On Getting Older in Tech • Hacker News Board

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#231

Post by che_shirecat » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:46 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #199

smokestack wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every ageism post I've read on HN ignores the hundreds of thousands of others jobs that exist outside of [hot SV tech companies] (avg age at FB is 28? no way!), and also don't mention those people who are right of the bell curve and working at companies like that (because their experience actually is valuable). Some of these posts are real ageism claims, but most are "I'm old, I'm scared, how am I going to sur…

I'm old, I'm scared ... some monolithic non-tech company Wait, your solution to the problem of ageism in tech is "get out of tech, old fogey"??

I think he's trying to say that ageism isn't as much of a big deal as people make it to be (outside of SV's alternate reality) - everyone in the industry deals with the constantly shifting landscape that engenders feelings of job insecurity for programmers young or old. It's just tougher on older techies that haven't carved out their niche. If you're trying to fit in and compete with fresh bootcamp grads working new frameworks at age 60, you're probably due for retirement - there's a reason why the traditional career path was to engineering management positions for senior engineers. Either management, or something you're really good at that isn't the most hip new tech but still in high demand.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#232

Post by tclancy » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:46 PM UTC

qznc wrote: post #168

> I’m only as good as what I’ve accomplished in the last two years This implies no more salary increases after two years?

No, not at all, just that interviewers are totally uninterested in anything older than about that date. I've been in the industry for 16 years, the last 9 on my own as a consultant and have been kicking the tires on some full-time jobs in the last couple of months and it's definitely eye-opening: they really only want to talk about what I've just worked on and trying to use examples from anywhere else in those 16 years is met with suspicion. Some of the hardest problems I solved were when I was limited to ASP and Access. The fact I didn't build the thing in Mongo and Clojure doesn't mean I can't use those technologies. Some of it is the impedance between "technical" recruiters who are really just looking for you to say certain keywords and some of it is the age gap between older devs and the developers who are typically interviewing them.

I have a resume that's good enough to get me in the door at a few places you've heard of this time around but it was also turned down flat without more than a recruiter call at other places where my current experience exactly matched the tech they were asking for. I can't help wondering if they saw "16 years of experience" and either thought "too old" or "too expensive". I have considered doing a little A/B testing on that.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#233

Post by tclancy » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:48 PM UTC

metafunctor wrote: post #136

It just struck me that Zuckerberg is starting to get too old for himself.

And in a few years he will be touting the value of people right around his own age. It's human nature and one of the most valuable things about getting older (while continuing to learn) is to be able to see that kind of thing and value insight from anyone, not just the people who look exactly like you.

Harder to learn if you build up an empire of people who look exactly like you.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#234

Post by tclancy » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

GuiA wrote: post #9

sean_patel wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's a single datapoint Thanks. But isn't your experience with very old managers also a single datapoint, or at best, a dozen datapoints?

I have a few hundred data points of coworkers in my career at this point (maybe even low thousands), and the number of "out of touch old guy" I've encountered pales in comparison to the number of "arrogant clueless young guy" I've had to bear. (interestingly enough, I've had many good female colleagues, a few great ones, and no terrible ones)

>I've had many good female colleagues, a few great ones, and no terrible ones)

Pretty much the same here. It's a disappointing confirmation of the idea to survive a woman has to be twice as good.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#235

Post by mgkimsal » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:52 PM UTC

daemonk wrote: post #118

blub wrote: post #104

I don't find this post inspiring, I find it sad. It's partly self-encouragment, part PR. The fact that it even exists is proof that the author is facing some issues, no matter how confident they would like to appear. That recipe to stay current looks tiresome. Listen to two podcasts, two webcasts, subscribe to four magazines, teach courses, go to one conference per year, blog regularly, read blogs, follow the latest…

I kinda agree in the sense that I think that a lot of the tech jobs out there are not "difficult" in a way that requires years and years of experience to perform reasonably well at. So maybe someone older should look for jobs that suit their abilities rather than a job that, as you said, anyone who went through a bootcamp can perform. Hopefully with age comes some kind of niche specialization or skill that can't be o…

"Hopefully with age comes some kind of niche specialization or skill that can't be obtained easily."

The big issue I've seen played out multiple times is a hiring manager, dev lead or anyone making a hiring decision not being able to tell the difference between what requires experience/skills/specialization and what doesn't. It leads to the all-too-common situation of people with required-experience being passed on in favor of the (generally younger) "hey, this person can definitely do it - they know all this computer stuff!" (slight exaggeration). It gets even more complicated when the person without the required skills tries to bluff their way through (deceptively or just out of sheer desperation).

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#236

Post by epalmer » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:53 PM UTC

FroshKiller wrote: post #190

heymijo wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I find these days I spend less time coding and I end up with better applications because I think through the design before coding." ^A golden nugget buried in an insightful ramble.

And you don't have to be a certain age to learn that lesson and put it in practice.

Absolutely right. In my job I find that my seniority gives me time to think more however. It depends on your circumstance and the work culture and boss relationship.

I report to the CIO and he has little need to know details. He cares about long term progress and the big picture. He could care less about how we get there as long as we are taking care of people and doing it honestly.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#237

Post by LesZedCB » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

andriesm wrote: post #174

I'm 39, ageism is real, but I'm gonna tell you to quit whining grow a pair, and what the hell is wrong with you if you cannot sell your strengths, wisdom and experience? (BTW: just so it's clear I apply this same rule to everyone - this is the same advice I would give to any discriminated group, whether women in tech, people of color, Jewish or Asian or whatever group that find themselves on the victim side of discri…

Isn't the point that you don't get a chance to demonstrate your value because you are overlooked earlier on in the process where some hiring manager sees how old you are and decides you aren't "a culture fit" for the company. Even if you being hired will make all us 20 somethings 20x more productive, you won't even get the chance?

Ageism, like most *isms, isn't something that you can simply throw individual willpower at. Anti-sexism isn't wont for women with willpower, it's a problem that lies beyond individual power, and requires collective power to combat.

> Crying aint gonna fix it

I think most people know that. It's because some people still deny or ignore the existence of these discriminations, so it raises awareness.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#238

Post by timemachiner » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 2:57 PM UTC

AlexCoventry wrote: post #221

timemachiner wrote: post #215

I'll probably be ~36 by the time I complete a PhD in CS. Should I be OK in terms of finding jobs at hip companies upon graduation (big 4, etc)? My areas of interest is in ML, algorithms but I'm completely OK with normal software development positions. Reason I'm older is I decided I had a passion for it in my late 20s / wanted to do research, but had to go back to school to take classes before enrolling into a PhD. H…

My experience has been that if you've got the chops, you've got no worries at all. Also, fashion is fickle, but right now you'll have people beating down your door to hire you if you're skilled with ML and algorithms. I am in my 40s.

Thanks for your very encouraging words. You really brighten my day. I've always had an interest in theoretics/foundations and believe a strong mathematical backbone leads to better understanding of these fields. I simply couldn't get that working a normal job, so I know I made the right choice to pursue a PhD. Many, many people recommended against it (especially my friends who are pulling big salaries in industry), but for me it was always about the intellectual pursuit.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#239

Post by amyjess » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 3:01 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #199

smokestack wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every ageism post I've read on HN ignores the hundreds of thousands of others jobs that exist outside of [hot SV tech companies] (avg age at FB is 28? no way!), and also don't mention those people who are right of the bell curve and working at companies like that (because their experience actually is valuable). Some of these posts are real ageism claims, but most are "I'm old, I'm scared, how am I going to sur…

I'm old, I'm scared ... some monolithic non-tech company Wait, your solution to the problem of ageism in tech is "get out of tech, old fogey"??

Not so much "get out of tech" as it is "stay in tech, but not at a company that specializes in tech".

Non-tech companies need specialized software, too. When I was in college, I knew multiple people who had internships working on internal tools for a major bank. I imagine those banks also employ senior people to work on their internal tools, customer-facing web portals, etc.

And it's not just banks. I once interviewed for a job working on e-commerce stuff for Neiman Marcus. I'd imagine that other retailers like Walmart, Target, etc. need people working on their portals.

And if you want to work with technology but get out of programming, everyone needs IT.

Re: On Getting Older in Tech

#240

Post by karmajunkie » Fri, Dec 09, 2016, 3:04 PM UTC

solatic wrote: post #177

There's a reason why ageism exists in the industry and it isn't because of some undeserved stereotype about old dogs not being able to learn new tricks. 1) Most business-critical projects have long lifetimes. There's a reason why banks are still running COBOL and mainframes, and why Java's continued promise of backward compatibility with every new release is so valuable to companies. 2) Maintaining legacy systems is…

This is an argument built on one stereotype/assumption after another.

1) Many business critical projects have relatively short lifetimes. The use of hyper-legacy (avoiding the use of the word 'ancient' here) systems has more to do with the stability of well-known domains like accounting than any other factor. Other systems are business critical but meant to solve a short-term need, eventually being replaced by a better or more well-informed implementation.

2) Don't presume to know what everyone else likes to do.

3) Your implication is that "old dogs" are going to write code which is immediately legacy: they don't write tests (which is by no means a guarantee that code won't become 'legacy'); they don't use modern language features; indeed, that code without the use of modern language features is itself legacy.

4) I won't argue with this one, but with the same assumption you make in #3.

5) No-compete clauses are only illegal in a few jurisdictions like CA (in the US anyway). "Smart" employees tend to stay with employers that have an ethos of investing in their employees. In any case, I used to teach corporate training classes, and I can assure you that there is a healthy market of employers who do this.

6) Yes, people of all ages need to spend a significant amount of time investing in themselves, including 20-somethings. This is not a new thing, and indeed, "old dogs" are better at sniffing out where that time is best spent.

The remainder of your argument are conclusions built on faulty premises.

The problem of ageism in tech is multifaceted to be sure, and we all know developers who fit into the stereotypes you promote here. But to say that they are the primary cause is part and parcel of that same ageism, and ignores: * the role of capital in providing vast sums of money to inexperienced youth; * the hubris of that same youth; * the lack of diverse and inclusive cultural values within the US as a whole and Silicon Valley in particular; * and far from the least, the social and cultural aspects of media in influencing stereotypes (Forbes' annual 30-under-30, anyone?).