
This would benefit the space community as a whole by making the project a lot
easier to adapt for commercial and educational purposes. Code:
[https://github.com/typpo/asterank](https://github.com/typpo/asterank)

I'm also on an open-source NASA grant where we're implementing web-based
asteroid data analysis tools. It's a bit earlier stage but still room to get
involved. Code:
[https://github.com/typpo/astrokit](https://github.com/typpo/astrokit)

Email me (hn@ianww.com) if you want to talk about either of these!

~~~
djellybeans
Hey typpo, data visualization and space exploration sounds like a great combo
for me!

I will email you shortly. Your website is pretty great I think has lots of
potential. I have experience programming in 3D graphics too, and have tried to
find another project for use in the web.

------
jvanderbot
All NASA centers have a need for web front-end designers and data
visualization interfaces. [source: I work at JPL]. Feel free to apply, we
could use you.

To "build chops" I'd suggest doing some side projects in displaying data,
especially using data sources like
[http://stuffin.space/](http://stuffin.space/)

~~~
djellybeans
Would I need experience working with large scale systems to have a chance? My
web experience is mostly in small startups for SaaS, and web agencies that
build e-commerce sites and blogs for small-medium businesses. I have not
worked on anything that gets used by the millions, or requires fine
calculations. Will I be at a disadvantage?

------
program247365
I was also thinking about creating a community around this. I was thinking
about creating a Slack for folks interested in the webdev + space
exploration/tech scene. Anyone interested?

Afaik, this is the only thing close right now:
[https://spacehack.org/](https://spacehack.org/)

~~~
52-6F-62
I'd be interested in such a thing if that's a plan.

Maybe a Keybase group to try and avoid [purely] shitposting types, and a board
for persistent posts that maybe aligns with similar rules?

~~~
program247365
[https://github.com/spacehackersclub](https://github.com/spacehackersclub)

~~~
program247365
Site is up, hosted by github pages:
[http://spacehackers.club/](http://spacehackers.club/)

Would love feedback on how to organize
[https://github.com/spacehackersclub/awesome-
spacehackers](https://github.com/spacehackersclub/awesome-spacehackers)

Things I'd like to add * jobs section like the ones mentioned in this post? *
open source projects involved in aerospace that are looking for contributors?

Would love to hear other ideas, join the keybase chat for spacehackers.

~~~
program247365
Also on Twitter if anyone wants to follow there:
[https://twitter.com/spacehckrsclub](https://twitter.com/spacehckrsclub)

------
program247365
Had a phone interview with SpaceX recently, they do have some web dev
positions:
[http://www.spacex.com/careers/list](http://www.spacex.com/careers/list)

~~~
djellybeans
I remember applying to SpaceX in February, for a Full Stack Enterprise
Software Engineer position, and got a rejection letter. I'm not sure what the
reason for rejection could be, but it may be that I don't have enough
experience with large scale systems.

------
mirashii
My company (spire.com) often has a variety of software positions open
depending on your level of experience. You can drop me an email (in my
profile) if you're curious.

------
zeristor
I'm in a similar situation. You could look at working on your own Remote
Sensing projects perhaps.

I've also plan to make something akin to Asterank, yes it is there and
working, but I think it is an amazing idea and would just love to do something
similar in my own way:

[http://www.asterank.com](http://www.asterank.com)

------
eduren
I'm in basically a similar situation right now and I'm honestly wondering if
going back to school for a more engineering focused degree would be the best
move.

Does anybody know how a Software+Aerospace engineer would be valued at an
aerospace company? Most job listings I find are basically one or the other.

~~~
mirashii
There's a few areas that these would overlap in, like ADCS and AOCS. That
said, I wouldnt call both necessarily mandatory to work in that space, more
often you find people who have gone deep in one and picked up enough of the
other to contribute.

Software engineers (in my personal experience hiring), especially senior ones,
are harder to find and hire than aerospace engineers today. Depending on an
area of focus, you can be just as involved with key decisions in the
spacecraft design as a software person.

Feel free to drop me a line, I'd be happy to talk for a few minutes about your
experience and what you want to do and give you what insight I have into the
industry.

~~~
eduren
>Depending on an area of focus, you can be just as involved with key decisions
in the spacecraft design as a software person.

This is really interesting to me and I'd love to hear more. While it seems
obvious that spacecraft rely heavily on software I've been under the
impression that much of that work is done by aerospace/avionics engineers and
is more driven by the hardware teams and hardware requirements (which is all
fascinating to me but I am stumped on how I would transition into a career
focusing on that). What sort of areas of focus are you thinking of?

I think I'll drop you a line to chat, thank you for offering!

------
pdfernhout
Below is an excerpt from something I posted in 2003 to an Slashdot article on
"Jeff Bezos' Shot At Space":
[https://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=62113&cid=58211...](https://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=62113&cid=5821178)

While it is excellent to see multiple billionaires pursuing cheap access to
space (CATS), this seems like a problem that will be much easier to solve as
new materials and processes come along (diamondoid jet nozzles, fusion, etc.)
in the near future. Several of these entrepreneurs are of course already using
newer materials and processes (composites, active dynamics, small ground crews
augmented by fancy computers and software) relative to what NASA is stuck with
in maintaining an aging Shuttle. While I would never say such innovative
effort is wasted, it would seem that launch technologies, while sexy, might
really deserve somewhat lower priorities than the issue of what to do when we
are in space. The fact is, we can launch people now, and relatively off-the-
shelf technology (e.g. Ariane or Saturn V equivalent rockets) if manufactured
in large quantities are probably Cheap-enough Access To Space for the next ten
to twenty years (until nano-tech makes far better launch systems possible)
especially if we are willing to accept 5% human casualties for launch (which
is probably a far lower casualty rate than most human settlement travel
activities historically).

There is also an issue of focus -- people focus on reusable vehicles, but the
reality is that it is so costly to get things into space that there is not
much point in returning either people or equipment after they have been
launched. At best, Apollo era reentry capsules for people who want to come
back to earth are good enough. For example, the space shuttle costs so much to
launch relative to its production cost it should really be left in orbit as
usable equipment (since anything in orbit is worth its weight in gold), and
people returned in a small capsule if at all. Even if launch costs are greatly
reduced, I think that a general outward trend of humanity will still reflect
some of this economics (short of a space elevator). For example, in the USA,
most people who went "West" during the 1800s probably never came back East.

So where is a key area of research that should be a priority among NASA and
Billionaires, but is not heavily pursued? The issue is what to do in space
once you have gotten there. Because if there is a reason to be in space, then
people and collectives will work to get there. And the reality is, that right
now, if we could get there, there is nothing to do there short of look around
and come back. And if that were the case, Space would not deserve much more
investment than say tourism to Mt. Everest. The reality is that we don't know
how to support human life in space -- in large part because we have only spent
a pittance on thinking about that issue systematically compared to the issues
of CATS and Planetary Exploration. Frankly, while we support human life on
earth, we have very little meta-knowledge formally about how to do even that.
And, most of figuring out how to support human life in space at a nuts and
bolts level requires non-sexy activities like sitting around and staring out
the window, talking, sending emails, building databases, building software
tools, building some small physical prototypes on tabletops and outdoors, and
just plain thinking (the hard stuff). This is all the preparation needed for
the spiritual voyage into the (physical) heavens. Biosphere II was an
excellent start in some ways, although the science mission was a bit dodgy at
first and it seems Columbia (the recipient) seems about to abandon that effort
for cost reasons --- and in any case, Biosphere II focuses on the wrong
question -- we know biospheres can work and replicate (although scale is an
issue) -- what we don't know is how to replicate the mechanical infrastructure
(e.g. glass pane making machinery) behind them. A lot more money has gone into
studying ecosystem food webs than industrial ecologies of pipe webs and
assembly line webs (and frankly, a lot of people don't want their
"proprietary" manufacturing processes studied or gossiped about by academics.)

Almost everything proposed as a reason to launch into space doesn't make
sense, as much as people have touted various suggestions. The closest might be
He3 mining for aneutronic fusion if we otherwise had that technology, but even
that issues (energy) is probably more easily solved through conservation,
energy efficiency (e.g. R60+ home insulation), and photovoltaic and wind etc.
alternate energy modes (which are rapidly proving cost effective for many
applications, and will be only more so with new processes and materials over
the next twenty years). Asteroid mining turns out to not be that useful, since
recycling is a much better idea. Zero gravity turns out to not be so valuable
after all for manufacturing, since most of the processes can be done on earth,
or alternative materials used. And so on for various other issues.

Exploration is noble and important as a long-term spiritual quest, but it is a
dubious priority in the short term considering how much ground based
telescopes can do quickly on earth, how valuable cheap robot probes are, and
how we are already slaughtering the other terrestrial intelligences (Muslims,
Aborigines, elephants) and extraterrestrial intelligences (whales, octopods,
etc.) we know of without much concern or attempt to communicate and pursue any
sort of cosmic brotherhood.

The only really sensible thing to do in space is to live there under various
social and technical systems. People like Freeman Dyson, Gerard K. O'Neill,
and Marshall T. Savage and many others have discussed these issues. We aren't
able to pursue this because we don't know much about how to support human life
on earth. We have little understanding of the Comprehensive Anticipatory
Design Science Buckminster Fuller proposed back in the 1930s or so. Economics
is a multi-trillion dollar joke, with economists having about zero knowledge
on how technical economies really work or develop (otherwise, why have no
developing nations left that category in one hundred years?) We need to better
understand how life is supported on earth both biologically and technically so
that we can replicate it out there, and so we can then use asteroid resources,
sunlight, and empty space to support quadrillions of conscious souls pursuing
diverse ends in some sorts of diverse collaborations (such as J.D. Bernal
proposed in the 1920s). [See also NASA dreams under Carter:
[http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/](http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/) ]

As a bonus, once some people live in space, mine asteroids for their own
purposes, capture solar energy for their own purposes, use self-replicating
manufacturing systems for their own purposes, then CATS really becomes CATE
(Cheap Access To Earth) and for spacers who might be 1000X more wealthy than
groundhogs in terms of materials and energy and innovation and cooperation,
CATE would be easy, and CATS then piggybacks as a slight imbalance in CATE
tourism (although why most spacers would want to go anywhere near a gravity
well would probably be a deep psychological question with profound moral
overtones like "spacer's burden" and all that rot).

So, while it is great to see all these billionaires pursuing CATS, it would be
great to see more people pursuing DOGS (Design Of Great Settlements). Since
NASA is stuck running an obsolete space ferry it has little attention left
over for DOGS. Since Billionaries are doing the sexy CATS stuff, that leaves
the rest of us to go to the DOGS.

And disclaimer: DOGS is essentially what I am working on with the Pointrel
Foundation and related activities, but unlike Jeff Bezos (a sort-of classmate
from Princeton -- Hi Jeff!) what I am working on with just my own spare time
(not being a billionaire, and frankly, realizing even a billion bucks is not
even a bone to throw to the DOGS) is how that issue of what to do if we got
into space could be pursued the same way Debian GNU/Linux is pursued. And, I
find, when you pursue such a space settlement design science in the right
spirit, the work is also immediately applicable on Earth as sustainable
technology (such as our garden simulator -- intended to help people grow food
wherever in the cosmos they live). My wife and I published a paper on how an
open source / free software collaboration style approaches could be used to
make DOGS happen in the 2001 Space Studies Institute symposium on Space
Manufacturing and Space Settlement. ... The OSCOMAK site [http://www.kurtz-
fernhout.com/oscomak/](http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/) is a much
earlier vision along these lines [and includes a link to that 2001 paper]...

~~~
program247365
Mmmm, very interesting points to think about. The priority of space
exploration is always a topic that comes up. Although I don't think I've heard
the argument for focusing on DOGS (Design of Great Settlements). :) DOGS vs
CATS, ha!

I think what I'm trying to do with
[https://spacehackers.club](https://spacehackers.club) is to get more folks
interested in hardware/software problem-solving in the context of what may be
pervasive in the coming decades, which is increasing the human reach into the
solar system.

Your post here has me thinking about how I might categorize things on this
list: [https://github.com/spacehackersclub/awesome-
spacehackers](https://github.com/spacehackersclub/awesome-spacehackers)

Maybe more DOGS related resources? Would love contributions and further
discussion about what focus should be.

~~~
pdfernhout
Thanks. A couple resources to maybe add:

[http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/](http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/)

[http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2017/1...](http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2017/12/space_isn_t_a_void_it_s_a_canvas_for_human_imagination.html)
(Discussed here: [https://science.slashdot.org/story/17/12/14/1639204/space-
is...](https://science.slashdot.org/story/17/12/14/1639204/space-is-not-a-
void) )

Definitely would encourage you to keep going with this to form a supportive
community of interested people.

Some ideas on making groups work well that I've collected (often easier said
then done): [https://github.com/pdfernhout/High-Performance-
Organizations...](https://github.com/pdfernhout/High-Performance-
Organizations-Reading-List)

A group I was involved in from 2008:
[http://www.openvirgle.net/](http://www.openvirgle.net/)

I had some other links here (an archive of the OpenVigle wiki from 2008) but
some are out-of-date:
[http://oscomak.net/wiki/Main_Page](http://oscomak.net/wiki/Main_Page)

Another group maybe of interest (but no recent posts):
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenLuna](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenLuna)

I'd encourage you to explore links with the maker movement. That is sort of
what became of the 2008 OpenVirgle effort -- at that time, it seemed to make
more sense to think about the early maker movement and "Open Manufacturing"
because increasing that capacity was a big win for everyone in both the short-
term on Earth and long term in space.
[http://openmanufacturing.net/](http://openmanufacturing.net/)
[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmanufacturing](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmanufacturing)

