Live data from Hacker News

CIA Labs

cia.gov

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: CIA Labs

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think that's a perk you don't belong doing that work. It's not the james bond life you think it is and the people who think of it that way are insufferable. Try living in a windowless box for 8 hours a day and having no resume.

I think you meant the inverse. If you value optionality to work on government projects that require clearance wouldn’t one view already having said clearance as a perk? If you don’t want to do that work you would not view it as a perk.

I'm not trying to nitpick or anything, but to my ears calling a clearance a "perk" speaks to misconceptions about the reality of working in that ecosystem. But job mobility is a real thing, so yeah that's a good point to talk about.

I can only speak from the contractor side of things, and it is true that many job openings list "must have active [clearance X]" as a requirement, which certainly keeps the candidate pool to within people already in that community. It takes 12-24 months to get some clearances, with no guarantee that after that time invested, you will actually be approved. So it is a massive gate.

But the flip side, as others pointed out, is you have large chunks of time where you cannot talk about what you did in anything approaching the detail someone who worked on a non-cleared job can. Even if you worked on some stealth mode startup's top-secret project, with NDAs and whatnot, there's nothing like the very real threat of decades in federal prison. The best way to avoid falling afoul of an unauthorized disclosure is strongly compartmentalizing your work life - this is strongly encouraged within the industry. You talk about work at work, in a vault where the only other people there are cleared. You STFU everywhere else. Easy and simple to remember. The only time this is _ever_ a problem is when you're trying to get out of the industry, where you must talk about your work experience to potential employers. That's how your perk becomes a trap.

Re: CIA Labs

#72

More information: "Officers who develop new technologies at CIA Labs will be allowed to patent, license, and profit from their work, making 15% of the total income from the new invention with a cap of $150,000 per year. That could double most agency salaries and make the work more competitive with Silicon Valley." : https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/21/1008654/cias-new...

Seems like a strange proposition, I take all the risk of creating a new technology that will likely fail, and then if I beat the odds and succeed I'm capped at 150k? Also, if I'm not allowed to monetize my technology or patents, do I really own them? Is this just a bad startup incubator?

If you're continuously drawing a salary and not having to pay the lawyers yourself, you're definitely not taking all of the rism

Re: CIA Labs

#74

Is the dragonfly logo somehow on a more general level related to spy stuff? It is not the first time I see it in a spy context and neither this or the other time it could be easily explained just because of dragonfly drones.

I commented elsewhere, but look up "Insectothopter". Nefarious orgs like the CIA seem to love symbolism, so I'd imagine there's some connection between embedding themselves in public and private research and being "flies on the wall".

Re: CIA Labs

#77
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still take a risk because if your project fails for whatever reason, you're stuck on a CIA salary, rather than a SV salary where you'd probably be making twice as much even if your project fails there too.

Are we talking about founders or FAANG developers? Last I’ve read on HN, most founders are not making “SV salary” because they’re expecting the golden ticket. Here, it appears you get an equivalent salary + job security with a capped upside.

Sorry, I meant compared to being a bog standard IC at FAANG. Not a founder or anything like that.

Re: CIA Labs

#78

More information: "Officers who develop new technologies at CIA Labs will be allowed to patent, license, and profit from their work, making 15% of the total income from the new invention with a cap of $150,000 per year. That could double most agency salaries and make the work more competitive with Silicon Valley." : https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/21/1008654/cias-new...

Seems like a strange proposition, I take all the risk of creating a new technology that will likely fail, and then if I beat the odds and succeed I'm capped at 150k? Also, if I'm not allowed to monetize my technology or patents, do I really own them? Is this just a bad startup incubator?

It is not cheap filing. I hope CIA is paying for this....

Re: CIA Labs

#79
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they're gonna scoop up all the Palantir guys after the IPO.

How are they going to get the Palantir people? Doesn't Palantir pay extremely well? I don't think people in this thread understand: The starting salary range for a "Technical Developer" is $60k-$150k according to their website. I imagine it's similar for CIA labs. That won't get any FAANG or Palantir developers out of bed in the morning unless they think being in the CIA super cool or something.

Palantir does not pay well, or at least used to not. They had a disclosed relatively low salary cap back in the day.

https://www.quora.com/How-does-Palantir-attract-talent-if-it...

Re: CIA Labs

#80
post #19

decent amount of history indicates CIA had been partnering with academics and private industry for decades. Seems like this is an attempt to broaden the funnel of participants, away from key strategic efforts into DARPA-style R&D land?

To some extent yes, but not really, overlaps seems to me happens at transition from lab R&D prototype to prototype deployment/integration with agency.
Post reply on HN