3 ms·
The ladder we chose to climb was a very short one, unlike the ones the reporters climb. To get to the top meant convincing one or two people we could make a con
by bitsweet 15y ago
The ladder we chose to climb was a very short one, unlike the ones the reporters climb. To get to the top meant convincing one or two people we could make a contribution.
IMO, this still applies to software. That is why the whole debate to stay or drop out of school even exists. You don't see lawyers, accountants, doctors, or journalists for that matter debate on the merits of school to advance their career. If you write code, consider yourself lucky to still be living in this "golden period" where just a little skill and ambition is all you need to make an excellent living doing enjoyable work.
- wes-exp 15y agoTo be fair, lawyers, accountants, and doctors all face strict professional requirements to be degree holders. As such, debating the necessity of a degree serves no practical purpose in those fields. The decreased need for education in software engineering shouldn't be used as an indicator of its competitiveness. On the contrary, one could argue that is actually more competitive, because anyone can enter the field at any time.
- bitsweet 15y agoExactly - Accounting as an example had a much lower bar of entry, similar to programming today. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen -"Hey Arthur Andersen, your a bright kid, you should come work for us") It is very possible programming follows a similar path requiring more and more professional requirements to get a ticket to play.
- hollerith 15y agoYou have to be a CPA to sign certain kinds of reports that investors depend on and to do certain kinds of audits, but there is a lot of work in accounting without any profession-wide degree or certification requirements.