41–50 of 79 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Psst, the semicolon comment is funny because JavaScript doesn't actually require semicolons at the end of each line. It will automatically insert them for you if missing, which has led to a number of hard-to-find bugs. Its curly-brace behavior, however, is pretty much exactly like C.
Oh. I feel kind of stupid now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My Intro Philosophy professor phrased it like this: "If you want to sound smart in front of your friends, make a distinction." Our judgments of how intelligent people are usually come from how many relevant details they are able to see that we would otherwise have missed. So someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk' is dumb. Someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk', except t…
Yeah, but I think your philosophy prof was suggesting that useless distinctions are the stock in trade of tiny minds. For instance, a web client that allows you to use IRC protocol is generally Just-The-Same-As-IRC. Putting it on the web doesn't do anything really different, except maybe that one doesn't have the inconvenience of installing IRC software. But let's say that you had a really good help channel for your…
Isn't this called "engineering"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grumpy-ness aside which is difficult to judge in an unbiased manner and every one for himself, the question is still relevant, and something that I can relate to tho not being in the affected age segment. I look around at my last 2 work places and have yet to meet more than the occasional mid-40s professional who is in positions of technical ownership. Most of them have moved into positions of management (paper p…
"I have yet to hear a cogent argument on why folks in their late 40s or early 50s are not adequately represented in programming positions start ups or otherwise. What is unique about programming as a practice that make it unsuitable for professional beyond a certain age?" Bear in mind that programming is still a relatively new field. There are simply more young programmers out there. We see ageism more because it's a…
Bear in mind that programming is still a relatively new field.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grumpy-ness aside which is difficult to judge in an unbiased manner and every one for himself, the question is still relevant, and something that I can relate to tho not being in the affected age segment. I look around at my last 2 work places and have yet to meet more than the occasional mid-40s professional who is in positions of technical ownership. Most of them have moved into positions of management (paper p…
The answer may be related to the early age at which mathematicians seem to peak. Another factor is the rate of change in technology. Mere experience may be an obstacle there. When you start knowing nothing and pick a technology to learn, you naturally tend to pick the newest one. Whereas for an old person, learning new technologies is something you do out of duty as much as eagerness. An old person learning new techn…
The arrogance of this statement is just mind boggling. Why exactly does the author think he's orders of magnitude more employable than other engineers of his age group?
Ironically while arguing one side of the case he becomes an example supporting the other. He sounds so grumpy and closed minded. Who'd want to hire him? His thesis that technology hasn't changed is false in any case. E.g. while the fundamentals of algorithms haven't changed, that sort of knowledge is less central than it used to be; for better or worse, software development seems to be evolving into something where y…
In fact just by using that single word you've strengthened his argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I have yet to hear a cogent argument on why folks in their late 40s or early 50s are not adequately represented in programming positions start ups or otherwise. What is unique about programming as a practice that make it unsuitable for professional beyond a certain age?" Bear in mind that programming is still a relatively new field. There are simply more young programmers out there. We see ageism more because it's a…
Bear in mind that programming is still a relatively new field. HAHA what?! People have been programming for almost 60 years now. Hell, your bank is probably running code that is 40+ years old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grumpy-ness aside which is difficult to judge in an unbiased manner and every one for himself, the question is still relevant, and something that I can relate to tho not being in the affected age segment. I look around at my last 2 work places and have yet to meet more than the occasional mid-40s professional who is in positions of technical ownership. Most of them have moved into positions of management (paper p…
The answer may be related to the early age at which mathematicians seem to peak. Another factor is the rate of change in technology. Mere experience may be an obstacle there. When you start knowing nothing and pick a technology to learn, you naturally tend to pick the newest one. Whereas for an old person, learning new technologies is something you do out of duty as much as eagerness. An old person learning new techn…
An extraordinarily small percentage of mathematicians ever make any significant contribution to the realm of knowledge, as is true in most fields. It is unfortunate that such a small sampling is then used to judge the pursuit as a whole.
They are the exception. Further, it's just as possible that those very, very few would have led long lives of contributions, but the early success corrupted and waylaid their focus.
We see the same sort of observations in the field of software engineering where a remarkably small samping of Torvalds and Carmacks are used as a baseline, when they're anything but. With all due respect, the technology behind most startups -- many of the YC examples included -- almost qualifies as purile. There are remarkably few that represent any depth or significance, although granted there are some great fundamental ideas and some excellent dedication.
I think if I were 25 and launching a startup, hiring somebody twice my age really might feel a little bit weird.
Maybe this alone could explain it - if people only like to hire people who are younger than themselves, there would be fewer places willing to hire the older you got.
If I can't get into the game, I can't imagine there's much chance for most other people in their 50's to play a role. The arrogance of this statement is just mind boggling. Why exactly does the author think he's orders of magnitude more employable than other engineers of his age group?