EEVblab #2 - Are Electronics Hobbyists Useless?

[kony]

Heads up, Dave!
There must be at least dozen of students/hobbyists fitting your requirements living nearby, what you are asking for is not unreasonable at all.
You might even consider adding requirement for basics of programmable logic design, if you are seeking for someone in the higher end (read: not lazy to learn).

Such people do exist, only thing is to make it interesting enough for them - sure, publicity and valuable point on resume is something, but what range of project can one expect to work on as lab assistant? You are quite vague in the definiton. Such people, if bright enough, will be sooner or later noticed by someone from industry and be sure they will happily take any field related job when offered. Once bit more expirienced, they will be more and more picky and tend to choose only work related to topics that interests them - so offer something exciting to tinker with, not only vague "what suits your capabilities", then it's on to you to evaulate candidates if they are capable enough to fullfill project goals.

I'd always go for something that interests me even if it's paing less in multiples of what I can earn with my skillset - just because then I can fully enjoy my work and in the end it was all fun. As bonus there are new skills gained with minimum effort required. Another factor I value much more than money is work collective - working with enthusiastic people having same taste of humor as me is priceless, bonus points if it is small garrage company and we are all acting almost like a big family.

BTW: one mistake I see repeated over and over around me - Why do people expect to be taught anything by a school?
Teaching or learning something solely based on memorising facts instead of fully understanding them and applying them and hence encouraging student to be interested in more details is utter nonsense, but not uncommon at all - schoolar system can be fairly regarded as broken in this way.
Also, students will choose path of least resistance in most cases - why would one bother to understand, when memorising random facts is enough to pass exams? And this applies all the way from elementary school up to the college.  I'd bet you will choose someone who's fully, or almost fully selftaught, (just) because it's this way nowdays.



Before one starts flamewar based on my post - I'm not trying to sound like elitist dickhead at all, I'm just summing up all my up to date expirience and my viewpoint leading from it.
 
To be more detailed on my backround: I'm in my early 20's, working for small company focused on highend chemical instrumentation, doing all suff related to hardware, including low level firmware, HW design (from concept trough prototypes, verification, PCB layout, HDL design all the way up to manufacturing preparation and material sourcing), almost all of the mechanical related stuff (or least doing documentation for third party companies). Other guys do rest of the firmware and software work, bureocracy, chemical research and so on. Previously worked about two years for another small company focused on LED technologies - some of it was medical, some aftermarket automotive. I've got my first serious paid project back when I was 16yo teenage.

And you know what ? I'm selftaught. I know about at least three other people in my age brighter than me in our region (and that's about 200k of people in total and fairly limited by my social awkardness), all of them selftaught, too. Such people exist. Just keep looking and make it interesting for them (I'd apply in a heartbeat, BTW - if only just not living on the opposite side of the Earth ).

[AlienRelics]

2. I think "hobbyist" would be someone who doesnt do this for a living.

The two are not mutually exclusive. I think there are quite a few of us who do this for a living and are into electronics as a hobby.

I work in electronics because I love working in electronics. Why wouldn't it be my hobby? That said, why wouldn't I want to do it for a living? Major league baseball players started out as baseball "hobbyists".

I know, I know... I'm responding to things said pages ago.

[AlienRelics]

I feel that bashing "people today" has become something of a fad in the tech community.

Not really. I've always been aware of those "people today" who don't seem to know much about their chosen profession. 2 year degrees, applying for the same jobs I was. They get an interview but I don't because I didn't have that little sheet of paper. Yet they can't read a color code and can barely solder.

It doesn't qualify as a fad, then. 

[Stephen Durr]

Dave, I vote you give the job to Sagan 

[senso]

I feel that bashing "people today" has become something of a fad in the tech community.

Not really. I've always been aware of those "people today" who don't seem to know much about their chosen profession. 2 year degrees, applying for the same jobs I was. They get an interview but I don't because I didn't have that little sheet of paper. Yet they can't read a color code and can barely solder.

It doesn't qualify as a fad, then. 

Join the boat AlienRelics.
Or start doing what I do, freelance work, and then I get paid to correct all the mistakes that the so called engineers make when they burn the factory down when they try to light up a led with a freaking arduino 

[RogerS]

Sorry Dave,

I wouldn't have qualified for your position either back in the day when I first began studying electronics in the 1960's. My breadboard consisted of a 1' x 2' piece of 3/4" pine with a traced copy of the schematic from a magazine taped to it and some small finish brads to use as solder lugs. I didn't learn my first professional layout tool, PADS/Mentor Graphics, until the mid 1990's after working as a technician (shipboard radar and communications) for well over 20 years.

I was taught DC and AC circuit analysis (using a slide rule) , troubleshooting, instrumentation, and layout using pencil and paper drafting skills, blueprinting, and tape out.

If I was looking for help again, I would do as I have done in the past and look for some one that could at least do DC circuit analysis and knew how to use the standard word processor and spread sheets, which in my part of the blue marble is Microsoft office. The important thing to me is that, in addition to the above, the candidate have a can do attitude, strong work ethic, and tolerable personality. The schematic capture and layout of minor non-RF 2 layer boards can be learned quite quickly. The same can be said for soldering. Well, that's my opinion for what it is worth. (PS If some of my words are miss spelled, please cut me some slack not only am I an engineer, I'm a Yank and English is a second language.)

[Corporate666]

It comes down to two things.

First, if you want a candidate to have a skill, it should be because you want them to utilize that skill, and therefore they need to be fairly compensated at fair market value for having and using that skill.  Otherwise, they won't stick around long or they won't perform - and you can't really blame them for either if they're not making fair market value.  There are exceptions like internships, work-study, lab assistants and such, but this is a "real" job and those exceptions don't apply.  Finding someone with all the skills requested who is reasonably proficient in those skills isn't impossible - but the pay will need to be commensurate with that experience.  We don't know what they pay is so this isn't a criticism - I assume we're speaking about a pay level that matches the skillset being asked for.

Second, a very very successful man in the oil business once told me "Don't hire the best.  Hire someone good enough".  That was in response to my first business plan which involved a Star-Trek-like idea to hire the best and brightest group of brilliant over-achievers I could find to build an unstoppable team.  He advised me against it - and he was right.  The problem was that such a group of brilliant people with lots of skills and experience in various fields wouldn't want to be working for my little startup unless they were hard up, and/or they would work there for a short time and turn into a competitor or leave when something better came along.  My friend suggested that if you want to hire an accountant, then hire someone who is happy to just be an accountant, not someone who is a brilliant financial mind with some proficiency in sales, technology and engineering.  That guy won't want to be "just your accountant", and you need "just an accountant".  In other words, it's important to define what specific role the employee is expected to fill, and ensure that you hire someone who is good enough for that role (at that pay), rather than someone who is the very best you can find.  Nothing is more of a hassle than getting a new employee up to speed, so you need someone who will be happy with the job (and pay) being offered. 

[Ecklar]

I believe the general description Dave lays out for a possible employee is perfect.  The description, however, is not describing an undergraduate university student since for the first several years these students are largely taking building block math (calculus 1, 2, 3, 4, linear eq, diff eq, etc) and electives (the humanities namely English, psychology, sociology and all that) or engineering drafting ( God forbid!).  Electronics training for an undergrad EE at this point is vague, nil and largely has very little to do with the pragmatic hardscrabble skills and insights displayed throughout and requested for the EEVBLOG.

Rather that perfect candidate will most likely be some naturally passionate, over the top obsessivly curious, slightly nutty electronics hobbyist with a lab in their bedroom in addition to a practical trade school background, and still at this point, probably vying for the more worldly university degree.  A misanthrope would probably fit if they thoroughly understood Ohm's Law, and while growing up, had dismantled every clock and computer in their neighborhood (treasure) while looking great in a bikini (think video presence and mud runs).

[george graves]

I'd have to say the last two posts are spot on.

Dave isn't replying to this post.    I'll give you 3 guesses why, but you only need one.  It's cause he's sure he's found someone. 

I hope you make us all a lair Dave!

[EEVblog]

There must be at least dozen of students/hobbyists fitting your requirements living nearby

And it seems that's pretty much what I got. About dozen or so locals, majority students, some qualified graduates, some just hobbyists, and the odd person older than me. One thing they have in common, enthusiastic hobbyists all. But that's not surprising because having watched my blog is an automatic filter mechanism for that.

[Lennos]

Look I tend to agree with Dave's description for the role. It is the difference between an enthusiast and a hobbyist. I would say I am an enthusiast, I love to tinker and learn about electronics and fix things that are broken and can do diagnostics of basic circuits, but I couldn't design a PCB layout to save my life (mainly because I am not in a position where it requires me to actually make any money out of it or try and find my first job in the electronics field). I loved mucking around with circuits as a youngster, building also sorts of stuff from the old Dick Smith Fun Way into electronics and old Tandy electronics books in the late 70's and early 80's, and hacking hardware (especially 8 bit computers of the era) but circumstances led me into other careers and I never pursued electronics until more recently despite my passionate curiosity for the subject and likewise be reinvigorated by websites such as the eevBlog.

Still having all the enthusiasm in the world doesn't mean I am of the caliber of a reasonable hobbyist who has been making many circuits at home. While I can solder, use various test equipment and understand basic electronics theory, in my limited experience and probably still ignorant opinion of the subject it is the difference between home theoretical electronics and practical applied electronics (or simply understanding vs doing) where you see the step change. The next for me would be hobbyist to undergraduate university student where the hands on skill meets the advanced theory and solidifies why the hell those things you built actually worked, and turns on the lightbulb why many of them didn't (despite you figuring out that adding/substituting higher value components here and there seemed to solve the problem in one of your hobby circuits).

[EEVblog]

First, if you want a candidate to have a skill, it should be because you want them to utilize that skill, and therefore they need to be fairly compensated at fair market value for having and using that skill.  Otherwise, they won't stick around long or they won't perform - and you can't really blame them for either if they're not making fair market value.  There are exceptions like internships, work-study, lab assistants and such, but this is a "real" job and those exceptions don't apply.

It's never that black and white.
There are many subtle pros and cons to every job, and this one is no exception.
For example:
I offer the chance at a public profile role, you might be able to make a public name for yourself, some people might find that valuable?
I offer a low pressure environment compared to say working in a design house, some people might find that valuable?
I offer the ability to work remotely if needed, and no set hours, some people might find that valuable?
I offer the ability for someone with no qualifications, or lesser qualifications to take a "step up" to job that might look good on their resume, some people might find that valuable?
And there are likely other benefits I can offer over many other employers to some people.

Finding someone with all the skills requested who is reasonably proficient in those skills isn't impossible - but the pay will need to be commensurate with that experience.  We don't know what they pay is so this isn't a criticism - I assume we're speaking about a pay level that matches the skillset being asked for.

Correct, I think it is.
But once again, it ain't that black out white.
There is a huge difference between having the basic hobby level skills (that I am after) to lay out say a double sided low frequency board, and being able to lay out a professional 12 layer board with bleeding edge design rules and GHz signals integrated into a high end system with high end requirements.
Both can be described the same as "PCB design layout experience" in job descriptions.

[EEVblog]

I'd have to say the last two posts are spot on.
Dave isn't replying to this post.    I'll give you 3 guesses why, but you only need one.  It's cause he's sure he's found someone. 
I hope you make us all a lair Dave!

Yes, you were wrong.
Of course I haven't hired or interviewed anyone yet. But I got over 40 applications from people willing to be considered for the role. And based on their resumes (what ones I've read so far) and other stuff they have sent me (public projects, videos, crowd funded project links, websites etc), many seem very talented and well suited. And they range from hobbyists, school kids, EE students, graduates (up to masters), industry experienced, and even retirees. There seems to be no shortage, even knowing up front that it was a not a high level experienced industry paying job. And yes, the majority of them have most or all of the things I'm asking for.

[(In)Sanity]

Dave,  I think whoever you hire should feel honored to be part of such a cool video blog.   That's assuming they get at least a tiny bit of camera time,  the occasional blip.  If you keep them hidden away slaving in the mines they might not like it so much.   People can be funny like that.

Jeff

[JDSween855]

The description and expectation of the position is a realistic one, and I would think it would not be that hard to find someone to fill it.  I also started electronics experimenting in the 1960's as RogerS did with about the same type of gear.  I think a retired electronics repair person, like myself that carried a scope and tool bag from site to site for years and had discrete components in the trunk, would make a great side-kick to the blog.  If I were not also a yank, would have applied when the post first came out.  Any person that has practiced electronics as a hobbyist should have the skills mentioned if they do anything at home for the pure joy of it.  Otherwise, how would you get to do anything except read and wish?  My two-bits.

[Bud]

So before you acquire the mentioned skills you cannot be called hobbyist, can you? What are you then?  Sorry does not make sense to me.

[miguelvp]

So before you acquire the mentioned skills you cannot be called hobbyist, can you? What are you then?

A noob?

[Dr. Frank]

Simply call him "Elton"

(Germans will understand)

[(In)Sanity]

So before you acquire the mentioned skills you cannot be called hobbyist, can you? What are you then?  Sorry does not make sense to me.

A person with interest in.......______________

Jeff

[iva]

[...] And they range from hobbyists, school kids, EE students, graduates (up to masters), industry experienced, and even retirees.

I watch all the videos I can but seldom leave comments. This one though has serious potential, imagine an old grumpy questioning Dave all the time, that's material for a sit-com!!

PS at 17 in the early 90s I would have fit the profile! come on, we had to learn all the stuff from expensive magazines in those days, layout was done with a "student version" of orcad... how come is it that difficult now with all the tutorial material and great open source software available with a click?
The request seemed very reasonable to me...

[EEVblog]

So before you acquire the mentioned skills you cannot be called hobbyist, can you? What are you then?  Sorry does not make sense to me.

You can call yourself anything you want.
But if you want to go for a job saying you have decent hobby level electronics skills, people will expect that you can do all that basic stuff to a moderately competent level.

[Simon]

Join the boat AlienRelics.
Or start doing what I do, freelance work, and then I get paid to correct all the mistakes that the so called engineers make when they burn the factory down when they try to light up a led with a freaking arduino 

Glad to here I'm not the only one but then when a company tells your their staffed by post graduates and don't say in what, well they could have done media studies for all i know.

[tggzzz]

I feel that bashing "people today" has become something of a fad in the tech community.

Not really. I've always been aware of those "people today" who don't seem to know much about their chosen profession. 2 year degrees, applying for the same jobs I was. They get an interview but I don't because I didn't have that little sheet of paper. Yet they can't read a color code and can barely solder.

It doesn't qualify as a fad, then. 

Join the boat AlienRelics.
Or start doing what I do, freelance work, and then I get paid to correct all the mistakes that the so called engineers make when they burn the factory down when they try to light up a led with a freaking arduino 

Obligatory, very famous, very important counter-example, just to keep some balance.

Sir Stanley Hooker, being allowed to do anything he wanted, decided to look at the supercharger on Merlin engines. He saw that the existing craft design was "suboptimum" from a theoretical (and operational!) perspective. His use of maths gave Spitfires, Hurricanes and Mustangs an extra 30% (!) power (i.e. improved climb and height) and 22mph more speed.

Without that maths and theoretical insight, the Battle of Britain would have been lost and my German would be much better than it is.

Theory without practice is mental masturbaton. Practice without theory is alchemical fumbling. Both theory and practice are necessary; neither is sufficient on its own.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/sir_stanley_hooker.htm

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

Without that maths and theoretical insight, the Battle of Britain would have been lost and my German would be much better than it is.

It looks like the above statement is wrong. Just gave this a cursory look so I may be wrong instead.
It seems Stanley Hooker's designs only went in after Battle of Britain, October 1940, I think the battle was lost and won by then.
ps. Not disrespecting Stanley's designs.

[VK5RC]

Looking at the stats on those Merlin engines is "mechanical porn"!
 I want an engine that can produce 1200kW at 3000rpm!