3 ms·

> Doctor, lawyer, and athlete are "jock" professions, while software engineering is very much a "nerd" profession. These words represent status and general leve

by mjr00 3y ago

> Doctor, lawyer, and athlete are "jock" professions, while software engineering is very much a "nerd" profession. These words represent status and general level of attractiveness and therefore access to attention and sex. This is just your perspective and, IMO, it's pretty warped. Software engineering is not a low-status position, even compared to doctors and lawyers. You aren't lacking in status or not having sex because you're a software engineer getting paid $200k/year instead of a doctor paid $200k/year. > Furthermore, the whole point of the vast majority of software engineering is to sell loot boxes to kids to increase shareholder wealth for a pittance of the wealth created (or something not too different from that for at least 60% of companies). Lawyers have to defend clients they know are guilty to help rapists and murderers walk free, and file IP lawsuits for patents they know are bullshit so that their client can siphon off a settlement from a large company, just because it's cheaper than a court battle. Lawyers have been widely (and unfairly!) regarded as one of the most despised professions since Shakespeare.[0] Professional atheletes have long been subject of the media debate over being paid "too much" compared to the value they bring to society. Even if they were broadly perceived as providing negative value to society, which I don't believe, software developers would not be unique. > To put it bluntly, many bad parents abandoned their kids to the internet where they found solace. Software engineering is a natural extension of spending too much time using the internet and becoming curious how it works. This is becoming less and less true. Many junior devs who were born post-2000 that I talk to never had a computer growing up other than their phone, and their first real experience with PCs came in high school and university. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_kill_all_the_lawyers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_kill_all_the_lawyers

p_l 3y ago
> This is just your perspective and, IMO, it's pretty warped. Software engineering is not a low-status position, even compared to doctors and lawyers. You aren't lacking in status or not having sex because you're a software engineer getting paid $200k/year instead of a doctor paid $200k/year. I find that it definitely points to a time period when someone entered maybe not workforce, but the "IT world" let's say. There was a time when programming in many places had definitely "unsexy" vibe among general population, with a lot of, well, painful "jokes", and all of that definitely set a "theme". fast forward a decade or so to 2010 and suddenly IT is no longer that place where only losers go.
- optimalquiet 3y ago
  As it turns out, the massive money generated by software produces quite a lot of status. But the IT world is meaningfully different from software engineering. IT infrastructure (as distinct from creating software) pays less, generally, and is also regarded as much lower-status. IT is like auto mechanics to software engineering's automobile design. It's the blue collar equivalent, especially at the low level. At the high level, as far as I understand, it morphs with "cloud-engineering" or just general management and becomes higher-status. Unfortunately, I think this comes from how the entrance into IT is gated by working on low-level ("have you tried turning it off and on again?") problems, and putting slightly awkward, new-to-the-workforce nerds in a position where they need to help a lot of people with their computer problems. Many of whom are (understandably!) frustrated that their computer systems aren't working and/or don't totally understand why they won't work. So IT gets to see people at their worst and most frustrated, and people get to see IT at its most awkward and least experienced. So hostility forms on both sides. And first impressions sometimes last very long.
  - p_l 3y ago
    The massive amounts of money is, largely, a post-2010 thing too. Before that, some hugely successful people in software outside of "nerd" circles were discussed often in terms disconnected with tech and more as just other (if wildly successful, like Bill Gates) business people.
- jimbokun 3y ago
  The stigma is different now. It’s not “you’re a loser”. It’s “you make a lot of money while ruining the world for everyone else.” Look at the jokes about Zuckerberg imitating a human. He’s obviously one of the most powerful people in the world. But looked down upon by creating a socially harmful product. Like cigarette company or oil company CEOs.
jjav 3y ago
> Software engineering is not a low-status position Pay is not status. Software currently pays quite well, but in most companies today a developer is at the very bottom of the status curve. Developers are no longer allowed any say in what to build or how to build it, they are micromanaged by product managers and program managers and team managers and required to give daily status reports ("agile"). (I say "used to" because in the 90s developers were a high status role. You got to make all decisions and execute on them with great independence. Pay was much lower but respect was much higher.) The other stress factor is that developers get decreasing respect every year they age. This is in contrast with basically every other professional role where experience is highly valued. Nobody wants the rookie heart surgeon, everyone wants the 60 year old who has done it thousands of times. But nobody wants a 60 year old software engineer.
- shiroiushi 3y ago
  >Developers are no longer allowed any say in what to build or how to build it, they are micromanaged by product managers and program managers and team managers and required to give daily status reports ("agile"). I don't see how this is a bad thing, for a large and complicated product. For a small company where a team of 5 people can do the whole thing, sure, you don't need all this management, though I think some parts of the Agile methodology can be useful just for keeping people in sync. I worked in a small-ish team a while ago using an Agile methodology and it was fine: the program manager basically told us the feedback from the customer, and then it was up to us to decide what features to make to keep the customer happy and how to do it and how to schedule it. The Agile methodology just forced us to have regular meetings, and made it easy for the outside stakeholders to keep tabs on us and attend our meetings when necessary. Having daily habits in your life isn't a bad thing for many people, and that's basically what Agile was, in my experience: a way of having habits. >Pay was much lower but respect was much higher. No, it really wasn't. Maybe within the profession, but not to society at-large. Developers back then had little respect, until they started making lots of money in the dot-com boom, then people starting respecting the profession a bit more. Software development has never gotten the respect that doctors and lawyers get. >Nobody wants the rookie heart surgeon, everyone wants the 60 year old who has done it thousands of times. This might have some truth, but it's a bad view: generally, older surgeons prefer to use older surgical techniques that they learned decades ago, since they weren't trained on the newest techniques. The newer techniques generally are much less invasive and have faster recovery times. It's better to go with younger surgeons who have more modern training, but still some experience (i.e., not fresh out).
fisf 3y ago
Software developers usually have managers of various sorts of supervisors. This is classical division of worker / manager in the Taylorist sense, as in the managers are mostly not developers themselves. This is what makes software developers a low status profession, i.e. many developers are glorified assembly line workers with little agency over their work (they do not make decisions). Doctors and lawyers might have some form of management layer, but this is mostly a support function.
jimbokun 3y ago
> You aren't lacking in status or not having sex because you're a software engineer getting paid $200k/year instead of a doctor paid $200k/year. If you don’t think male doctors have more opportunities with women than male software engineers, other things being equal, I can’t take you seriously.

by mjr00 3y ago

p_l 3y ago

> This is just your perspective and, IMO, it's pretty warped. Software engineering is not a low-status position, even compared to doctors and lawyers. You aren't lacking in status or not having sex because you're a software engineer getting paid $200k/year instead of a doctor paid $200k/year. I find that it definitely points to a time period when someone entered maybe not workforce, but the "IT world" let's say. There was a time when programming in many places had definitely "unsexy" vibe among general population, with a lot of, well, painful "jokes", and all of that definitely set a "theme". fast forward a decade or so to 2010 and suddenly IT is no longer that place where only losers go.

optimalquiet 3y ago
As it turns out, the massive money generated by software produces quite a lot of status. But the IT world is meaningfully different from software engineering. IT infrastructure (as distinct from creating software) pays less, generally, and is also regarded as much lower-status. IT is like auto mechanics to software engineering's automobile design. It's the blue collar equivalent, especially at the low level. At the high level, as far as I understand, it morphs with "cloud-engineering" or just general management and becomes higher-status. Unfortunately, I think this comes from how the entrance into IT is gated by working on low-level ("have you tried turning it off and on again?") problems, and putting slightly awkward, new-to-the-workforce nerds in a position where they need to help a lot of people with their computer problems. Many of whom are (understandably!) frustrated that their computer systems aren't working and/or don't totally understand why they won't work. So IT gets to see people at their worst and most frustrated, and people get to see IT at its most awkward and least experienced. So hostility forms on both sides. And first impressions sometimes last very long.
- p_l 3y ago
  The massive amounts of money is, largely, a post-2010 thing too. Before that, some hugely successful people in software outside of "nerd" circles were discussed often in terms disconnected with tech and more as just other (if wildly successful, like Bill Gates) business people.
jimbokun 3y ago
The stigma is different now. It’s not “you’re a loser”. It’s “you make a lot of money while ruining the world for everyone else.” Look at the jokes about Zuckerberg imitating a human. He’s obviously one of the most powerful people in the world. But looked down upon by creating a socially harmful product. Like cigarette company or oil company CEOs.

jjav 3y ago

> Software engineering is not a low-status position Pay is not status. Software currently pays quite well, but in most companies today a developer is at the very bottom of the status curve. Developers are no longer allowed any say in what to build or how to build it, they are micromanaged by product managers and program managers and team managers and required to give daily status reports ("agile"). (I say "used to" because in the 90s developers were a high status role. You got to make all decisions and execute on them with great independence. Pay was much lower but respect was much higher.) The other stress factor is that developers get decreasing respect every year they age. This is in contrast with basically every other professional role where experience is highly valued. Nobody wants the rookie heart surgeon, everyone wants the 60 year old who has done it thousands of times. But nobody wants a 60 year old software engineer.

shiroiushi 3y ago
>Developers are no longer allowed any say in what to build or how to build it, they are micromanaged by product managers and program managers and team managers and required to give daily status reports ("agile"). I don't see how this is a bad thing, for a large and complicated product. For a small company where a team of 5 people can do the whole thing, sure, you don't need all this management, though I think some parts of the Agile methodology can be useful just for keeping people in sync. I worked in a small-ish team a while ago using an Agile methodology and it was fine: the program manager basically told us the feedback from the customer, and then it was up to us to decide what features to make to keep the customer happy and how to do it and how to schedule it. The Agile methodology just forced us to have regular meetings, and made it easy for the outside stakeholders to keep tabs on us and attend our meetings when necessary. Having daily habits in your life isn't a bad thing for many people, and that's basically what Agile was, in my experience: a way of having habits. >Pay was much lower but respect was much higher. No, it really wasn't. Maybe within the profession, but not to society at-large. Developers back then had little respect, until they started making lots of money in the dot-com boom, then people starting respecting the profession a bit more. Software development has never gotten the respect that doctors and lawyers get. >Nobody wants the rookie heart surgeon, everyone wants the 60 year old who has done it thousands of times. This might have some truth, but it's a bad view: generally, older surgeons prefer to use older surgical techniques that they learned decades ago, since they weren't trained on the newest techniques. The newer techniques generally are much less invasive and have faster recovery times. It's better to go with younger surgeons who have more modern training, but still some experience (i.e., not fresh out).

fisf 3y ago

Software developers usually have managers of various sorts of supervisors. This is classical division of worker / manager in the Taylorist sense, as in the managers are mostly not developers themselves. This is what makes software developers a low status profession, i.e. many developers are glorified assembly line workers with little agency over their work (they do not make decisions). Doctors and lawyers might have some form of management layer, but this is mostly a support function.

jimbokun 3y ago

> You aren't lacking in status or not having sex because you're a software engineer getting paid $200k/year instead of a doctor paid $200k/year. If you don’t think male doctors have more opportunities with women than male software engineers, other things being equal, I can’t take you seriously.