Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Software Scientist

evanmiller.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 54 posts

Re: The Software Scientist

#41

Post by dllthomas »

michaelochurch wrote: post #40
dllthomas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Software Strategist" doesn't sound, to me, like someone who writes any code.

I've come to the conclusion that there is zero upside in your job description requiring you to write code. You might have to write in Java, or lose a weekend every 9 weeks to production support, or maintain some shitty legacy code. Instead, you want the freedom to write code, but a job title that makes it clear that you don't have to write any code. If you're a data scientist or an architect or in R&D, you get this f…

You may be right. I was thinking more from a communicative standpoint than a job requirements standpoint.

Re: The Software Scientist

#42

Post by rebelshrug »

jasode wrote: post #18
greenyoda wrote: post #10

"By and large, programming is a young man’s game" As a middle-aged programmer who is a much better programmer now than I was when I was young, I'd argue with the article's initial premise.

> much better programmer now than I was when I was young, I don't think that's the angle the author was talking about. He's actually saying this: "By and large, programming (in terms in jobs/careers/economics) is a young man’s game" The qualification I added in parentheses would be a fair reading based on his previous sentence: "...take a job as a software engineer." Likewise, his 3 bullet points after the "young man…

>> Perhaps readers are too conditioned by the mathematician G.H. Hardy quote, "math is a young man's game"[1] in which he was talking about about intellectual output.

Readers might just be conditioned to taking things at face value.

The author's next blog post is titled Attracting Millennial Engineers - http://www.evanmiller.org/attracting-millennial-engineers.ht...

I can't tell if it's satire.

Re: The Software Scientist

#43

Post by jacquesm »

Young people are very popular because they don't know how to negotiate their worth and hence are cheap. Older people may be more experienced but compared to hiring two or even three (more?) younger ones they will produce less code that will (probably) be less buggy and a bit better laid out but you won't be able to get them to sleep under their desks or work unpaid overtime. And those other advantages won't show right away. So in the end the younger guys get more done for the money and they are probably a lot more pliable.

Re: The Software Scientist

#44

Post by swatow »

jacquesm wrote: post #43

Young people are very popular because they don't know how to negotiate their worth and hence are cheap. Older people may be more experienced but compared to hiring two or even three (more?) younger ones they will produce less code that will (probably) be less buggy and a bit better laid out but you won't be able to get them to sleep under their desks or work unpaid overtime. And those other advantages won't show righ…

If you're so good at negotiating that you end up without a job because no one will pay what you demand, then you are actually bad at negotiating.

Re: The Software Scientist

#46

Post by jacquesm »

swatow wrote: post #44
jacquesm wrote: post #43

Young people are very popular because they don't know how to negotiate their worth and hence are cheap. Older people may be more experienced but compared to hiring two or even three (more?) younger ones they will produce less code that will (probably) be less buggy and a bit better laid out but you won't be able to get them to sleep under their desks or work unpaid overtime. And those other advantages won't show righ…

If you're so good at negotiating that you end up without a job because no one will pay what you demand, then you are actually bad at negotiating.

No, they get the job 6 months later, to clean up the mess at double the original pay...

Re: The Software Scientist

#47

Post by swatow »

jacquesm wrote: post #46
swatow wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're so good at negotiating that you end up without a job because no one will pay what you demand, then you are actually bad at negotiating.

No, they get the job 6 months later, to clean up the mess at double the original pay...

That doesn't seem consistent with your first post. Overall, would you argue that older engineers do or don't suffer worse outcomes because they require higher pay? Is it the case that employers hire younger engineers instead, or is it the case that in the long run, older engineers get jobs at the higher pay they demand?

Re: The Software Scientist

#48

Post by jacquesm »

swatow wrote: post #47
jacquesm wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they get the job 6 months later, to clean up the mess at double the original pay...

That doesn't seem consistent with your first post. Overall, would you argue that older engineers do or don't suffer worse outcomes because they require higher pay? Is it the case that employers hire younger engineers instead, or is it the case that in the long run, older engineers get jobs at the higher pay they demand?

Younger people tend to be the ones hired early on in the life cycle of a product or company because they're cheap, easy to push into a mold (or so management likes to think) and can do just as good a job (or maybe even quicker) than older people in making something that visually looks like it might work.

Then, as the project matures you'll find that that gained speed comes at a price, a price that will sooner or later offset the higher wages demanded by the ones that are further along in their life (dependents, more aware of their value).

If there are young really good programmers (it does happen, I've met a couple) then they tend to be exploited even worse, they will end up creating a large amount of value for peanuts.

But that's rare enough that it doesn't change the situation too much.

So I don't see any inconsistency, it's just time shifted.

Re: The Software Scientist

#49

Post by programminggeek »

I think of this role as "The Fixer". On most teams I've worked on there is someone who ends up doing the hard parts, knows the obscure parts of the system, and tends to end up optimizing queries, cleaning up algorithms, and generally guides the long term technical direction, whether they have a title to go with it or not.

In my experience, while a software scientist or fixer is highly valued, they aren't necessarily highly paid moreso than anyone else on a team. Also, a technical lead is not always going to do this job or do it well if given it.

The largest part of development doesn't rely on someone with this specialization to write the initial code for any feature, yet without this skillset a team will ship some terrible code without realizing it.

I don't really see any group hiring for this kind of role.

Post reply on HN