Is 40 the New 60? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#181

Post by Icathian » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:21 PM UTC

inimino wrote: post #169

Icathian wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You post this all the time. You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. It isn't your age, as so many others on this chain have pointed out. You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all , and when eventually that became relevant again, you were out of luck. I read your posts whenever I see them, it's obvious y…

> anyone would be unhireable So since you are defending the practice, please explain what is it about spending your entire career at a single company that makes you unemployable anywhere else. And please don't assume that that means never learning anything new during 27 years. Can you name another career where holding one job too long makes you unemployable, and where people actually defend this?

You're conflating recognizing reality with defending a given hiring practice. I've responded to other comments with more detail.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#182

Post by brandall10 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:21 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #170

brandall10 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have that optimism and it certainly is not fake. I love what I do. Yes, I bring experience to the table but not bad energy. WTF would you want to hire someone who poisons the well? It doesn't matter what the job/industry is, in what situation would that be remotely desirable?

If you say so. But just as you doubt the vigor of the “somewhat pessimistic” candidate (in your words, you didn’t say they were toxic), others will doubt the sincerity of your overwhelming optimism. So is life.

When we discuss these types of candidates, that is always the tone of the discussion.

It's good to discuss the pluses and minuses of an approach, we encourage this in our architecture section of the interview loop and during the initial screen when discussing line items in the resumes.

It's having a general negative attitude... bad mouthing past employers, being negative to a tech stack (and literally not couching it with any reasoning what-soever when we try to dig in), being negative to past arch decisions by co-workers without providing what are better solutions, things like that. Sometimes it's implied, sometimes it's more direct, but it there is a distinct lack of social intelligence that seems to happen more w/ older candidates that just suggests someone is burnt out. Wisdom should bring skill, not attitude.

Forest from the trees here. You pay someone to bring value to the team. That is not valuable to anyone. We're not running charities.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#183

Post by xedrac » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:21 PM UTC

alexwebb2 wrote: post #133

jasode wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>At 40, I've done some of the best work I've ever done [...] Its because at 40, I had a much deeper understanding of the tech, The blog post isn't about self-reported cognitive ability getting stronger (or not declining). It's about the job marketplace . Maybe it's instructive to compare/contrast different professional careers that depend on mental abilities and how age affects marketability: - computer programming :…

The implicit assumption powering this is that programming experience from 35 years ago is not only irrelevant to today’s challenges, but undesirable due to having the wrong habits and patterns of thinking; this stands in contrast to surgery or management skills which are widely perceived to be more timeless with candidate value compounding with experience. It’s plainly false for all sorts of reasons, but that’s the s…

I've met plenty of older developers that refused to adapt and keep learning. On the other hand, the best developers I've known have all been older. It's not about the skills you acquired at age X. It's about you attitude towards continual learning and improving, regardless of your age.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#184

Post by taf2 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:21 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #140

taf2 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah at around 35 - pulling all nighters actually just kinda starts to hurt… like for more then a day. Also I think no matter the age you’ll always feel old but just remember your not actually old until literally no one else is older then you… think 90s then appreciate being 30s you have 60 years left at least!

The stress and sedentary nature of the job makes it seem like 30 years remaining is a more realistic timeframe.

Knowing is half the battle- get up and walk around, you have at least 30 years to figure it out

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#185

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:22 PM UTC

Icathian wrote: post #117

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #37

Don't even get me started (just take a shufti through my posting history on this very site. You'll see this is a subject that has my attention) . > while the experience that comes with age is valued in fields like music, it counts against you in tech. Yup. The Jurassic-scale disasters that are becoming increasingly common, these days, are evidence of unsteady hands at the wheel. I'm not saying that older folks are be…

You post this all the time. You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. It isn't your age, as so many others on this chain have pointed out. You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all , and when eventually that became relevant again, you were out of luck. I read your posts whenever I see them, it's obvious y…

> so proudly and often

Not proudly, but often. Be nice. I thought we were supposed to be nicer to each other here, than in other Internet venues, but I'm often wrong.

> You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all

I see things differently. Don't forget that I was a hiring manager for most of that time. My CV reflects what I would have considered to be a "dream employee" for most of that time. It is not one that current companies find attractive, and that's actually (IMNSHO) a real problem, in today's industry. In most other industries, it would have been a "We need to get this guy on board right now" kind of thing. In tech, it's "He spent all that time at one company? He must be terrible, and insecure."

I am quite aware that having spent 27 years at one company is actually considered a bad thing. I really do see how the industry works. I won't change my expectations to meet the new reality.

If no one wants me, then I'll do my own thing. I'm very grateful to have that option, and my heart goes out to the folks that don't have that option.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#186

Post by stripline » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:22 PM UTC

I don't think this is due to a perception of older developers not being as good as younger developers. I think most people would agree that a more experienced dev would have better skills and be more efficient.

I believe it all comes down to pay. The experienced developer commands a higher salary than a 20 year old, rightfully so. But employers fail to see the added value they bring, just as they have trouble identifying the 10x programmers out there.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#187

Post by tlamponi » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:22 PM UTC

Icathian wrote: post #138

Dumblydorr wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does doing 27 years at one company make someone unhireable? It's one thing if he used the same old tech for 27 years, but without that assumption, seems like ageism to say 27 years at one company is an obvious ground for disqualification.

After a thousand threads on why tech hiring is hard, I don't think I need to re-hash that getting signal from noise is complex and imperfect. Out of the two signals, "this person was successful at 8 different companies" versus "this person stuck in one place for almost three decades", which do you imagine is going to get hired? It isn't ageism, again go read the rest of this thread. It's the nature of making yourself…

> After a thousand threads on why tech hiring is hard, I don't think I need to re-hash that getting signal from noise is complex and imperfect. Out of the two signals, "this person was successful at 8 different companies" versus "this person stuck in one place for almost three decades", which do you imagine is going to get hired?

One can also take this as: "this person jumps jobs often, everything I invest in them will probably have not a good/long ROI" vs. "this person was a loyal employee that was so good he was kept for decades"

A few jumps surely do not hurt, are even good to get some different POVs and such, but if we get people that were barely one or two years at a company at max it always rings a few alarm bells.

But, either way its generalization, the reasons for why either situation happened are relevant to make a sensible decision.

I.e., the answer to "why switch so often?" or "why stuck for so long and why now?" are key.

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#188

Post by gwbas1c » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #37

Don't even get me started (just take a shufti through my posting history on this very site. You'll see this is a subject that has my attention) . > while the experience that comes with age is valued in fields like music, it counts against you in tech. Yup. The Jurassic-scale disasters that are becoming increasingly common, these days, are evidence of unsteady hands at the wheel. I'm not saying that older folks are be…

> In my case, I was finally laid off, after a 27-year run at one of the world's marquee imaging companies (which I think was overbalanced by experience). I started looking around for more work, as I wasn't really up for retirement (which I was quite capable of doing).

Are you "out of practice" in the job search?

This comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28758320) states:

> Delete the first 10 years of your work history and take the date off your CS degree

> I started getting significantly more responses to applications and inquiries from recruiters on LinkedIn

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#189

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

Icathian wrote: post #173

quadrifoliate wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. Next time you hear someone complain about why programmers jump jobs ever 2 years, point them to this cynical and stereotyping comment. In my opinion this is no different from saying "What, you didn't graduate from college? Well, obviously you are unhireable", but I bet 'Icathian would…

I said nothing about what is fair, or what should be. I'm describing what is . Programmers jump jobs every 2-4 years (myself included) because it's the best way to reliably get good pay increases, and because staying more than 10 years at one company often makes it harder to get hired at the next place. You can blame me for recognizing that all you want, but it's a pretty well-known truth of our industry. I want it t…

> but it's a pretty well-known truth of our industry.

Doesn't make it right.

Just sayin'...

Re: Is 40 the New 60?

#190

Post by hallway_monitor » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

brandall10 wrote: post #159

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the need to fake overwhelming optimism to get by interviewers with mindsets similar to yours. Too much honesty can be bad in this industry, especially at higher levels, where diplomacy and soft skills are very important.

I have that optimism and it certainly is not fake. I love what I do. Yes, I bring experience to the table but not bad energy. WTF would you want to hire someone who poisons the well? It doesn't matter what the job/industry is, in what situation would that be remotely desirable?

This is 100% correct. As a hiring manager, the attitude of candidates was probably equally important as their skills when it comes to the decision of whether to hire. The baseline of is this someone I would enjoy working with every day? Is this someone my team would enjoy working with every day? If it's not a solid yes I'm going to pass on you.