4 ms·

"IQ-gated?" Please, let's not be so self congratulatory. The plumber who works on my house is easily as smart as I am. A successful software engineering career

"IQ-gated?" Please, let's not be so self congratulatory. The plumber who works on my house is easily as smart as I am. A successful software engineering career has brought me financial independence but I'm not particularly brilliant. Most of the folks I've worked with in FAANG aren't either. We're just normal people making a living during a very lucky period for a specific type of nerd.

atleastoptimal 2y ago
Most people who work in engineering and science tend to be more intelligent than those who work in blue-collar jobs. Exceptions do not invalidate this general trend. The fact that most tech job interviews are questions that are as close as possible to a live IQ-test further supports this premise. There is a premium on abstract reasoning that limits the number of people who can be successful software engineers, especially at places that pay a lot (FAANG, etc.) To ignore this fact is nice sounding but generally wishful thinking.
- nunez 2y ago
  That is definitely not true. The trades are hard as shit and dealing with the "standards" vs reality situations that they deal with day in day out is exhausting just to read.
  - atleastoptimal 2y ago
    They are hard and there are many smart people working in the trades. I am not disagreeing with this premise. It is still difficult to outright deny the general intelligence gap between those who work in manual labor/trades jobs and those who work in STEM professions. Of course there are different types of intelligence. There are figures starting on page 80 in this document that support this claim: https://gwern.net/doc/iq/ses/2002-hauser.pdf https://gwern.net/doc/iq/ses/2002-hauser.pdf
    - strix_varius 2y ago
      You're using data from 1944, based on fixed-pay government jobs, to support a claim that private sector software engineering is well-paid, in 2024, due to "IQ gating." The irony is hard to miss.
      - atleastoptimal 2y ago
        1. it’s a good study because they gave the army intelligence test to everyone who came in, so little selection bias 2. a job doesn’t necessarily pay well just because it does require a high IQ. Scientists in a research lab, professorships, academic research all likely have more intelligent people on average yet don’t pay as well as software engineering. 3. The study still shows a routine and reliable difference in average IQ between those who work in manual jobs/trades and those who work in science/engineering Software engineering in the US is well paid, yes, partially due to economic effects and impact of software in and of itself, but it is, especially in FAANG, a profession with a very high concentration of people near the higher end of normal and above in the IQ spectrum, which leads to implicit selection criteria regarding intellectual capacities in employment.
        nwiswell 2y ago
        #2 actually undercuts your argument about "IQ gating". Pay for software engineers is the product of supply and demand, and the absurd salaries clearly have much more to do with the demand side of the equation because of explosive growth in tech; if it really had to do with supply due to "IQ gating", then research scientists, professors, etc would make more. In any event there is more recent data (1992-4) that confirms that the differential is still present. This is maybe unpleasant to confront because it's self-congratulatory and has obvious class implications, but it's also pretty obviously true. See page 89 / figure 12: https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~hauser/merit_01_081502_complete.pdf https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~hauser/merit_01_081502_complete....

atleastoptimal 2y ago

Most people who work in engineering and science tend to be more intelligent than those who work in blue-collar jobs. Exceptions do not invalidate this general trend. The fact that most tech job interviews are questions that are as close as possible to a live IQ-test further supports this premise. There is a premium on abstract reasoning that limits the number of people who can be successful software engineers, especially at places that pay a lot (FAANG, etc.) To ignore this fact is nice sounding but generally wishful thinking.

nunez 2y ago
That is definitely not true. The trades are hard as shit and dealing with the "standards" vs reality situations that they deal with day in day out is exhausting just to read.
- atleastoptimal 2y ago
  They are hard and there are many smart people working in the trades. I am not disagreeing with this premise. It is still difficult to outright deny the general intelligence gap between those who work in manual labor/trades jobs and those who work in STEM professions. Of course there are different types of intelligence. There are figures starting on page 80 in this document that support this claim: https://gwern.net/doc/iq/ses/2002-hauser.pdf https://gwern.net/doc/iq/ses/2002-hauser.pdf
  - strix_varius 2y ago
    You're using data from 1944, based on fixed-pay government jobs, to support a claim that private sector software engineering is well-paid, in 2024, due to "IQ gating." The irony is hard to miss.
    - atleastoptimal 2y ago
      1. it’s a good study because they gave the army intelligence test to everyone who came in, so little selection bias 2. a job doesn’t necessarily pay well just because it does require a high IQ. Scientists in a research lab, professorships, academic research all likely have more intelligent people on average yet don’t pay as well as software engineering. 3. The study still shows a routine and reliable difference in average IQ between those who work in manual jobs/trades and those who work in science/engineering Software engineering in the US is well paid, yes, partially due to economic effects and impact of software in and of itself, but it is, especially in FAANG, a profession with a very high concentration of people near the higher end of normal and above in the IQ spectrum, which leads to implicit selection criteria regarding intellectual capacities in employment.
      - nwiswell 2y ago
        #2 actually undercuts your argument about "IQ gating". Pay for software engineers is the product of supply and demand, and the absurd salaries clearly have much more to do with the demand side of the equation because of explosive growth in tech; if it really had to do with supply due to "IQ gating", then research scientists, professors, etc would make more. In any event there is more recent data (1992-4) that confirms that the differential is still present. This is maybe unpleasant to confront because it's self-congratulatory and has obvious class implications, but it's also pretty obviously true. See page 89 / figure 12: https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~hauser/merit_01_081502_complete.pdf https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~hauser/merit_01_081502_complete....