3 ms·

> generally far more certified Hardly. Any software developer working on systems that risk people’s safety - eg avionics, automotive systems, medical devices,

> generally far more certified Hardly. Any software developer working on systems that risk people’s safety - eg avionics, automotive systems, medical devices, traffic control systems - would be required to have advanced university qualifications. Google at least used to require all its software engineers to have masters degrees. Do they still? People I’ve know to work in software dev jobs at Microsoft and even mid-level companies like TripAdvisor and SurveyMonkey have PhDs. Other tech companies like IBM and Accenture sure would require at least bachelor degrees. But sure, plenty of software developers have no formal qualifications or liability. And they’re not working on stuff that directly risks people’s physical safety.

austincheney 5y ago
That completely misses the point. Some developers have some certifications to cover employer liability. You cannot be a software developer for the US federal government without at least a Security+ certification, but this is rare among developers. In most of my giant corporate employers you didn’t need even a bachelors degree. Regardless of industry or employer you cannot get hired as a help desk IT guy without a laundry list of certifications. It is a night and day difference.
- tomhoward 5y ago
  You said you agreed with my main point so I probably should have left it at that, but for the record: The OP says: Most organizations seem to hire their first part-time IT person before they reach 20 employees. When that first IT person is replaced, the new IT person bores everybody with complaints about how "totally incompetent" the first person must have been, and, usually, is correct. When you hire somebody's teenage kid, you almost invariably get the competence you pay for. By "somebody's teenage kid" I gather we're meant to assume this character is not qualified or certified; that's the very point of the article. I've certainly known of such people, and have even been that person. Indeed the first five years of my career were in helpdesk and network design roles, and I had no certifications. Sure, I know what you mean, that to be serious support professional for products from vendors like Microsoft, Cisco, Oracle, etc, you need certifications. But plenty of small-business networks are set up by young, inexperienced, uncertified people such as family members and friends, and if the business stays small it's often fine. But sure, among software developers, plenty of highly paid ones don't have qualifications/certifications, where it's not deemed necessary by employers/clients. And plenty do, where it is deemed necessary or legally required. I guess the real point is that people are paid more for their impact and the uniqueness of their abilities, not their certifications, and it's more common to be high-impact and unique as a developer than as a helpdesk tech.

austincheney 5y ago

That completely misses the point. Some developers have some certifications to cover employer liability. You cannot be a software developer for the US federal government without at least a Security+ certification, but this is rare among developers. In most of my giant corporate employers you didn’t need even a bachelors degree. Regardless of industry or employer you cannot get hired as a help desk IT guy without a laundry list of certifications. It is a night and day difference.

tomhoward 5y ago
You said you agreed with my main point so I probably should have left it at that, but for the record: The OP says: Most organizations seem to hire their first part-time IT person before they reach 20 employees. When that first IT person is replaced, the new IT person bores everybody with complaints about how "totally incompetent" the first person must have been, and, usually, is correct. When you hire somebody's teenage kid, you almost invariably get the competence you pay for. By "somebody's teenage kid" I gather we're meant to assume this character is not qualified or certified; that's the very point of the article. I've certainly known of such people, and have even been that person. Indeed the first five years of my career were in helpdesk and network design roles, and I had no certifications. Sure, I know what you mean, that to be serious support professional for products from vendors like Microsoft, Cisco, Oracle, etc, you need certifications. But plenty of small-business networks are set up by young, inexperienced, uncertified people such as family members and friends, and if the business stays small it's often fine. But sure, among software developers, plenty of highly paid ones don't have qualifications/certifications, where it's not deemed necessary by employers/clients. And plenty do, where it is deemed necessary or legally required. I guess the real point is that people are paid more for their impact and the uniqueness of their abilities, not their certifications, and it's more common to be high-impact and unique as a developer than as a helpdesk tech.