10 ms·

Here’s something I think a lot of people don’t think on: 40 years old is mid-career. If you expect to retire at 60 (likely 65 these days) and you start working

• synergy20 4y ago
  40s or 50s are still prime time for programmers, assuming he/she keeps learning and coding and designing. but those are still of small group, it's like a normal distribution, I read somewhere age wise there are only about 1.5% that are above 50s.
  • jmfldn 4y ago
    Programmers doubled every 5 years for 20 years. That's at least part of the reason.
  • w4ffl35 4y ago
    I'm better now than I ever have been. I was trash in my Jr years. Being discriminated against due to age would be a grievous error on the part of any potential employer.
  • layer8 4y ago
    A significant reason for that is that the field has kept growing for decades. Of course a lot less people started 20/30/40 years ago than do now.
• wpietri 4y ago
  Two things can be true. 40 is mid-career, and tech's ageism includes it: https://www.businessinsider.com/we-hire-old-people-ageism-tech-inudstry-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/we-hire-old-people-ageism-te...
  • w4ffl35 4y ago
    Limiting a software engineers career to less than 20 years is a pretty fucking idiotic thing to do.
    • wpietri 4y ago
      Sure. Ageism, sexism, racism, etc, etc, etc, are all fucking idiotic. And yet surprisingly popular. So we have to deal with them.
      • ThePadawan 4y ago
        I agree with you, but imagine being a discriminatory, but rational asshole. Of course you're not going to hire a woman if you could hire a man - they might get pregnant and be away from work for a long time. Of course you're not going hire an older employee that knows their worth over a recent graduate that isn't familiar with the salary they should earn. You can rip them off much more easily. People can be cunts but still act with some rational motivation. That's why we have protected categories, to make sure that that isn't a strategy worth pursuing.
        • w4ffl35 4y ago
          > not going hire an older employee that knows their worth over a recent graduate that isn't familiar with the salary they should earn that's the real problem, self and situational-awareness.
        • whiddershins 4y ago
          Except if the more experienced engineer is actually worth more, the rational actor will pay them more.
          • w4ffl35 4y ago
            > the rational actor i like the points in this thread. perhaps aging is just a natural bad actor filter. options narrow as we wise up.
• sys_64738 4y ago
  A lot of programmers who are 35+ can struggle to find further opportunities as the more senior you are the less available those opportunities are and the more expensive you are. Lots of companies only want young people who are naive and have limited distractions outside of work. So, really, programming as a field is front loaded and the longer you stay in the business over 35 then the luckier you have been. But make sure you have an effective exit strategy to support yourself and your family when the boss doesn't like folk older than him.
  • Swizec 4y ago
    Big part of why programming is front loaded is that it's an incredibly new field. The entire field hasn't existed for more than 70 years. And that was if you count "Niche academic field that a few dozen mathematicians knew about" as the start. It didn't become like a job job until what, the mid 1960's? That's 60 years ago. And the number of programmers is doubling every ~5 years. Of course it's front-loaded with young people! The people who have been doing this for the field's entire time of mass popularity (1980's onwards imo) haven't even had time to get proper old yet. But also: The more experienced you are, the more your biggest value isn't in banging keys on the keyboard. A company would much rather leverage your thoughts and opinions and that may look a lot more like technical leadership than programming. Even though it's still engineering.
    • therealdokks 4y ago
      This is exactly what I've found. My employer relies on my experience and values my opinions as much as they value my actual code out put.
  • user_named 4y ago
    The same goes for EVERY profession.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  • 4y ago
• howmayiannoyyou 4y ago
  > ageism in tech Several reasons for ageism sometimes missed. This from someone whose been discriminated against, who has hired, who now owns a company & who was also a recruiter. __I don't agree with this__ just laying the reasons out for clarity sake: - Hiring managers don't consider themselves ageist, but opt for younger employees whom they think make a better cultural fit. You can blame the 'work is my social life' culture that emerged in the 2000's and that persists today. - Hiring managers don't want to be ageist, but they've had or heard of bad experiences where disgruntled or non-performing employees abuse the EEOC process for financial gain and retribution. Very well intentioned rules, designed to protect certain cohorts of employees, doing the exact opposite as is often the case with Gov regs. - Hiring managers (usually fixated on 'new tech') who fear diminished learning, adoption or performance capacity in older employees. - Money. The perception that older employees cost more in wages and benefits, without much thought to efficiency gains that accompanies gray hair. I was age discriminated against by a well known SAAS provider, who used a 2014 interview process to extract a detailed roadmap and ideas for product growth from me, and then ghosted me. I've watched as they've (badly) implemented the specific of my roadmap the past few years, and I chuckle. 100% my fault for giving up too much value in the interview process, but it was tough time and I thought I really needed that job.
  • draw_down 4y ago
  • WesolyKubeczek 4y ago
    > Hiring managers don't consider themselves ageist, but > Hiring managers don't want to be ageist, but I classify this into the "I'm not a racist, but..." bucket. > Hiring managers (usually fixated on 'new tech') who fear diminished learning, adoption or performance capacity in older employees This is the textbook definition of what ageism is. Conclusion? They are ageists, plain as that. They may not consider themselves to be, or want to be, but they still are, because ageist is as ageist does, and it matters jack what appearances they want to keep or what they think or who they perceive in a mirror.
    • 4y ago
• toastedwedge 4y ago
  Is this ageism implied for SV and like companies, or all of them in general (implied US-based anyway)? I can't speak in either instance at this time, but I'd like to think ageism isn't nearly as widespread as it seems when discussed on here when it comes to technology-based work. E.g., Small town in Nebraska with one or two software houses versus SF.
• tootie 4y ago
  "likely 65 these days" I think with software jobs paying what they do, retiring at 50 would be pretty easy.
  • hmlongco 4y ago
    Things happen. But what I often tell people is that I'd probably be sitting in front of a computer anyway. Might as well get paid for it.
  • nly 4y ago
    If you start your career strong in your early to mid 20s and plan for it for then... yes. Not all software engineers are paid ludicrous money though, and even in places that they are paid well the cost of living can be atrocious.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]