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

Why Ageism Never Gets Old

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 272 posts

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#61

Post by throwanem »

geomark wrote: post #17
zaarn wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Ageism seems largely concentrated on the Silicon-Valley style society. As far as I am concerned, ageism does not exist at my workplace. Old engineers, even software engineers are looked for because they bring possibly valueable experience. The simple truth is that ageism is a result of not valuing the lessons of an experienced engineer because they're not up-to-date enough.

"Ageism seems largely concentrated on the Silicon-Valley style society." I saw ageism many years ago at a big aerospace firm in the L.A. area. It was understood and even outspoken that young engineers would get the call to work extra hours and weekends if needed, as well as the occasional graveyard shift when a unit was in thermovac testing. Older engineers were not usually called upon become they had "paid their due…

That's not ageism; that's a gentle form of hazing, and to be found in almost any profession or trade. An extreme example is what medical students go through in the early years of their study; a mild example is how, when I worked nominally as a cashier in a grocery store as a high school kid, the more experienced folks ran me from pillar to post for my first couple weeks' worth of shifts, doing everything from stocking to bagging and hauling to breaking down boxes and cleaning up spills, including one especially memorable spray of vomit from a kid who'd eaten too much of the extremely wrong thing.

The point is to find out whether you're game, and whether you'll work hard when you need to. These are important traits in the makeup of a worthwhile colleague, and those who would invest considerable of their own time and effort in mentoring you want to make sure they won't be wasted. This is how that's done. And, yeah, it's a pain in the ass for a while. But once you've proven that, as it was once put to me, "you ain't no scrub", that's an end to it.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#62

Post by Harvey-Specter »

jlebrech wrote: post #59
Harvey-Specter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the issues is using the word "engineer" for any of the brogrammer types In Canada the term 'engineer' is regulated at the provincial level, and a person can be prosecuted for labeling themselves as an engineer if they are not registered and licensed with their province's engineering association. For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet…

does the ethics test preclude doing work on rayguns? asking for a friend.

Probably, engineers are required to adhere to a strict code of ethics that puts the public interested first. Rayguns tend to be developed by people with evil ambitions. If I were a professional engineer and my boss asked me to work on a raygun, I would be ethically required to refuse and potentially to report him to the relevant authorities.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#63

Post by jlos »

wyager wrote: post #42
Harvey-Specter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the issues is using the word "engineer" for any of the brogrammer types In Canada the term 'engineer' is regulated at the provincial level, and a person can be prosecuted for labeling themselves as an engineer if they are not registered and licensed with their province's engineering association. For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet…

> For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet strict academic and work experience requirements[1], pass an ethics exam, and pay a yearly membership fee. Sounds like a racket, especially given that the PEO is a private organization. I’m not sure why this is supposed to be a good thing. > Everyone who graduates from an accredited engineering program…

In Canada the engineering associations are self regulating bodies, that is, the associations serve a legal purpose because of the technical nature of engineering. The thinking is that Politicians don't have the technical background to regulate the profession and so having pronvincial bodies allows engineers to regulate themselves. Hence the ethics part

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#64

Post by pc86 »

wyager wrote: post #42
Harvey-Specter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the issues is using the word "engineer" for any of the brogrammer types In Canada the term 'engineer' is regulated at the provincial level, and a person can be prosecuted for labeling themselves as an engineer if they are not registered and licensed with their province's engineering association. For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet…

> For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet strict academic and work experience requirements[1], pass an ethics exam, and pay a yearly membership fee. Sounds like a racket, especially given that the PEO is a private organization. I’m not sure why this is supposed to be a good thing. > Everyone who graduates from an accredited engineering program…

You can become a software PE in the United States, but it is absolutely a racket. One of the requirements for a PE is you need to work for another PE. This leads to a situation where new exams, like the software discipline, have 20 people sit for an exam in one year. The transportation discipline had 1,800.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#65

Post by barrkel »

ryandrake wrote: post #51
barrkel wrote: post #12

As the bulge in older people progresses and ageism becomes worse in an irrational way, it may make sense for older people to come together and form companies of their own, focused on selling to older people, who, of course, have the wealth (if not always the income).

You bring up a good point: Despite older people having all of the wealth in the world (and likely a great deal of the income), few startups seem to be courting them as customers. Everyone's target end-user seems to be that mythical 15-25 year old middle class Ideal Consumer.

I'm less certain older people have such a big chunk of income (from labour, at least). A lot of wealth is tied up in real estate and pensions. Not everybody climbs all the way up the pyramid to make the big bucks; but people do accumulate assets.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#66

Post by shkaga »

I think it is a mistake to think that ageism only describes a preference for young over old. The exact opposite has been/is the case for many industries in many countries.

Ageism is bad, regardless of age.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#67

Post by jonahx »

jeremyjh wrote: 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 sort of mythology is NOT helping. An experienced Software Engineer has valuable skills that do not age at all.

Not only is the claim "now it’s five years at most, and, for a software engineer, less than three" an unhelpful mythology, it's laughably incorrect to the point that I can't imagine anyone knowledgable espousing the view with a straight face.

It stems from, on the one hand, "software as popular culture," which is a great way to choose bad tools, and, on the other, the conflation of surface knowledge (the syntax of a new language, the API of a new hot library, etc) with deep knowledge (design principles that transcend language, the ability to evaluate a library based on those principle, etc).

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#68

Post by Harvey-Specter »

kogepathic wrote: post #60
Harvey-Specter wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to my knowledge there are no legal restrictions on what title a company can give a role From [1]: Becoming licensed gives you the right to use “P.Eng.” after your name and “engineer” in your job title. Under the Professional Engineers Act, you may only use “engineer” in your job title if you hold a P.Eng. licence. So yes, I'd agree that companies shouldn't be using engineer in the job title unless they're hiring a…

> So yes, I'd agree that companies shouldn't be using engineer in the job title unless they're hiring a P.Eng, but that doesn't absolve the employee of liability. So, would you agree that if we are going to be strict about who can use the term "Engineer" there shouldn't be a double standard allowing companies to call a position "X Engineer" and then hire someone who isn't a P. Eng for the position? If Engineer is a r…

Yes, I thought my agreement was clear in my previous comment. Companies shouldn't be using 'engineer' in the job title unless they're hiring a P.Eng.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#69

Post by jjkk0101 »

coldtea wrote: post #54
Swinx43 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. Does it matter if neither the product sales nor the execs will suffer from producing it?

Right, those examples albeit being good to convince a kid to into 5 yrs college are rarely the reality in the IT business. Quality has a price that most of the companies are not willing to pay and might as well detract'em from tapping into a new market.

Re: Why Ageism Never Gets Old

#70

Post by pc86 »

kogepathic wrote: post #44
Harvey-Specter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the issues is using the word "engineer" for any of the brogrammer types In Canada the term 'engineer' is regulated at the provincial level, and a person can be prosecuted for labeling themselves as an engineer if they are not registered and licensed with their province's engineering association. For example in Ontario in order to join Professional Engineers Ontario and call yourself an engineer you must meet…

> and have "Software Engineer" in their job title, and proudly introduce themselves as such. Personally I don't see a problem with this. That's their job title. Whether they have a P. Eng and can legally sign documents is another matter. You are correct that technically they cannot walk around saying "I am a Software Engineer" unless they are a Professional Engineer. But I don't see the harm of someone saying "I work…

TIL I can say "I work as an attorney at X company" even if I never went to law school, as long as that's my job title. Hint: I can't.
Post reply on HN