4 ms·

There are 2 kinds of old people: 1. Old battle hardened veterans who can just jump in and clean the floor. The desire more battles and will confront problems h

by NTDF9 9y ago

There are 2 kinds of old people: 1. Old battle hardened veterans who can just jump in and clean the floor. The desire more battles and will confront problems head on 2. Folks who are in the industry for a long time and are productive as a consequence of experience and not because they desire to be there There are folks intersecting the two sets above. But more often than not, folks in 2 are folks with families, mortgages and other commitments making them risk/battle averse. That kills their hireability. The reasonably confident, smart old folks are the ones who just walk into companies and bash the young interviewers right away (I experienced this as the young interviewer myself). Young engineers fit the above categories too but they get the benefit of doubt and get hired for potential. Older folks don't seem to have that luxury.

moduspol 9y ago
Respectfully there is also another group: 3. Folks who have been in the industry for a while, are very comfortable with the tools they've used previously, are not always open to embracing new tech, and have compensation expectations a little higher than the market value of what they're offering. I'm not denying ageism exists, but I think it's disingenuous to suggest people in our industry are immune to becoming complacent over time. I think the primary problem might just be that our industry is more punishing for people who do. I also think people are pointing at the young-skewing culture in tech and looking at it as the cause of the problem, when it's possible it's a symptom. I don't know how any of that can be measured, but I think it's something we have to keep in mind in this discussion about apparent ageism.
watwut 9y ago
What kind of companies do you all work for that willingness to "battle" and "risk" is so important? Software development is normally one of the safest jobs there is. It is even stereotyped to have above average amount of people on spectrum and that condition makes one sux at both political fighting and risk handling. If you need everybody to battle that often, then there is something wrong. And if ability to handle risk is so important for developers, then maybe management should start to manage that risk.
- NTDF9 9y ago
  >> What kind of companies do you all work for that willingness to "battle" and "risk" is so important? When I (as a 5 year experienced person) have to explain to an older developer how the code base HE OWNED for 2 years works internally.
  - watwut 9y ago
    What was the risk there? Why would explaining be a battle? Was he a complete jerk or high in company? I dont know everything about codebase I own either, some parts I barely seen despite owning them and some I have seen but forgot what it means. So I mean, I would not mind if someone learned parts of it I have barely seen and gave me tldr.
    - NTDF9 9y ago
      The risk is when customer calls with a showstopper bug, if I (the new hire) cannot even rely on the experienced, god save that product. I'm not saying people need to know everything inside out. But damn it know some codepath please after 2 years.
analog31 9y ago
3. Folks who understand business, and know a crappy deal or a hopeless cause when we see one. I believe this is the majority of the so called "risk averse." I'm 53, and consider myself to be in the first and third categories: I'm certainly willing to jump in and produce, and I'm not afraid of hard problems, but I can see when someone's trying to lure me with empty promises, or who is taking unnecessary business risks. We also respect you enough to have a frank conversation with you, which could be unnerving if you're accustomed to interviewing people who have been trained to tell you what they think you want to hear.
- NTDF9 9y ago
  3. Folks who understand business, and know a crappy deal or a hopeless cause when we see one. I believe this is the majority of the so called "risk averse." You are number 1 in the categories I defined in my original post. Risk averse people are people who cannot move out of their language, area of expertise etc.
  - analog31 9y ago
    I hate to think about it, but answering questions about things like risk aversion may be akin to the coding interview, where they could be studied and memorized. The flip side is that with business experience, the older candidate could make an educated guess about how likely it actually is, that they will have to work outside of their existing skill set. So, objectively assessing the risk is sometimes an alternative to simply avoiding it without knowing if the risk is real.

by NTDF9 9y ago

moduspol 9y ago

Respectfully there is also another group: 3. Folks who have been in the industry for a while, are very comfortable with the tools they've used previously, are not always open to embracing new tech, and have compensation expectations a little higher than the market value of what they're offering. I'm not denying ageism exists, but I think it's disingenuous to suggest people in our industry are immune to becoming complacent over time. I think the primary problem might just be that our industry is more punishing for people who do. I also think people are pointing at the young-skewing culture in tech and looking at it as the cause of the problem, when it's possible it's a symptom. I don't know how any of that can be measured, but I think it's something we have to keep in mind in this discussion about apparent ageism.

watwut 9y ago

What kind of companies do you all work for that willingness to "battle" and "risk" is so important? Software development is normally one of the safest jobs there is. It is even stereotyped to have above average amount of people on spectrum and that condition makes one sux at both political fighting and risk handling. If you need everybody to battle that often, then there is something wrong. And if ability to handle risk is so important for developers, then maybe management should start to manage that risk.

NTDF9 9y ago
>> What kind of companies do you all work for that willingness to "battle" and "risk" is so important? When I (as a 5 year experienced person) have to explain to an older developer how the code base HE OWNED for 2 years works internally.
- watwut 9y ago
  What was the risk there? Why would explaining be a battle? Was he a complete jerk or high in company? I dont know everything about codebase I own either, some parts I barely seen despite owning them and some I have seen but forgot what it means. So I mean, I would not mind if someone learned parts of it I have barely seen and gave me tldr.
  - NTDF9 9y ago
    The risk is when customer calls with a showstopper bug, if I (the new hire) cannot even rely on the experienced, god save that product. I'm not saying people need to know everything inside out. But damn it know some codepath please after 2 years.

analog31 9y ago

3. Folks who understand business, and know a crappy deal or a hopeless cause when we see one. I believe this is the majority of the so called "risk averse." I'm 53, and consider myself to be in the first and third categories: I'm certainly willing to jump in and produce, and I'm not afraid of hard problems, but I can see when someone's trying to lure me with empty promises, or who is taking unnecessary business risks. We also respect you enough to have a frank conversation with you, which could be unnerving if you're accustomed to interviewing people who have been trained to tell you what they think you want to hear.

NTDF9 9y ago
3. Folks who understand business, and know a crappy deal or a hopeless cause when we see one. I believe this is the majority of the so called "risk averse." You are number 1 in the categories I defined in my original post. Risk averse people are people who cannot move out of their language, area of expertise etc.
- analog31 9y ago
  I hate to think about it, but answering questions about things like risk aversion may be akin to the coding interview, where they could be studied and memorized. The flip side is that with business experience, the older candidate could make an educated guess about how likely it actually is, that they will have to work outside of their existing skill set. So, objectively assessing the risk is sometimes an alternative to simply avoiding it without knowing if the risk is real.