4 ms·

No, I don't think so. That's a 1980s era explanation. There are people who aren't especially attractive in all industries. Even in Hollywood, look at what Weins

No, I don't think so. That's a 1980s era explanation. There are people who aren't especially attractive in all industries. Even in Hollywood, look at what Weinstein got up to, and he isn't exactly Adonis reborn. I think the explanation is simpler: music and acting jobs are easy. Lots of people can sing, dance, semi-convincingly repeat lines written for them by other people, or even write scripts. It's just not a very skilled set of jobs. It doesn't take 5 years of study to become a great actor, people just luck into it all the time. Anywhere you get the intersection of a lot of money and easy jobs, you get jobs being parcelled out according to criteria like looks, knowing the right people, having the right parents, having the right party attitudes, or how easily they get into bed. After all, what other criteria are they going to use to differentiate between the masses of hopefuls applying for their chance at fame and fortune. In contrast, tech is hard. It takes years of study to even get in on the bottom rung. Then it takes many more years of obsessive-level study and work to climb to the top. The difference in skill between a newbie and a master is enormous. If you're interviewing for a master software developer, and say "hey, you party much?" and they reply with something lame and boring like "no, I prefer to spend time with my wife and kids" then in a well functioning organisation they will still get the job. In quite a few other industries, if the interviewer is young that reply could easily cause you to be ranked lower than some other candidate who said "I'm always up for a good time!"

krageon 6y ago
I'm not sure where to start with this, so I'll start with the broad strokes: You've underestimated the difficulty of creative work (or what is traditionally seen as creative) and overestimated the difficulty of "tech" (which I would argue is also a creative field). If anything, tech is ridiculously easy to get into even if you are patently and demonstrably unskilled. The same is simply not true for other creative work (at least not if it has to pay the bills).
- ed25519FUUU 6y ago
  Also, young naive tech people are consistently and often financially exploited by startups in the valley all of the time. It’s just a different kind of exploitation.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  I would say the grandparent even has the correlation backwards. Tech isn’t necessarily harder or easier, there is just so much demand for tech that employees can afford to walk away from egregious behavior. Most creative industries do not suffer from extremely high demand. In fact this isn’t even true for all tech. Academia sounds like a big hazing ritual. Games has had high profile abuse cases. And startups can be plenty exploitative.
- thu2111 6y ago
  tech is ridiculously easy to get into even if you are patently and demonstrably unskilled For what definition of "get into tech" is this? Be somewhere in the proximity of a company that calls itself a tech company? Maybe? Be hired as an actual software developer after starting from scratch - this is by no means "ridiculously easy". I've helped people try to break in and they found it extremely hard.
  - krageon 6y ago
    > after starting from scratch I am as always assuming schooling. If you've done no relevant schooling it may be difficult at first, but relatively I'd say it still isn't very difficult when compared to other industries.
circlefavshape 6y ago
> music and acting jobs are easy. Lots of people can sing, dance, semi-convincingly repeat lines written for them by other people, or even write scripts. Oh please. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I can't speak to acting, but it takes far more than 5 years of study to become a professional dancer or musician (oh and FWIW I've been a professional software dev for 25 years, having lucked into it just by being a nerdy guy in the right place at the right time)
- thu2111 6y ago
  Uh huh, really. John Lennon formed the Beatles when he was 20, after flunking out of music school, failing his O-Levels and being written off by his teachers. He wrote his first top 10 hit when he was 15, just a year or so after getting his first guitar. The Beatles was formed mostly of his mates, no extensive 5+ year study of music went into any of this. Naturally talented group, yes, but that is nowhere near the same as requiring years of study to be able to get work in the field at all. The history of most bands and professional musicians is the same. They're all self taught and it doesn't take years before they can get work. The slogan "learn to code" was deemed a quasi-offensive thing to say to out of work Appalachian coal miners because it implied that anyone can learn to code pretty easily, and that's widely recognised across society as not being true. How many of those coal miners could already sing songs or play musical instruments? Probably quite a few.
Bakary 6y ago
Music, acting, and dancing are much, much more difficult than you portray them to be. It's just that the people who are good at it make it look easy. The competition is also extremely fierce and ruthless. There is little demand for most artists. In tech, there is high demand for even moderately proficient individuals. There are tons of free tools and helpful resources to help you study and improve. If you have access to a computer and the internet you are already in a great position to practice. Being a master is obviously tremendously hard, but it is far from necessary for a good life. If I had to choose, I would pick tech since there is a greater probability of having a very decent standard of living, and tech workers are generally left alone when it comes to the rest of their lifestyle. They do not need to keep up a personal style and social life that directly feeds into their job prospects. That's why the last point you mentioned is actually in favor of tech being easier.

krageon 6y ago

I'm not sure where to start with this, so I'll start with the broad strokes: You've underestimated the difficulty of creative work (or what is traditionally seen as creative) and overestimated the difficulty of "tech" (which I would argue is also a creative field). If anything, tech is ridiculously easy to get into even if you are patently and demonstrably unskilled. The same is simply not true for other creative work (at least not if it has to pay the bills).

ed25519FUUU 6y ago
Also, young naive tech people are consistently and often financially exploited by startups in the valley all of the time. It’s just a different kind of exploitation.
bobthepanda 6y ago
I would say the grandparent even has the correlation backwards. Tech isn’t necessarily harder or easier, there is just so much demand for tech that employees can afford to walk away from egregious behavior. Most creative industries do not suffer from extremely high demand. In fact this isn’t even true for all tech. Academia sounds like a big hazing ritual. Games has had high profile abuse cases. And startups can be plenty exploitative.
thu2111 6y ago
tech is ridiculously easy to get into even if you are patently and demonstrably unskilled For what definition of "get into tech" is this? Be somewhere in the proximity of a company that calls itself a tech company? Maybe? Be hired as an actual software developer after starting from scratch - this is by no means "ridiculously easy". I've helped people try to break in and they found it extremely hard.
- krageon 6y ago
  > after starting from scratch I am as always assuming schooling. If you've done no relevant schooling it may be difficult at first, but relatively I'd say it still isn't very difficult when compared to other industries.

circlefavshape 6y ago

> music and acting jobs are easy. Lots of people can sing, dance, semi-convincingly repeat lines written for them by other people, or even write scripts. Oh please. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I can't speak to acting, but it takes far more than 5 years of study to become a professional dancer or musician (oh and FWIW I've been a professional software dev for 25 years, having lucked into it just by being a nerdy guy in the right place at the right time)

thu2111 6y ago
Uh huh, really. John Lennon formed the Beatles when he was 20, after flunking out of music school, failing his O-Levels and being written off by his teachers. He wrote his first top 10 hit when he was 15, just a year or so after getting his first guitar. The Beatles was formed mostly of his mates, no extensive 5+ year study of music went into any of this. Naturally talented group, yes, but that is nowhere near the same as requiring years of study to be able to get work in the field at all. The history of most bands and professional musicians is the same. They're all self taught and it doesn't take years before they can get work. The slogan "learn to code" was deemed a quasi-offensive thing to say to out of work Appalachian coal miners because it implied that anyone can learn to code pretty easily, and that's widely recognised across society as not being true. How many of those coal miners could already sing songs or play musical instruments? Probably quite a few.

Bakary 6y ago

Music, acting, and dancing are much, much more difficult than you portray them to be. It's just that the people who are good at it make it look easy. The competition is also extremely fierce and ruthless. There is little demand for most artists. In tech, there is high demand for even moderately proficient individuals. There are tons of free tools and helpful resources to help you study and improve. If you have access to a computer and the internet you are already in a great position to practice. Being a master is obviously tremendously hard, but it is far from necessary for a good life. If I had to choose, I would pick tech since there is a greater probability of having a very decent standard of living, and tech workers are generally left alone when it comes to the rest of their lifestyle. They do not need to keep up a personal style and social life that directly feeds into their job prospects. That's why the last point you mentioned is actually in favor of tech being easier.