Live data from Hacker News

Why Ageism Never Gets Old

newyorker.com

241–250 of 272 posts

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#241
post #103

> "Dan Lyons, a fifty-one-year-old Newsweek reporter, gets his first shock when he’s laid off. “They can take your salary and hire five kids right out of college,” he’s told" I wonder to what extent, the above is the reason behind senior workers having a harder time finding/maintaining their job. It almost sounds like a Keynesian liquidity trap. People expect their salaries to continually grow over the course of thei…

The problem isn't ageism, the problem is capitalism. For a long period of time in the (not too distant) past, one of the the main purposes of a company was to pay employees. Corporations in the U.S. have continually shifted goals to eschew all goals other than raw profit and growth (leading to more profit). It is EXTREMELY rare to see a tech company which offers its employees more than they are worth on the market or…

>For a long period of time in the (not too distant) past, one of the the main purposes of a company was to pay employees.

I don't really disagree with your sentiment, but I don't think that statement has been ever true.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing this--and sorry in advance if I came off abrasive. I just think the key difference in our industry is that it's far more punishing than others if you're not keeping up to date with relevant skills. I'm 29 and my last search was two years ago. My last job had me primarily doing ColdFusion-based web development and occasionally iOS development. A big part of the reason I left was specifically to avoi…

What are "relevant skills?" It's it a programming language? An environment? A framework? When I started, I was expected to pick anything up as I was working. I got my first job partially as a result of having seen Smalltalk in a programming language class. The important "relevant skills" were enough background to pick up new things (since everywhere was different) and a demonstrated ability to get work done.

"Relevant skills" are the things listed as "required" or "preferred" in the job ad. These typically are all of those things.

I agree with your second paragraph--but isn't that a strong case for investing in a cheaper developer with less experience?

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#243

If the tech industry wasn't mostly located in SV with all it's housing problems it wouldn't have nearly as much ageism. Of course the 20-something who's running a rat race to pay overpriced rent on a poorly maintained dump with no hope of ever owning real property resents the 50-something who owns the place. Of course that trickles down a little resentment for all "older" people.

This is utter baseless speculation. Who thinks about how old their landlord is? Why does ageism exist outside of CA?

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#244
post #29

First, ageism is not just a SV phenomenon. For example, see the very young White House aides in Clinton, Bush, & Obama administrations.[1] Second, the tech companies that have a reputation for favoring 20-somethings will still hire older workers for certain positions. - Even though Mark Zuckerberg said, "younger people are just smarter" , he hired an "old" person like Sheryl Sandberg to be COO at age ~38. - Bill Gate…

Tactical vs strategical.

At implementation level, software throughput is higher when you are younger. Validating/killing ideas, making money at large scale do not require experience, not that much.

At strategical level things change.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

60 year old dev here. I have been living on the cutting edge of tech for 30 years, and I have many scars to prove it. New is usually not better if you actually want scalable, maintainable, and monetizable results. I disagree that many area's of my knowledge has a half life. My deep understanding of network protocols hasn't aged. My deep understanding of SQL and NoSQL databases hasn't aged. The principles of distribut…

This is a sensible perspective, but the job market is actually the opposite of sensible (in a way). Paradoxically, the (again, sensible) attitude that fundamentals are the same with a different coating, will distantiate one from chasing the latest fads... which is actually what the [majority of the] market looks for.

I agree on the market being crazy.

Does any employer in the world interview people with real world skills?

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing this--and sorry in advance if I came off abrasive. I just think the key difference in our industry is that it's far more punishing than others if you're not keeping up to date with relevant skills. I'm 29 and my last search was two years ago. My last job had me primarily doing ColdFusion-based web development and occasionally iOS development. A big part of the reason I left was specifically to avoi…

> But despite being 27, I wasn't immune from having to branch out, learn new things, and become passionate about something to find a new position. Respectfully: our industry doesn't allow for one to stick to the same skillset for long. Your post reinforces what I had feared, which is that people are blaming ageism while sitting on a skillset that is no longer competitive. That's shortsighted and your employer's proce…

> I don't give a crap if you've already used React, Redux, Express, whatever new flavor of the months are coming. If you're 23 and actively using them, odds are you're still going to be worth much less to my team than someone 40 who has to pick them up their first couple months but can immediately contribute valuable, hard-earned broadly-applicable timeless lessons about how to build and operate software.

Odds are fine, but they aren't a shortcut for using your brain. If a team's culture makes its members instantly side with either the 40 year old or the 23 year old when he/she makes a claim like "we don't need to write tests", "there are no problems in my code", or "we should convert our entire existing repo to ", then that culture is stifling discussion and actively harming the quality of the code the team writes. Same applies to hiring decisions.

It's frustrating to see ageism swinging back and forth like a pendulum. There's value in having both the crystallised intelligence of older workers and the fluid intelligence of younger workers on one team, provided they firstly get hired and secondly manage to work together.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing this--and sorry in advance if I came off abrasive. I just think the key difference in our industry is that it's far more punishing than others if you're not keeping up to date with relevant skills. I'm 29 and my last search was two years ago. My last job had me primarily doing ColdFusion-based web development and occasionally iOS development. A big part of the reason I left was specifically to avoi…

> But despite being 27, I wasn't immune from having to branch out, learn new things, and become passionate about something to find a new position. Respectfully: our industry doesn't allow for one to stick to the same skillset for long. Your post reinforces what I had feared, which is that people are blaming ageism while sitting on a skillset that is no longer competitive. That's shortsighted and your employer's proce…

> I don't give a crap if you've already used React, Redux, Express, whatever new flavor of the months are coming. If you're 23 and actively using them, odds are you're still going to be worth much less to my team than someone 40 who has to pick them up their first couple months but can immediately contribute valuable, hard-earned broadly-applicable timeless lessons about how to build and operate software.

Just as the majority of 23 year olds are what you are imagining (inexperienced, know-it-alls, chasing the latest fad, etc.) I would say the majority of 40 year old programmers are just as useless in the other direction.

Maybe not on HN where everyone is above average, but in the flyover states it's absolutely the case. Exceedingly few 40+ year old programmers around these parts I'd describe as holding a relevant modern skillset or holding any interest whatsoever in updating their knowledge or trying to stay competitive. It's almost universal derision over the "flavor of the month" until 10-15 years down the road when they realized flavor of the month turned into Linux and all they have left is bitterness over being left behind.

Just as you have the hiring skills to weed through the huge cruft of useless candidates of your preferred type, some hiring managers hold the skills to wade through the cruft of young hipster bros and find the gems as well. The 80/20 rule typically applies to all things in life.

So put another way - in the end, I'd say it all roughly evens out in my experience. I think age is an extremely poor metric for productivity, and it really depends on the specific individual.

I say all this as someone much closer to 40 than 20.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#248
post #7
post #3

> In the nineteen-twenties, an engineer’s “half life of knowledge”—the time it took for half of his expertise to become obsolete—was thirty-five years. In the nineteen-sixties, it was a decade. Now it’s five years at most, and, for a software engineer, less than three. This sort of mythology is NOT helping. An experienced Software Engineer has valuable skills that do not age at all. Yes there are new languages and fr…

This mythology leads directly to horribly created software that will either ensure many terrible security breaches in the future or the continued proliferation of "magic" throughout a product. One of the issues is using the word "engineer" for any of the brogrammer types. an engineer in any other proper engineering discipline does not become worthless with age, their experience actually counts for something. Somehow…

>>Somehow we have confused people who stitch together software from pieces of "magic" that they do not understand with engineers.

Exactly, this is like saying carpenters get obsolete every few years because wood pieces with new joints come in every few years.

>>It normally boils down to those people being willing to work longer hours for less money.

And for naivety, you can easily sell stories like 'work for great exposure' to newly arrived kids.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#249
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But despite being 27, I wasn't immune from having to branch out, learn new things, and become passionate about something to find a new position. Respectfully: our industry doesn't allow for one to stick to the same skillset for long. Your post reinforces what I had feared, which is that people are blaming ageism while sitting on a skillset that is no longer competitive. That's shortsighted and your employer's proce…

> I don't give a crap if you've already used React, Redux, Express, whatever new flavor of the months are coming. If you're 23 and actively using them, odds are you're still going to be worth much less to my team than someone 40 who has to pick them up their first couple months but can immediately contribute valuable, hard-earned broadly-applicable timeless lessons about how to build and operate software. Just as the…

>>I would say the majority of 40 year old programmers are just as useless in the other direction.

This has nothing to do with age. In most people's case swim lanes are set early in life. If you weren't good enough at 23, unless some major incident in your life changed you, chances are you will be the same at 40.

This has largely been a problem- most people feel with this popular phenomenon called 'Nerd culture'. Some people have it all figured way early in life, others take long, many never. This fact alone counts for different starting points in life, overall seriousness, and the net time available to make progress. Also if you started out as a Nerd earlier, you are more curious, and more eager to learn, change and adapt to things. Than people who start out later, who just wanted a job to provide for their family, and are in purely for 9 - 5 kind of a job, those people will routinely find themselves stuck in the wrong job- As they have to spend bulk of their time learning things. While they might want to spend that time on recreation.

This whole thing about learning and exploring things just for the heck of it doesn't come naturally to most people.

From my own childhood I remember a bunch of bullies from my lane, routinely taunting and beating up kids. One of them grew up to his mid-20s and woke up to the financial realities of life. He then went to college and did his engineering. But that was 8 years after I had finished my degree, and had a neat 9 - 10 years experience compared to him. I once met him in a bus and he came across as a totally changed person, but he still struggles. Largely because the impulse to do things is different, he just wants a job, and beyond that bulk of his early life throughout childhood, teenage and early adulthood were spent doing unproductive stuff. So there is just no desire or curiosity, or even the mental tools required to sustain a continuous learning life long marathon campaign.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read your post, and I try to empathise, but at the same time I can't help but feel you were naive in thinking you could take on a web development job without having any of the skills required, even a very basic level of them. If a 20 year old applied for a job that involved writing SQL queries, and couldn't, I'd expect him to be rejected. There's a world of difference between low level C/C++ style programming, a…

If a 20 year old applied for a job that involved writing SQL queries, and couldn't, I'd expect him to be rejected. I've been a webdev now for some time, and I've written zero SQL queries. Firebase is nice. So is Mongoose. And yes, I can structure it as a traditional SQL relational database with proper indices if needed. I'm not choosing technologies that cause technical debt or problems down the road. If you think th…

>>I can structure it as a traditional SQL relational database with proper indices if needed.

These sort of things are the reason I have to these days deal with programmers who show me their several thousands of lines of code and feel proud about it, until I show them it can done with a few SQL queries. Or that Java/Python program who proudly flaunts their few thousands of lines of code weekend project, which is basically a awk command that can be written under 3 minutes.

Only a few months back I was asked to review a backend application. The developer explained passionately how his massive structure of Java code plays with the store, which happens to be a key-value store, while the application is largely transactional in nature. Despite explaining to them why this isn't great idea even from an operations perspective, let alone conceptually or design wise they went ahead. Last time I checked they have to often deal with dirty read/write issues in case of temporary failure, and disk crashes apparently are common.

These sort of issues can be avoided if devs sit down and get basic exposure to things SQL, which by the can be done under a few weeks.

Post reply on HN