Live data from Hacker News

On Getting Older in Tech

corgibytes.com

81–90 of 440 posts

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#81
post #55

One of the things that has made me old (52) and crotchety is that I learned Lisp very early in my career. That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp. Even today, Common Lisp -- despite (or, as some would argue, because of) the fact that it hasn't been officially updated in decades is still not only a viable language but one of the best choices…

Even today, Common Lisp is still one of the best choices for many applications.

Then why don't people build amazing and popular things with it? I don't mean one or two people build one or two things, but lots of people building lots of things.

Nobody uses it, but it's the best choice, can't both be true. And 'nobody uses it' is approximately true. It's not a mainstream JVM language or CLR language, it's not an AWS or Azure or Google Web Services language, it's not used for Linux Kernel, Windows, Oracle, *BSD, SQL databases, No-SQL databases, it's not used where Erlang is, it's not the research language Haskell is, it's not the fun esolang or the long-tail COBOL, it's not the new compiles-to-JavaScript, it's not the back of 3D games or VR engines, it's not behind Amazon's shop or used where Go is. It's not talked about in StackOverflow's most popular languages surveys, or most profitable languages for devs to learn, or most desired by employers. It's not an educational language like it once was.

Yet it's "one of the best choices".

I simply don't believe it. Any perceived advantages it has, in practise must be a wash.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#82
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How much hands-on tech involvement does Musk actually have in his enterprises? From multiple interviews, Elon has stated that he spends the majority of his time on engineering and design problems, and very little time on business, PR.

PR BS & founder worship. If he wasnt spending time on PR he wouldn't be doing interviews

> If he wasnt spending time on PR he wouldn't be doing interviews

There's a difference between spending minimal time and no time at all on business, PR aspects.

> founder worship

I only stated the facts. Where is the worship?

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#83
post #55

One of the things that has made me old (52) and crotchety is that I learned Lisp very early in my career. That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp. Even today, Common Lisp -- despite (or, as some would argue, because of) the fact that it hasn't been officially updated in decades is still not only a viable language but one of the best choices…

"That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp"

"But no one knows it..."

It'll be really hard to work with a 23 year old with that attitude too.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#84
post #55

One of the things that has made me old (52) and crotchety is that I learned Lisp very early in my career. That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp. Even today, Common Lisp -- despite (or, as some would argue, because of) the fact that it hasn't been officially updated in decades is still not only a viable language but one of the best choices…

Even today, Common Lisp is still one of the best choices for many applications. Then why don't people build amazing and popular things with it? I don't mean one or two people build one or two things, but lots of people building lots of things. Nobody uses it, but it's the best choice, can't both be true. And 'nobody uses it' is approximately true. It's not a mainstream JVM language or CLR language, it's not an AWS or…

Too much fun to program in. Lisp makes it remarkably easy to extend the language into just what you want it to be...which means that Lisp programmers tend to spend most of their time extending the language into just what they want it to be rather than solving the problem. (Indeed, this is often touted as one of the benefits of Lisp...once you have a suitably well-adapted DSL, the problem solution follows naturally.)

Meanwhile, the Java or Go programmer is thinking "this is boring and ugly. Let me finish this problem as quickly as I can so I can go home." So they finish the problem as quickly as they can, and then it's done, and it ships. And people have an incentive to use it rather than tinker with it because nobody really wants to peek under the hood, and the people who do peek under the hood tend to be really dedicated and care a lot about the problem domain because why else would you put up with the language?

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#85
post #55

One of the things that has made me old (52) and crotchety is that I learned Lisp very early in my career. That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp. Even today, Common Lisp -- despite (or, as some would argue, because of) the fact that it hasn't been officially updated in decades is still not only a viable language but one of the best choices…

Even today, Common Lisp is still one of the best choices for many applications. Then why don't people build amazing and popular things with it? I don't mean one or two people build one or two things, but lots of people building lots of things. Nobody uses it, but it's the best choice, can't both be true. And 'nobody uses it' is approximately true. It's not a mainstream JVM language or CLR language, it's not an AWS or…

Then why don't people build amazing and popular things with it?

The reason is because "best" can have more than one meaning. Languages are usually only "best" at one thing, not for all things. In the case of many languages that people consider to be "best", they've been optimised for the development process (making it nice to write code in) rather than speed (C) or security (Ada) or a specific niche (R) or maintainability (not sure) or customisability (LISP). They're designed to make writing code more straightforward. Languages that are optimised to be easy to code with are the languages that tend to bubble up to the top when it comes to popularity contests because the more people who can access the language the more popular it's going to be.

There is an argument that Ruby is mostly LISP, so it could be said that lots of people use it very happily everyday.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#86
post #55

One of the things that has made me old (52) and crotchety is that I learned Lisp very early in my career. That gave me the ability to see that 99% of "new" technologies were really just poor re-inventions of (parts of) Lisp. Even today, Common Lisp -- despite (or, as some would argue, because of) the fact that it hasn't been officially updated in decades is still not only a viable language but one of the best choices…

Even today, Common Lisp is still one of the best choices for many applications. Then why don't people build amazing and popular things with it? I don't mean one or two people build one or two things, but lots of people building lots of things. Nobody uses it, but it's the best choice, can't both be true. And 'nobody uses it' is approximately true. It's not a mainstream JVM language or CLR language, it's not an AWS or…

A few notes:

* Google actively develops one of the Lisp compilers. Google Flights powers Orbitz, Kayak, etc. That's Lisp.

* There are several Lisp compilers in active open source development.

* There's a graph database written in Lisp called AllegroCache. It's good enough to support a business (Franz) for more than a decade.

* Another company (LispWorks) also exists and has a large portfolio of clients.

* Lisp has been used to make entire operating systems. Ones of the past, and ones of now. (Of course, an OS needs a community. But where are real OS's with GUIs in other languages?)

* Lisp has been successfully used in my own career for embedded systems to control satellite acquisition systems to, most recently, quantum computing. (At real companies.)

Just because there's not this huge buzz around Lisp doesn't mean no one is using it.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#87
post #71

Elephant in the room, IMHO, is the technical interview process. In software engineering roles at big/desirable/fast-growing companies, the interview process favors faster (by definition, younger) minds. Both young and old are put thru the same/similar coding interviews at many of these places, and often faster coders are younger, and get the job. You can't fix ageism without fixing the interview process. Being jovial…

Why do you think often faster coders are younger? With many more tricks up their sleeves, a more experienced coder will be faster. Or are you saying compared to literally older people, but not experienced?

I don't think the assertion has any basis in objective data in the first place but is based on a personal feeling. I don't see the value of trying to discuss reasons for something that only "exists" based on spurious subjective personal claims?

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#88

Age will matter more in a loose job market (more people than jobs). In a tight market as it is today, your skills are front and center, not your age. That said, the OP is correct. You're only as good as your last two years and even that's pushing it. If the tech changes, you have to adapt with it. I'm 53 as of yesterday (the 8th). I started with PDP-11's in the 80's, then VAX's, then PC's, BASIC at first, then C, the…

>Age will matter more in a loose job market (more people than jobs). In a tight market as it is today, your skills are front and center, not your age.

You'd be surprised. The original post (TFA) gives the median age in major companies for example and it doesn't work like that there.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#89
"You know what they do with engineers when they turn forty? They take them out and shoot them." - Primer (2004)

One of the biggest killers of sedentary professions is heart disease, which is the number one killer in the US. People who work at Microsoft have told me they give free soda, sugared "juices" with artificial flavors, coffees and teas for free to their employees. These all are sources of heart disease, but the young engineers drink it up like a lost caravan in the desert. It's likely not that different in any of the other areas as well.

The cost for ailments such as heart disease is known to be one of the most expensive in the US. It requires extensive testing, support, medications and visits to the doctors and hospitals. Considering the extremely high health care costs the US enforces, this places a huge dent on insurance premiums companies pay as well as accommodation, etc.

These companies want them out before they have to pay more premiums on health-care and other factors related to health, age, seniority, etc...

Post reply on HN