8 ms·

Reading this article makes me realize I certainly picked the road not taken. Last year I quit my job as the Director of IT at a small pharma, dropped out of a c

by chime 16y ago

Reading this article makes me realize I certainly picked the road not taken. Last year I quit my job as the Director of IT at a small pharma, dropped out of a company-paid MBA program, drastically reduced my expenses, and started doing independent research. A lot of people around me thought I was crazy especially since I wasn't going the PhD or startup route either. In my mind though, it seems pretty logical - I want to do real computer science research without all the BS that goes on with academia or corporate research lab. I'm more productive when working solo than in teams. And I already have a specific research project in mind. All I needed was to plan my life so I'd have 50-60hr/week free after my bills were paid. For the past two months, I've been working on my research project diligently and without any external delays. I know I won't get a degree out of this and I doubt I can get published but since that's not my end-goal, it doesn't matter. I am looking for a hardware hacker if anyone is interested - it is a very fun/rewarding project: http://ktype.net http://ktype.net

tjmaxal 16y ago
Are you just doing research for researches sake? If so good for you. If not, why try and do it independently? Don't you think you deserve to be rewarded for your work? i.e. compensated either with prestige or money? At the very least would you like to be compensated for you contributions to the field?
- nutanc 16y ago
  Prestige and compensation are two ways of being rewarded. Another way is to just see your work make the world a better place and feel satisfied.
- chime 16y ago
  I guess I'm doing it for the end-goal's sake. I really do want people with disabilities to be able to communicate better, including my own cousin. As long as my bills are being paid (regardless of the source of income), I don't need any rewards. I'm not a saint or anything - I just don't want to deal with the overhead of funding, grants, scholarships, sales, marketing, clients, customers. I want to make a usable, innovative product and keep improving it. A few years ago my preliminary version got #1 on HN ( http://chir.ag/projects/ktype/ http://chir.ag/projects/ktype/ ) and since that day I have been working hard to change my life so I could work on it full-time. Took over a year but I can finally do it now, so I'm very happy.
  - msg 16y ago
    You might not want "customers" but nothing will help you innovate like users. Where I work we get mountains of feedback and use it to justify new features and to prioritize bug fixes.
    - chime 16y ago
      I wholeheartedly agree and I intend to start working with my potential users very soon.
jazzyb 16y ago
What is the ultimate goal of your research? If you are simply doing research for the fun of it, then you can only continue it without funding for as long as you have runway capital. I ask this question because I've thought about doing the same thing, but I'm not sure I could productize the research I want to do, so it scares me to begin and basically throw away my savings for no tangible benefit. I'd appreciate your thoughts.
- chime 16y ago
  I was very careful to pick realistic, targetable goals for my research project, KType. World peace wouldn't cut it. KType has the goals of: * Improving communication for people with disabilities * Creating low-cost software / hardware tools, customizable for each individual * Providing useful research material and articles for families & friends * Sharing case studies of actual users Money doesn't factor into this because over the past few years, I've worked hard to ensure my bills are paid without me having to work full-time. My research project goals have to do with the real project's usability and accessibility and not orthogonal accomplishments like publishing papers, getting grants etc. That's all I need to keeps me in focus. Every minute I work on KType, I am actually working on KType. It's a very slow process but at least I know I'm moving in the right direction.
chwahoo 16y ago
Doing independent research like this is very cool. I admire your willingness to take such a risk and make this sacrifice. One comment I would add is that, while you might be more "productive" solo (less context switching/blocking I assume ;), working with others forces you to maintain a persuasive, crisp story about why what your doing is the right thing. While early, exploratory research can temporarily delay the need for this story, it can't be delayed long! From the info on your website, it looks like you are developing keyboard layouts that would be useful for people with disabilities. However, I was unable to figure out what your elevator speech for this work might be. What is your hypothesis? What evidence do you have for it? What disability(ies) are you targeting? How will new mobile keyboard help? Lastly, this looks like a useful project for others (you're not just proving random theorems in your basement :)! Why not re-frame this in your mind as a startup? Good luck!
- chime 16y ago
  I am definitely getting input from as many people as I can. Within a month, I'm going to start working with my potential users and their caretakers so that'll be real feedback. I'm targeting http://ktype.net/wiki/research:disabilities http://ktype.net/wiki/research:disabilities which prevent people from talking or using a keyboard - Stephen Hawkings of the world as well as autistic children with major speech problems. There are many existing solutions out there to help people with disabilities but there are also very wide gaps in between. I'm trying to catalog everything I can find to help fill in the gaps and I will make my own bridges if necessary. The new keyboard is an iPad app (Demo: http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:demo http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:demo ) and it will be extremely customizable. On the iPad itself, you can already define your own keys/layout: http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110204 http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110204 Additionally, I'm working on a vastly better auto-suggest feature: http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110209 http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110209 than a cellphone T9. Also, I want to make it work with a variety of hardware input devices. If you are a researcher making a brain-reading interface for paralyzed patients, don't hook it up to Windows! KType will learn from each user's patterns and will be customizable enough to support easy communication. I'm also going to integrate Twitter/email etc. soon enough - http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:roadmap http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:roadmap Don't get me started I can keep talking about this 24/7 :)
david927 16y ago
I did the same thing about ten years ago: I quit a high-paying job in Zurich, moved to Prague on-the-cheap, and hired two Czech PhD students part-time. We spent five years doing CS research and it was always two-steps forward, one back. Every three or four months we would throw everything out and start again; and we had the freedom to do so. There was no installed base, no one tapping their fingers expectantly. Looking back, I wouldn’t have done it any other way. I think you made a great choice. Good luck!
- jlmendezbonini 16y ago
  Would you mind telling us what has happened since?
  - david927 16y ago
    Sure. The mission was to find a new way to approach how software is constructed. The result is called Kayia and it's here: http://kayia.org/kayia.pdf http://kayia.org/kayia.pdf It hit 'singularity' (everything came down to a graph edge; the system is comprised of nothing else) in 2005. I've had some great advisors and the feedback is consistent, “That it’s unique is not interesting if it's not compelling. Show how it’s compelling.” So I’ve stumbled with my limited resources over the years to do that and I’ve come up with a database, of all things, but it’s actually the "programming language" masquerading as a database. I'm thinking of offering it as a service and if you want to see where that's going, it's at http://www.kayadb.com http://www.kayadb.com (although it’s not meant to be looked at yet). I'll do a Tell HN when in a few weeks when it's closer to being ready to show.
    - 108 16y ago
      Is it opensource? Can you also provide a link to the source code? Is it an RDBMS or a NoSQL? How can I download and use your DB?
      - david927 16y ago
        It's not ready yet. It's NoSQL, scales to 4EB on the back-end but handles the relational model. Not open source for varying reasons. It will be a service at first. But it's not ready yet. I'll definitely let HN know when it is, and if anyone wants to be an early user, please contact me.
rapicastillo 16y ago
This is the exact same thing i am planning to do. i am currently in a lavish tech consultancy firm, but the whole idea of being a "resource" is really stagnating my brain, and also objectivizes humanity. I still can't stand being called a resource. Im planning on quitting soon, and doing independent research while creating non-startup apps. Posts like this (and the link above) really motivate me. :) Best of luck to ya!
- chime 16y ago
  Thanks! Same to you. Feel free to keep me updated with your research projects.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
hessenwolf 16y ago
Watch for the 8 month wtf collapse, stay in bed for the requisite week, and then just get back up again.
NY_USA_Hacker 16y ago
You wrote: "I know I won't get a degree out of this and I doubt I can get published" Sorry to disagree! :-)! For getting published, try some journal on human-computer interaction. Since you know much more about your field than I do, look for other journal 'varieties' as well. For what you are doing, that is, a lot of independent, call it, R&D, if you get results anything like what you want, then it would be surprising if you didn't have something publishable. If this argument is not enough, then look at much of what does get published and conclude that much of it is not very high quality stuff! Uh, one way to improve your paper a notch or two over what is common is just to write well, say, well organized, clear, including writing good English with good spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Once you are published at least once, better, say, three times, sorry, but you should be able to get a Ph.D.! :-)! Maybe this is a big disappointment, but it's true! How then to get a Ph.D? Four points: (1) At at least some of the best US research universities, there is no coursework requirement for a Ph.D. (2) The requirement for a dissertation is, say, "an original contribution to knowledge worthy of publication". Since you've already been there, done that, got the T-shirt, there's no question. Big, huge advantage. (3) One more requirement would likely be the qualifying exams. These exams are to show that you are 'qualified' to move on to research and do research. But, uh, did I mention that you've already been there, done that, got the T-shirt? The difficulty of the qualifying exams varies widely, but generally the 'polish on your halo' can be important in deciding who passes. So, it can be good to have some high quality halo polish; here are three: (A) Some of the best halo polish is published papers, the more papers, more highly regarded, the better the polish. (B) More halo polish is when it looks like you might be a successful entrepreneur who gets good publicity for the university and, maybe later on, is, uh, 'thankful and generous'! (C) More good polish is that you actually did this work, conceived it, took it on, got it done, independently, which means you are promising as a good researcher for the future bringing more good publicity to the university. (4) There may be a requirement for 'residency' for a year. This can mean that maybe you show up on campus some day in September and again in the spring to defend your dissertation which you submit by taking a stack of your published papers and putting a big staple in the UL corner. For more: You should pick the university and department carefully. You might try, say, the bio-engineering program at Johns Hopkins. I would focus on such higher end engineering programs with 'biology' contact. Of course try MIT and Cal Tech. Don't settle for Southern Sawgrass U. You may be able to get a research grant, before, during, or after your Ph.D. program: At your university, ask the people who know about grant sources. Maybe the US DoD VA would give you a grant. A research grant is the 'magic bullet' to rapid progress in academics because you are bringing money to the university! You will understand better when you see what fraction of the money the university keeps for 'overhead'! Did I hear someone say, "Money talks."? Uh, one way to pick a department and prof: Pick your journal carefully! That is, if you want to get into program A with full prof P editor of relevant journal X, then submit your paper to journal X and, if it is accepted, then, uh, take 'advantage' of this contact you made with prof P to get your Ph.D. Note: It can be possible for prof P to 'direct' your dissertation at a school not his. Uh, once your paper is accepted, prof P may invite you to present your paper at his conference on Computer-Human Interaction or some such. Likely accept! Then that's two bullets on your CV. Note: When you submit your paper, likely you do not have to give any significant biographical information at all. So, you don't need a high school transcript! In particular, it doesn't have to be clear if you have a Ph.D. or not. So, before your Ph.D., you are fully 'qualified' to submit a paper. Note: Commonly a journal plays pocket pool with your paper for a year before sending you results of reviews. So, two rejections and one acceptance would take three years. Bummer. So, to speed up the process, go online, find maybe 50 appropriate journals, to the editor in chief of each, via e-mail or on paper, write a nice, one page letter outlining your paper and asking "might your journal be interested?", enclose a copy of your paper, and, then, only from the responses make a 'formal submission'. Uh, the research universities make a big, huge deal out of 'research' both for the faculty and for at least the Ph.D. students. Else they'd have to know something about the real world and teach it, right? Horrors! Uh, the research universities long since concluded that by a wide margin the most difficult part of a Ph.D. and the usual point of failure is just the research for the dissertation. For some students, that work is hard enough to threaten their life (literally). For others, it's put their feet up for an afternoon, think up some good stuff, write it up, send it in, get it accepted for publication, and shout "Done!". In my opinion, you've already passed the main obstacle: You've decided to do some independent work. For more, you've picked a problem, have some productive lines of attack, and are making progress. For more, if you get the research results you have in mind, then you will have something "new, correct, and significant": "New"? No doubt what you are working on does not yet exist. "Correct"? It works! "Significant"? Ask Hawking or many people and/or groups working with the handicapped. E.g., ask the US DoD VA. You can do something cute here: You satisfy "significant" because you solve a practical problem and not because you have a theorem or counterexample that settles some old conjecture about differential cohomology that only six people in the world know about. Readers listen up: This example makes a useful, general point! Presto: "New, correct, and significant" are the usual criteria for publication! That is, you've already given up on taking a problem from a prof, pleasing a prof, caring mostly about what will please a prof, looking for praise, approval, status, prestige, guidance, 'mentoring' from a prof, etc. But, but, but, your work would never get venture funding, right? Wrong! One of the 'themes' Brad Feld likes to pursue is human-computer interaction, especially without a traditional keyboard! Uh, if you had Hawking, the DoD VA, and some organization for the handicapped on your side, had some beta testers, ..., then you might get a venture capital check -- it's not hopeless. Sorry to disagree with your: "I know I won't get a degree out of this and I doubt I can get published". :-)! There's an old quote: "Be wise; generalize.". Okay: How I got a Ph.D.: I started with a practical problem I'd identified and worked on before grad school. I saw a solution intuitively. In my first year in grad school, I took some advanced math that let me turn my intuitive stuff into some solid theorems and proofs for a solution, and in my first summer independently I did that. That work was all but the software and typing for my dissertation. For some interim 'halo polish', I saw a problem, thought for a few evenings, roughly saw a solution, and then signed up for a 'reading course' on that problem. I worked for a few more days and saw a much nicer solution, wrote it up, turned it in, and was done with the reading course in two weeks. The work looked publishable and was -- I published it later. So, in two weeks I'd created "an original contribution to knowledge worthy of publication", that is, satisfied the requirement for a dissertation. Good halo polish. A student who does such independent work is "difficult", but on this point read the recent Fred Wilson blog at his AVC.COM. You will not be the first to do some independent work and later get a Ph.D. for it. Uh, one of the biggest topics now in computer science is a 'good' algorithm as in the set of algorithms P as in the question P versus NP. Well, likely and apparently the formulator of a 'good' algorithm was Jack Edmonds. Can get a start on him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Edmonds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Edmonds Yes, he also won a von Neumann prize, etc. Little things like that! As at Wikipedia, he was at University of Maryland (UM). Uh, as I heard the story, he was not a happy Ph.D. student at UM so left to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) about 40 miles away. Then he published some good work in graph theory. Finally some of the math faculty at UM, feeling a little guilty, drove to NBS, smoked a peace pipe, and said essentially "Put a staple in the UL corner of your papers and we'll be pleased to call it a Ph.D. dissertation in our department.". Final point: Of course, D. Knuth knows about academics. Well buried in 'The TeXBook' is: "The traditional way is to put off all creative aspects until the last part of graduate school. For seventeen or more years, a student is taught 'examsmanship', then suddenly after passing enough exams in graduate school he's told to do something original." Yes, there very much is a conflict here: The approach to getting into grad school can strongly conflict with the approach to writing a dissertation.

by chime 16y ago

tjmaxal 16y ago

Are you just doing research for researches sake? If so good for you. If not, why try and do it independently? Don't you think you deserve to be rewarded for your work? i.e. compensated either with prestige or money? At the very least would you like to be compensated for you contributions to the field?

nutanc 16y ago
Prestige and compensation are two ways of being rewarded. Another way is to just see your work make the world a better place and feel satisfied.
chime 16y ago
I guess I'm doing it for the end-goal's sake. I really do want people with disabilities to be able to communicate better, including my own cousin. As long as my bills are being paid (regardless of the source of income), I don't need any rewards. I'm not a saint or anything - I just don't want to deal with the overhead of funding, grants, scholarships, sales, marketing, clients, customers. I want to make a usable, innovative product and keep improving it. A few years ago my preliminary version got #1 on HN ( http://chir.ag/projects/ktype/ http://chir.ag/projects/ktype/ ) and since that day I have been working hard to change my life so I could work on it full-time. Took over a year but I can finally do it now, so I'm very happy.
- msg 16y ago
  You might not want "customers" but nothing will help you innovate like users. Where I work we get mountains of feedback and use it to justify new features and to prioritize bug fixes.
  - chime 16y ago
    I wholeheartedly agree and I intend to start working with my potential users very soon.

jazzyb 16y ago

What is the ultimate goal of your research? If you are simply doing research for the fun of it, then you can only continue it without funding for as long as you have runway capital. I ask this question because I've thought about doing the same thing, but I'm not sure I could productize the research I want to do, so it scares me to begin and basically throw away my savings for no tangible benefit. I'd appreciate your thoughts.

chime 16y ago
I was very careful to pick realistic, targetable goals for my research project, KType. World peace wouldn't cut it. KType has the goals of: * Improving communication for people with disabilities * Creating low-cost software / hardware tools, customizable for each individual * Providing useful research material and articles for families & friends * Sharing case studies of actual users Money doesn't factor into this because over the past few years, I've worked hard to ensure my bills are paid without me having to work full-time. My research project goals have to do with the real project's usability and accessibility and not orthogonal accomplishments like publishing papers, getting grants etc. That's all I need to keeps me in focus. Every minute I work on KType, I am actually working on KType. It's a very slow process but at least I know I'm moving in the right direction.

chwahoo 16y ago

Doing independent research like this is very cool. I admire your willingness to take such a risk and make this sacrifice. One comment I would add is that, while you might be more "productive" solo (less context switching/blocking I assume ;), working with others forces you to maintain a persuasive, crisp story about why what your doing is the right thing. While early, exploratory research can temporarily delay the need for this story, it can't be delayed long! From the info on your website, it looks like you are developing keyboard layouts that would be useful for people with disabilities. However, I was unable to figure out what your elevator speech for this work might be. What is your hypothesis? What evidence do you have for it? What disability(ies) are you targeting? How will new mobile keyboard help? Lastly, this looks like a useful project for others (you're not just proving random theorems in your basement :)! Why not re-frame this in your mind as a startup? Good luck!

chime 16y ago
I am definitely getting input from as many people as I can. Within a month, I'm going to start working with my potential users and their caretakers so that'll be real feedback. I'm targeting http://ktype.net/wiki/research:disabilities http://ktype.net/wiki/research:disabilities which prevent people from talking or using a keyboard - Stephen Hawkings of the world as well as autistic children with major speech problems. There are many existing solutions out there to help people with disabilities but there are also very wide gaps in between. I'm trying to catalog everything I can find to help fill in the gaps and I will make my own bridges if necessary. The new keyboard is an iPad app (Demo: http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:demo http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:demo ) and it will be extremely customizable. On the iPad itself, you can already define your own keys/layout: http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110204 http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110204 Additionally, I'm working on a vastly better auto-suggest feature: http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110209 http://ktype.net/wiki/research:articles:progress_20110209 than a cellphone T9. Also, I want to make it work with a variety of hardware input devices. If you are a researcher making a brain-reading interface for paralyzed patients, don't hook it up to Windows! KType will learn from each user's patterns and will be customizable enough to support easy communication. I'm also going to integrate Twitter/email etc. soon enough - http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:roadmap http://ktype.net/wiki/dev:roadmap Don't get me started I can keep talking about this 24/7 :)

david927 16y ago

I did the same thing about ten years ago: I quit a high-paying job in Zurich, moved to Prague on-the-cheap, and hired two Czech PhD students part-time. We spent five years doing CS research and it was always two-steps forward, one back. Every three or four months we would throw everything out and start again; and we had the freedom to do so. There was no installed base, no one tapping their fingers expectantly. Looking back, I wouldn’t have done it any other way. I think you made a great choice. Good luck!

jlmendezbonini 16y ago
Would you mind telling us what has happened since?
- david927 16y ago
  Sure. The mission was to find a new way to approach how software is constructed. The result is called Kayia and it's here: http://kayia.org/kayia.pdf http://kayia.org/kayia.pdf It hit 'singularity' (everything came down to a graph edge; the system is comprised of nothing else) in 2005. I've had some great advisors and the feedback is consistent, “That it’s unique is not interesting if it's not compelling. Show how it’s compelling.” So I’ve stumbled with my limited resources over the years to do that and I’ve come up with a database, of all things, but it’s actually the "programming language" masquerading as a database. I'm thinking of offering it as a service and if you want to see where that's going, it's at http://www.kayadb.com http://www.kayadb.com (although it’s not meant to be looked at yet). I'll do a Tell HN when in a few weeks when it's closer to being ready to show.
  - 108 16y ago
    Is it opensource? Can you also provide a link to the source code? Is it an RDBMS or a NoSQL? How can I download and use your DB?
    - david927 16y ago
      It's not ready yet. It's NoSQL, scales to 4EB on the back-end but handles the relational model. Not open source for varying reasons. It will be a service at first. But it's not ready yet. I'll definitely let HN know when it is, and if anyone wants to be an early user, please contact me.

rapicastillo 16y ago

This is the exact same thing i am planning to do. i am currently in a lavish tech consultancy firm, but the whole idea of being a "resource" is really stagnating my brain, and also objectivizes humanity. I still can't stand being called a resource. Im planning on quitting soon, and doing independent research while creating non-startup apps. Posts like this (and the link above) really motivate me. :) Best of luck to ya!

chime 16y ago
Thanks! Same to you. Feel free to keep me updated with your research projects.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

hessenwolf 16y ago

Watch for the 8 month wtf collapse, stay in bed for the requisite week, and then just get back up again.

NY_USA_Hacker 16y ago

You wrote: "I know I won't get a degree out of this and I doubt I can get published" Sorry to disagree! :-)! For getting published, try some journal on human-computer interaction. Since you know much more about your field than I do, look for other journal 'varieties' as well. For what you are doing, that is, a lot of independent, call it, R&D, if you get results anything like what you want, then it would be surprising if you didn't have something publishable. If this argument is not enough, then look at much of what does get published and conclude that much of it is not very high quality stuff! Uh, one way to improve your paper a notch or two over what is common is just to write well, say, well organized, clear, including writing good English with good spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Once you are published at least once, better, say, three times, sorry, but you should be able to get a Ph.D.! :-)! Maybe this is a big disappointment, but it's true! How then to get a Ph.D? Four points: (1) At at least some of the best US research universities, there is no coursework requirement for a Ph.D. (2) The requirement for a dissertation is, say, "an original contribution to knowledge worthy of publication". Since you've already been there, done that, got the T-shirt, there's no question. Big, huge advantage. (3) One more requirement would likely be the qualifying exams. These exams are to show that you are 'qualified' to move on to research and do research. But, uh, did I mention that you've already been there, done that, got the T-shirt? The difficulty of the qualifying exams varies widely, but generally the 'polish on your halo' can be important in deciding who passes. So, it can be good to have some high quality halo polish; here are three: (A) Some of the best halo polish is published papers, the more papers, more highly regarded, the better the polish. (B) More halo polish is when it looks like you might be a successful entrepreneur who gets good publicity for the university and, maybe later on, is, uh, 'thankful and generous'! (C) More good polish is that you actually did this work, conceived it, took it on, got it done, independently, which means you are promising as a good researcher for the future bringing more good publicity to the university. (4) There may be a requirement for 'residency' for a year. This can mean that maybe you show up on campus some day in September and again in the spring to defend your dissertation which you submit by taking a stack of your published papers and putting a big staple in the UL corner. For more: You should pick the university and department carefully. You might try, say, the bio-engineering program at Johns Hopkins. I would focus on such higher end engineering programs with 'biology' contact. Of course try MIT and Cal Tech. Don't settle for Southern Sawgrass U. You may be able to get a research grant, before, during, or after your Ph.D. program: At your university, ask the people who know about grant sources. Maybe the US DoD VA would give you a grant. A research grant is the 'magic bullet' to rapid progress in academics because you are bringing money to the university! You will understand better when you see what fraction of the money the university keeps for 'overhead'! Did I hear someone say, "Money talks."? Uh, one way to pick a department and prof: Pick your journal carefully! That is, if you want to get into program A with full prof P editor of relevant journal X, then submit your paper to journal X and, if it is accepted, then, uh, take 'advantage' of this contact you made with prof P to get your Ph.D. Note: It can be possible for prof P to 'direct' your dissertation at a school not his. Uh, once your paper is accepted, prof P may invite you to present your paper at his conference on Computer-Human Interaction or some such. Likely accept! Then that's two bullets on your CV. Note: When you submit your paper, likely you do not have to give any significant biographical information at all. So, you don't need a high school transcript! In particular, it doesn't have to be clear if you have a Ph.D. or not. So, before your Ph.D., you are fully 'qualified' to submit a paper. Note: Commonly a journal plays pocket pool with your paper for a year before sending you results of reviews. So, two rejections and one acceptance would take three years. Bummer. So, to speed up the process, go online, find maybe 50 appropriate journals, to the editor in chief of each, via e-mail or on paper, write a nice, one page letter outlining your paper and asking "might your journal be interested?", enclose a copy of your paper, and, then, only from the responses make a 'formal submission'. Uh, the research universities make a big, huge deal out of 'research' both for the faculty and for at least the Ph.D. students. Else they'd have to know something about the real world and teach it, right? Horrors! Uh, the research universities long since concluded that by a wide margin the most difficult part of a Ph.D. and the usual point of failure is just the research for the dissertation. For some students, that work is hard enough to threaten their life (literally). For others, it's put their feet up for an afternoon, think up some good stuff, write it up, send it in, get it accepted for publication, and shout "Done!". In my opinion, you've already passed the main obstacle: You've decided to do some independent work. For more, you've picked a problem, have some productive lines of attack, and are making progress. For more, if you get the research results you have in mind, then you will have something "new, correct, and significant": "New"? No doubt what you are working on does not yet exist. "Correct"? It works! "Significant"? Ask Hawking or many people and/or groups working with the handicapped. E.g., ask the US DoD VA. You can do something cute here: You satisfy "significant" because you solve a practical problem and not because you have a theorem or counterexample that settles some old conjecture about differential cohomology that only six people in the world know about. Readers listen up: This example makes a useful, general point! Presto: "New, correct, and significant" are the usual criteria for publication! That is, you've already given up on taking a problem from a prof, pleasing a prof, caring mostly about what will please a prof, looking for praise, approval, status, prestige, guidance, 'mentoring' from a prof, etc. But, but, but, your work would never get venture funding, right? Wrong! One of the 'themes' Brad Feld likes to pursue is human-computer interaction, especially without a traditional keyboard! Uh, if you had Hawking, the DoD VA, and some organization for the handicapped on your side, had some beta testers, ..., then you might get a venture capital check -- it's not hopeless. Sorry to disagree with your: "I know I won't get a degree out of this and I doubt I can get published". :-)! There's an old quote: "Be wise; generalize.". Okay: How I got a Ph.D.: I started with a practical problem I'd identified and worked on before grad school. I saw a solution intuitively. In my first year in grad school, I took some advanced math that let me turn my intuitive stuff into some solid theorems and proofs for a solution, and in my first summer independently I did that. That work was all but the software and typing for my dissertation. For some interim 'halo polish', I saw a problem, thought for a few evenings, roughly saw a solution, and then signed up for a 'reading course' on that problem. I worked for a few more days and saw a much nicer solution, wrote it up, turned it in, and was done with the reading course in two weeks. The work looked publishable and was -- I published it later. So, in two weeks I'd created "an original contribution to knowledge worthy of publication", that is, satisfied the requirement for a dissertation. Good halo polish. A student who does such independent work is "difficult", but on this point read the recent Fred Wilson blog at his AVC.COM. You will not be the first to do some independent work and later get a Ph.D. for it. Uh, one of the biggest topics now in computer science is a 'good' algorithm as in the set of algorithms P as in the question P versus NP. Well, likely and apparently the formulator of a 'good' algorithm was Jack Edmonds. Can get a start on him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Edmonds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Edmonds Yes, he also won a von Neumann prize, etc. Little things like that! As at Wikipedia, he was at University of Maryland (UM). Uh, as I heard the story, he was not a happy Ph.D. student at UM so left to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) about 40 miles away. Then he published some good work in graph theory. Finally some of the math faculty at UM, feeling a little guilty, drove to NBS, smoked a peace pipe, and said essentially "Put a staple in the UL corner of your papers and we'll be pleased to call it a Ph.D. dissertation in our department.". Final point: Of course, D. Knuth knows about academics. Well buried in 'The TeXBook' is: "The traditional way is to put off all creative aspects until the last part of graduate school. For seventeen or more years, a student is taught 'examsmanship', then suddenly after passing enough exams in graduate school he's told to do something original." Yes, there very much is a conflict here: The approach to getting into grad school can strongly conflict with the approach to writing a dissertation.