

Ask HN: As a software developer, how do I get into brain research? - danabramov

I&#x27;m a software developer in my early twenties. I&#x27;ve been programming professionally since I was 16, and I work in a startup now, mostly doing front-end engineering.<p>I tried going to university but I chose the wrong one and later dropped out (I don&#x27;t regret it).<p>I love my job, but sometimes there&#x27;s a nagging feeling that I&#x27;m missing out when I read about neural networks, machine learning or computational biology. I&#x27;ve been taking ML on Coursera and though I don&#x27;t have deep love for maths, I found the subject both fascinating and approachable.<p>Still, machine learning isn&#x27;t what I want to be doing. I&#x27;m a thousand times more fascinated by articles about reverse-engineering and hacking the human brain itself. (For example, this one: http:&#x2F;&#x2F;homes.cs.washington.edu&#x2F;~rao&#x2F;brain2brain&#x2F;index.html). I&#x27;m also very interested in OpenWorm project since it&#x27;s not your typical movie-recommendation kind of neural network.<p>I have no idea how to get into that area (fiddling with the brain). Do I absolutely need to get a degree in this area to participate in this kind of research? Do they need software development expertise? Is it difficult to adjust my skillset from being just a software developer? How does division of labor usually work in groups like these? I imagine there are always some biology- and some software-oriented folks in one group. What could be my first step in that direction?<p>If you have taken this path, please share your experience.
======
sebastianmarkow
I'm currently doing research on hippocampal function and how to model
authentic spiking neural networks (NEST) from spatial data as part of the
human brain project and the research center of Juelich Germany.

First of all most of the people working in computational neuroscience are
physicists. There are a few biologists and of course cognitive psychologist,
medical doctors or people from the department of neuroinformatics.

1a) Get an (paid) internship at a local research department. It's easy to get
in (at least in my experience), even if you're not working on computational
models in the first place. Most of these departments are not run very tightly,
and there are lots of opportunities to do what you are best suited for. Though
i would recommend to get back into university for a bachelors degree.

1b) Apply for google summer of code or something equivalent. There are lots of
open internships for the summer which are directly involved with the human
brain project.

2) It's about dynamic systems. So you have to ainte up your math. If you know
your way around statistics, 2d/3d simulations, data structures and algorithms
it's a huge plus. I recommend spending some time on top coder for the latter
two. So you already have the advantage of knowing most of the common ML
concepts.

3) Read everything you get your hands on which is connected to neuroscience.
You have to get the full picture. Psychology, cognitive neuroscience,
biophysics, medicine, neuroinformatics, etc. pp. First basics to get an
overview, then concentrate on recent papers.

4) Improve your writing and presenting, if you have difficulties with either
one. It will be an essential part of your work to discuss and present results.

5) Don't trap yourself into thinking you're not smart enough. Results in
research need ambition, duration and vision more then being the smartest
person in the room every day.

Most of the software which is written in science is just prototype grade to
prove a point and get a paper accepted in a journal. Standards are low, so
bringing something different (systems engineering, source control management,
automation, hpc programming, testing, deep knowledge of a
framework/programming language etc. pp) is also considered a plus. So whenever
you think something could be improved you should speak up and have a detailed
explanation at hand why this would be an improvement. Communication is key
sometimes, remember most of the people you will be working with are not
computer scientists nor did they ever work in an industry environment.

It's a good thing to have a deep understanding of at least one of the
following commonly used frameworks/programming languages in (neuro)science
plus TeX (not a complete list, just the top of my head). Though you'll
probably end up learning or writing a new/established framework depending on
the field of research you will be doing.

c/cpp, Python, Matlab/Octave, (statistics) R/Julia, (hpc/gpu) OpenCL/Cuda,
(functional) Lisp/Haskell

I would recommend Python (Scipy/Numpy) if you're used to Javascript front end
development (OOP/dynamic). Also i would advice you to get acquainted with your
favorite unix shell and the core utils if you aren't already. (Plus getting to
know at least one tool for plotting any kind of data)

Teams are rather small, depending on the budget. So in academia it's usually
one or two group leaders with a professors degree, a handful postdocs and
couple more phd students plus student assistants. Departments funded by
industry are requiring a phd in my experience. Which does not mean you can't
work there without having one, but you're less likely doing actual research.
You will not exclusively doing one thing only, it's a rather versatile field.

I hope you'll make the shift into neuroscience. I think it's the last great
mystery on earth which is to be explored. For me it's been a life changing
experience and it still keeps on giving.

Best of luck.

~~~
danabramov
>Results in research need ambition, duration and vision more then being the
smartest person in the room every day.

Thanks for mentioning that. I only recently realized that “mad genius
scientist” stereotype has probably scared away a lot of fine folks from
science.

------
ihnorton
First: you absolutely must get a bachelor's degree in _something_ (preferably
STEMish), full stop. It is a basic signal of many positive things that people
are looking for (for better or worse). And, more importantly, _you will learn
about things you didn 't know existed_. Contrary to popular opinion in some
circles, directed study by experts - with recourse to _interactive_ discussion
when you get stuck - is the most efficient way we know of to gain deep
knowledge in a subject. _You don 't know what you don't know._

However, it is completely possible to get a position "in a lab" without a
degree. I found a research-assistant position, part-time, while going back to
school to get a degree (after about three years off). That's one path, and
depending on your situation, you may need to move to an area with a high
concentration of universities to make this feasible. I can only speak to the
US, but if you are in the US, start with Craigslist for major metros with good
universities (Boston being far and away at the top of the list IMHO; also NY,
DC, Chicago, LA, and San Diego. When I did this in 2006, I had several job
offers in Boston for software-inclined research assistant positions I found on
Craigslist - without any degree. I was kind of shocked, but it makes sense. HR
everywhere is painful, so people with hustle go outside the system to find
candidates they want)

You could also try cold-emailing lab PIs. A couple of points here: professors
at top-100 US universities get a _lot_ of email in general, and in particular
from people in other countries looking for positions (probably same for
European professors). Without a degree you can't compete on (perceived)
credentials, but if you are in the same country already you will be much
easier to hire (no immigration hassle). Make sure your resume is neat,
positive (but accurate) and grammatically flawless. Make your cover letter
personal, both in the sense of _your_ story (why you are interested) and why
the _specific_ lab interests you. Especially look at youngish professors just
starting labs. Graduate students are very expensive, so if you are willing to
work for $20k then you will be about 1/3 the total cost of a graduate student.
Young professors need people with hustle more than anything else (getting a
lab started is a slog of ordering, unpacking boxes, and debugging equipment.
Electronics troubleshooting, and "I don't know, but I know how to read a
manual" are critically useful skills in any lab).

If you are in a place with one or more universities, go to talks! Most
university departments hold public-ish seminar series bringing in outside
speakers, and you can usually get on departmental announcement lists just by
emailing an administrator. If you a frequent fixture at talks, and you _ask
good questions_ at the end, you can end up in very useful situations ("why
don't you come along with us to lunch?" is the best possible outcome). If
people see you a few times, they may start to ask you who you are - and why
you are not at the school already.

A practical point: if you go the above route, and depending on your current
situation, you may very likely have to take a (large) pay cut. SAVE AS MUCH AS
YOU CAN, starting _now_ (this is generally applicable advice!). Some employers
offer split-deposit setups, where you can designate a percentage of your check
to several direct-deposit accounts. I budget out what I needed to live on,
send that to checking, and deposit the rest in a savings account in a
completely separate bank. That second account is untouchable - except for
tuition when I was in school (excepting true emergencies), and now saving for
longer-term things.

To help find a way back to academia, you can get a big boost by contributing
to an open-source project _with strong academic connections_ (I cannot stress
this enough. you want a project that is actively committed to by post-docs,
grad students, and - ideally - a prof or two. Even if they can't hire you,
they can recommend you). Some projects to look up: NiPy (neuroimaging in
Python), scikit-learn, Human Connectome Project (Connectome mapping toolkit,
connectome workbench), 3D Slicer, MITK, FreeSurfer, OpenWetWare (lots of
"open"-friendly labs are on here), Neuron (neural modelling), Covert lab
(Stanford - cell simulation), Virtual Cell (UConn). Good luck!!

~~~
robg
Not sure why you say he "absolutely must get" a degree then say it's possible
to get a job without one.

In his current situation, getting the degree was the original roadblock to his
curiosity. Many undergraduate programs today are no better than an extension
of high school.

Maybe I'm biased being among major research universities in brain science
(adding Pittsburgh and Philadelphia to your list), but he'll be able to find a
job with the right hustle.

Agree otherwise on your advice.

~~~
ihnorton
Yes to Pittsburgh! Excellent schools and quality of life.

I mean "absolutely must" for the long-term (PhD is a separate discussion).
Getting in the door is the critical first step, and definitely possible
without a degree (modulo a pay cut, of course).

~~~
robg
MIT doesn't require the Ph.D for tenure track jobs. The current head of the
media lab doesn't have an undergraduate degree.

On Pittsburgh, the cost of living is much lower than the coasts and between
Pitt and CMU I had an amazing experience.

~~~
ihnorton
If OP is +4 SD ability ("Will Hunting" level), and/or the godson of Timothy
Leary, who grew up in an academic family with Stanford Ovshinsky as a close
family friend, then YMMV :)

Media Lab Director is not a tenure-track position, but there are indeed a
handful of tenured professors in the country who do not hold a PhD.
Essentially all of them earned tenure 30+ years ago in a much different
environment. I've heard of some who skipped undergrad, got a PhD, and tenure -
but it's rare, and even more so in today's academic climate. I don't recall
hearing of any tenured person with no degree at all.

~~~
robg
Joi is an extreme example, sure, but now he's recruiting people for tenure
track jobs from outside the traditional academy track. Read their most recent
job listings.

Moreover, many top universities have positions called Professors of the
Practice. And that's a common enough path that Neuroscience, as an
interdisciplinary field, would do well to adopt. Geoff Hinton now works at
Google for a reason.

------
SapphireSun
If you're interested in neuroscience, we need Full Stack Developers,
Sysadmins, and C++ developers to help map the brain at the nanoscale level. No
neuroscience background required, but a sense of fun and an analytical mindset
are musts. We're looking to make our game to map the brain more engaging and
more scalable. We are affiliated with Princeton and MIT.

[http://blog.eyewire.org/eyewire-jobs-were-
hiring/](http://blog.eyewire.org/eyewire-jobs-were-hiring/)

Send a resume, cover letter, and code sample to jobs at eyewire d ot org

~~~
zura
I guess you're not open to a remote employment from Europe, are you?

~~~
SapphireSun
We're not really open to remote at this time, but we are open to
collaborations (game, design, API, or other :) ). If you have interest in
machine learning, we even have a contest to do it with 3D images:
[http://brainiac2.mit.edu/SNEMI3D/](http://brainiac2.mit.edu/SNEMI3D/)

------
cpcloud
I've come to software from the other direction.

1) In neuroscience there's an enormous lack of enthusiasm for software
development, even if it makes large parts of a workflow easier. If a poorly
written, undocumented piece of code stuck in a file called
temp123_final_final_no_really_final.m produces the same output as a higher
quality piece of code, no one cares as long as it leads to a publication.

2) You don't need a degree in neuroscience to do neuroscience research,
however you'll probably need to take a few basic neuroscience courses to get
up to speed depending on what area you're interested in focusing on. It sounds
like you're interested in theoretical neuroscience. For that you'll need to
take lots of probability and statistics.

3) Make no mistake, your ability to write clean, well documented code will be
massively under-appreciated by nearly everyone.

4) As far as division of labor goes, that usually depends on the lab size. The
smaller the lab, the more you do. Even in some large labs you have people
building software AND doing animal surgeries AND running experiments. There
usually isn't a person dedicated to a specific type of labor.

5) To "fiddle" with the brain, you'd have to get into animal research as you
can't really do that with people (yet?)

A lab worth checking out is the lab of Gyorgy Buszaki:
[http://www.buzsakilab.com/](http://www.buzsakilab.com/)

~~~
stinos
Very much this. Some comments: 1 and 3) I wouldnt really call it under-
appreciated or lack of interest. Mostly researchers appreciate your clean code
when they see it, they can even understand why your clean code is much better
(after all, these are mostly intelligent people), but the there it ends.
Sometimes they just don't really care enough to improve their own code, but
most of the time they don't have time to do so. The pressure is high, so even
if you explain them in depth how spending a lot of time now to make some
reusable piece will result in much more time gained in the long end, well,
they're gonna be all like 'yes, but if I fix it quickly now my paper can be
submitted for conference X'. That is hard to deal with for me, seeing people
do the wrong thing even though they know it is wrong.

5) There is fiddling with human brains, even remarkably similar to your
typical animal research: insert a bunch of electrodes and start recording
(afaik mainly for brain tumor patients: a part that gets removed anyway can as
well server for some very interesting recordings right before the operation).
Furtermore there's of course the more well-known the mind control stuff where
electrodes are inserted, read out, and used to control robot arms and such.

~~~
cpcloud
Nice addendum!

~~~
stinos
Too bad about the downvotes though :] Not sure what is wrong with shedding
some extra light on a first-hand experience?

------
scottfr
Ok, I think you need to decide what you are really interested in.

ML and neural networks research are very different from projects like openworm
both of which are very different from neuroscience work and modeling.

So you have three very distinct areas of research and work. Which one are you
most interested in?

Of the three the ML side probably has the most guaranteed value to you. Things
like openworm are shoot-the-moon type projects that are frankly unlikely to
succeed in achieving their ambitious goals. Neuroscience research can be
incredibly difficult due to the fact you're dealing with live people and there
is unfortunately a lot of hand-wavy, "voodoo-esque" statistical and modeling
techniques currently being employed in the analytical side of the field.

------
psyklic
I transitioned from software to brain science for my PhD. (Caltech has a
unique program for this called Computation and Neural Systems.)

Universities hire regular software engineers all the time for software
development work. Biology labs hire full-time "build-it" guys, and
computational projects with a lot of funding hire part-time and full-time
software engineers too.

So, to break in I recommend you look up some large brain science computation
projects online and contact them. There are quite a lot of them in Europe. You
may also be able to get into some fMRI projects.

That said, at a university, the chances of you taking more than a supporting
role without a university education is slim. So, I would recommend looking for
a brain-oriented startup.

If you want to do moreso biology, then I do not believe this path would be
worthwhile to you. Lab assistant work does not pay much, and it is often very
tedious work. Some techniques may take a year to get proficient at before your
results start to make sense (as was my case). That said, biologists constantly
amaze me -- they routinely make heroic efforts to find evidence for tiny
advancements (as is necessary due to the limitations of our brain technology).

------
dchichkov
There are two reasons why people who'd like to do research do PhDs. First,
without PhD, it is difficult to get a job in research. At any big company or
university it is pretty much a requirement and it is _hard_ to go around this
one. Not impossible, but very very hard.

The second reason, is that it's the environment that makes the researcher. PhD
years are essentially the years of apprenticeship, in which you are working
alongside with (hopefully good) researchers. It's just like in any other
field. To acquire skill set, to get good at it, you need to work for some
years with people who _are_ already good. Engineering skills are essential to
a researcher, but actual research skills even more so.

So if you manage to force your way in, and get a researcher job with only
engineering experience (I've seen people do that), your contributions to a
research project will have a chance to be on a negative side. Will even have a
chance to derail the whole project.

------
q845712
toward the end of undergrad i started thinking along the same lines you are
now. I wound in a graduate program in neuroscience - a move i generally
regret.

First, although modern science requires a lot of software, scientists refuse
to recognize that crafting software is its own discipline and insist that they
must be good at it because they're good at being scientists. Your skills won't
be valued - they won't even be recognized.

Second, the realities of biology are very different from the realities of
software. If you're working with living things, be they cell cultures or mice,
you'll find your schedule frequently dictated by the cycles of your
experimental materials. For example: suppose your experiments work best with
mice age 14 days. If a litter is born on a sunday, that means you'll be at
work on a sunday two weeks later.

Biological reactions are way worse than slow builds. So many biological
protocols involve doing something tedious for twenty minutes, then waiting for
a specific amount of time (perhaps 15 minutes , perhaps 45) and being back at
precisely the right moment to do a few more minutes of painstakingly careful
but tedious work.

In software you would never hire 5 developers but only give them two laptops -
each person needs a laptop to do their job, right? In biology the equipment is
so expensive that it must be shared. This can be ok, but it also results in
loss of control over your schedule. now you're not just working on sunday, but
because the other student sharing equipment also needs to experiment on
sunday, you're either working sunday early morning to early afternoon, or
sunday early afternoon to late evening.

I found science to be crowded with people trying to prove that they're the
most brilliant ones in the room, people unwilling to collaborate because if a
group effort succeeds you have to share the credit. In software I've found
everyone happy in the knowledge that a well-functioning team can produce
results at a scale unrealizable by even the most brilliant individual.

In conclusion, i hated being a biologist. I didn't like the culture of
science, I didn't like the work itself, and I didn't like the schedule and
lifestyle it demanded. I also really didn't like killing mice. Biology is
dirty work - not the worst by any means, but software is a more fun job that
pays 3-10X more.

~~~
lazzlazzlazz
My girlfriend and I had nearly the same experience - going through
neuroscience programs, working in labs, and ending up in software development.

Scientists generally do not appreciate their software-based tools and
workflows, and see writing software akin to writing short papers or
presentations - they aren't built to be reused or improved, just "turned in"
when done. It's very hard to build complex, improving systems in this manner.

It will take a long time before what appears to be common-sense in software
will be taken seriously by neuroscience.

------
robg
_Do I absolutely need to get a degree in this area to participate in this kind
of research?_

Absolutely not. Every research lab I've ever known, even at MIT, has
significant needs for what's called a Technical Assistant. It's similar to a
Research Assistant, but you help code experiments, program analytic scripts,
create visualizations and write reports. These labs run the gamut from single
unit recording to whole brain imaging.

 _Do they need software development expertise?_

Yes, all do.

 _Is it difficult to adjust my skillset from being just a software developer?_

That answer depends on the lab and its existing group of researchers,
assistants, and students. There's a learning curve but you are far better off
than the many, many researchers and students who have no programming
background.

 _How does division of labor usually work in groups like these?_

The principal investigator (PI) is responsible for everyone and is the one to
get the major grants, have or seek tenure, and plot the general direction of
the research based on their history of publications. Post-doctoral researchers
are recruited on their way to becoming PIs of their own labs. Graduate
students usually work on their own research, sometimes with their own smaller
grants. Research and technical assistants work for all of the above on the
day-to-day responsibilities.

 _I imagine there are always some biology- and some software-oriented folks in
one group. What could be my first step in that direction?_

It depends foremost on geography and your interests. Before uprooting your
life, look for research groups at the nearest university. Find the PIs whose
research is most interesting to you. Write them a very brief email (4-6
sentences) explaining your background and interest in working part-time on
technical software challenges they might have. If you don't have many PIs near
you, it will be more challenging. You won't hear back from most. But remember,
you're looking for experience. If you are dependable and professional, you'll
find some to grow with. Then you'll be better positioned to seek a full-time
job in a great lab that really fits your interests. After a few years, you'll
be qualified for graduate school. You don't necessarily need an undergraduate
degree if you are working with a leading researcher who can vouch for you.

~~~
ihnorton
> You don't necessarily need an undergraduate degree if you are working with a
> leading researcher who can vouch for you.

This is _true_ , in some sense, but don't plan on getting in to a top-30
school this way without some strong prior, independent evidence of ability
(>99% results on quantitative reasoning tests, for example).

~~~
robg
It's a failure of facts to assume the best schools are so narrow in their
thinking. Neuroscience is opening up most especially because it's a field
based on information processing. Worse to assume standardized testing is the
way to differentiate yourself.

A solid publication in a good journal is more important. Ph.D. programs teach
scholarship. To demonstrate that skill before admittance is the highest
currency possible.

------
hluska
Do you have any local universities that are actively doing neuroscience or
cognitive science research? If so, one possibility is to spend time on their
websites, find professors who are doing interesting work, and volunteer to
help out. Volunteering to help professors do research is a common path to get
into grad school in extremely competitive fields. So, these professors may not
be open to your help unless you're one of their students. However, if you
write the right query to the right prof, who knows where it will go??

Since so much of this work is theoretical and done in Universities, unless
you're just incredibly talented and lucky, you'll run into a wall without
degrees.

------
suchwow
The bigger question IMHO is why doesn't all public funded research happen in
the open (or I'm so out of the field that I wouldn't know about it even if it
happened).

I would love to donate some of my free time helping a project in which I
believe with software engineering expertise. Heck I might even pick up some
domain specific knowledge.

~~~
stinos
Here's one of the main reasons: competition in the field. Just like with
normal companies. If you pay a small dev team for a couple of years to create
a system that seriously speeds up or improves your experiments, that is worth
a lot of money since it will allow you to get more high level papers, hence
more grands. If you would just open source it, other labs (i.e., the
competition) can use it as well and the grands might go to them.

And another reason: for experiments that matter, you need instant support and
bugfixes, cause time is money. For example a couple of hours of using an MRI
scanner easily costst thousands of dollars. So if something goes wrong, it
needs instant fixing. You cannot rely on an open source ommunity and goodwill
for that.

Of course there are other types of experiments/projects for which none of the
above really matters; also there are projects like PsychoPy which seem to gain
some traction and definitely are open to helping hands.

~~~
read
_the grands might go to them_

The question becomes: why do universities act as if getting grands is what
matters and research is a zero-sum game?

------
danabramov
OP here: thanks for all the replies, I didn't expect this to get to the front
page.

To clarify a few things:

1\. I live in Russia but will move to US or Europe soon.

2\. This is not something I want to do _right now_. Rather, I'm thinking about
what I'd like to be doing in ten years, and how to get there eventually. It's
just one possible direction.

3\. I'm looking for some first steps that don't require me to drop everything
and move somewhere. Maybe some ways to evaluate the field. Great suggestions I
read in the thread included contributing to open source projects with academic
connections, reading recent thesis, saving money, getting familiar with tools
(R, Julia, Matlab) and sharpening maths, (later) writing emails to smart
people, looking out for startups in the field that don't require academia
background.

------
Void_
Get a job as frontend engineer at a company from similar field.

~~~
loceng
This is a perfectly valid and good suggestion - not sure why downvoted.
Upvoted.

~~~
stinos
Second. Companies creating electrode devices/drivers, motion detection,
whatever gets used in epxeriments etc, that stuff requires some serious skill
and also puts you in direct contact with the labs using it.

------
justplay
One thing for sure, your Maths knowledge is more essential than your software
development knowledge. So, if you're interested in that field you should
really learn a lot of Mathematics.

> Do I absolutely need to get a degree in this area to participate in this
> kind of research?

I guess yes (I wish I would say no, really) since it is all about theoretical
knowledge it is not easy to validate. Since, it is a research field, domain
experts can't spend time in testing your skills so they mainly rely on
exams/degree. If you have proved your skills to them at no time, then it is
easy to get inside.

------
read
The biggest reason to get a college degree might not be that it's a signal to
companies. It might be that it's a signal to you: how do _you_ know you are
capable of going into any kind of research, when you don't have signs you can
endure seemingly mundane work?

Compared to the kind of work you do in companies, college is a vacation. It's
also a way to see if you are capable of beating the system. If you can't
finish college while hacking on the side on things you like, plus come out
without debt, you should be alarmed.

------
sz4kerto
Where are you located? If you're somewhere in Europe, I might have some ideas.
You'll need a degree sooner or later though and you won't earn as much as you
can do as a software engineer working in the 'industry'. This field is mostly
grant-driven, therefore you need to find a group who's able to get funding,
and unfortunately getting paid from grants usually requires a degree.

~~~
danabramov
I'm located in Russia but I plan to move to US for an unknown period of time,
and later either stay in US or move to Europe. I'm not in a hurry—just trying
to imagine what I'd like to be doing in ten years.

------
jey

        Do I absolutely need to get a degree in this area to participate in this kind of research?
    

Nope, but you do need credible and convincing _signals_. (Google "signalling
theory".)

    
    
        Do they need software development expertise?
    

Yes, yes!

    
    
        Is it difficult to adjust my skillset from being just a software developer?
        How does division of labor usually work in groups like these? I imagine there
        are always some biology- and some software-oriented folks in one group. What
        could be my first step in that direction?
    

I don't know; "difficult" is a relative term. I do know that if you're
skilled, curious, and willing to learn, you can probably find some
collaborators to work with. The catch is probably they need you to be
committed and a net positive (i.e. don't drag them down), and they probably
won't be able to pay you right off the bat (or ever).

~~~
danabramov
Interesting that “don't drag them down” appeared several times in this thread.

------
weishigoname
I am interested in neural network, machine learning,too, I am a full-time
software engineer, the time I spend on this tropic is not much, and many times
I was frustrated by the math, which I am not pretty understand it, and I don't
know where to get help, if someone can share some resource, really appreciate
it.

------
qntmfred
I'm in the same position as you, although early thirties. Have always been
interested in the brain since a kid, have thought about pivoting my career to
the brain sciences a few times. It's not easy to go back into academia (which
is pretty much required to become qualified and relevant in this field) and
I've got a wife and kids now so I'm addicted to the income potential of a
software developer career, sadly neuro isn't in the same ballpark (yet?). I'd
say the next step is go back to school and do software on the side (if you
have time)

------
sebg
Start with a basic course - >
[https://www.coursera.org/course/compneuro](https://www.coursera.org/course/compneuro)

Then look at PhD thesis in the subject area that are recent. The first section
of each PhD thesis covers what is known in the area and builds up the problem.
Don't worry yet about understanding the rest of the subject matter - just
worry about understanding the front part. Since this is a PhD thesis, it will
be very heavily cited. Check out the citations for the front matter and delve
into those.

------
DLion
If you are a front-end engineering you can contribute to
[https://github.com/openworm/org.geppetto.frontend](https://github.com/openworm/org.geppetto.frontend)

------
_random_
"front-end engineering" \- do you mean applying one of the modern JavaScript
MV* frameworks to HTML GUI?

~~~
danabramov
Yep. I said “engineering” so I could sound fancy. Also, it's not about MV*
anymore.

------
gte910h
There are graduate programs at GT and Tampa that do this sort of work. I have
a friend who did the GT one then the Tampa one

[http://www.cc.gatech.edu/brainlab/](http://www.cc.gatech.edu/brainlab/)

------
atmosx
Get a bachelor's degree in biology or related science. Since you have the IT
background, you'll thrive :-).

ps. If you could attend a university full time, I would consider pharmacy.

------
SkyMarshal
Read Jeff Hawkins (Palm founder) book, _On Intelligence_ , then maybe contact
the research center he set up for brain and AI research.

------
wellboy
Google is doing that, have you tried to look there for AI jobs?

