4 ms·

I can relate to this article, but I have to say that not all older people know how to code. I'm pretty much at the age mentioned in this article so my peers ar

I can relate to this article, but I have to say that not all older people know how to code. I'm pretty much at the age mentioned in this article so my peers are all "old farts" in the tech industry. Some of them evolve into excellent programmers with valuable experience. Others are very change resistant and possibly never had good practices in their career. Some have had cushy jobs at corporations and move at the speed of a snail. Others crank out solid code at inhuman speed. Basically I think older coders need to be evaluated the same as younger guys. Some are good, some are not. However I do agree that older guys with families are not going to work 24/7 for 6 months in exchange for free pizza.

fennecfoxen 14y ago
The problem with hiring an older coder is the same as the problem as hiring a younger coder: they might not actually be very good. The thing you need to do with the older coder is make sure that their instincts and domain-specific knowledge of something you're hiring for won't mask a deficiency in general programming and problem-solving skills - like the ability to extensively think through all the consequences of their code changes and decisions, or operate in an unfamiliar environment - which will show up later when the rubber actually hits the road. With the younger coder, the general-purpose programming skills are probably all they have to show you. This is something you need to address in your interview process: just make sure you're interviewing for what you're actually going to need.
eshvk 14y ago
The problem lies in how a start up should evaluate an "older person". I am fresh out of school and think it is completely natural to be asked about new technologies, dynamic programming etc. However, I know a guy in his late thirties who has this inhuman ability to learn a fancy new technology in a week's time and then apply it to solve a complex old problem. Unfortunately, he doesn't necessarily have as good an algorithms background as I do. However, the speed at which he gets stuff is amazing. Does that mean that he is not a valuable asset? Also, how do you distinguish between such a person and a person who has spent a decade in industry and can run circles around you on high level stuff but is lacking when you dig deeper? When I am interviewed for a position, I expect (and even appreciate) being given a coding challenge and being asked to present my github account but I am unsure how scalable that model is for a senior person who has family etc.
- cunac 14y ago
  it is given that minimum you should be able to do is to code but that doesn't say at all can you actually develop something (think about that for moment) Low level stuff is generally easier to master (hence low part in name) than high level abstract thinking and concepts. Most people can learn low level stuff but most people doesn't grok high level stuff and implications of decisions they make.
  - eshvk 14y ago
    Yeah but I would think that evaluating whether a person can code or not is hard. (From both personal experiences as an interviewee/interviewer and the large number of posts regarding interviews that we see on HN every day). During my limited "oldster" interviewing experience as part of my startup job, I have found that people who have spent a long time out of academia find it (slightly) harder to solve questions on trees, graphs etc. On the other hand, they do cream the shit out of problems that you face in your day to day job in industry. On the other hand, people who are fresh out of school typically have the situation in reverse. I myself again feel the best way to evaluate a person's coding ability is to ask them to work on a tiny project. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to ask a person coming in for a senior position to work on a silly coding challenge.
- jakejake 14y ago
  I think what you're saying really can apply to all ages. Different programmers have different skills they bring to the table. Some have an amazing ability to crank out a utility app that is easy to use. Some are amazing at complex algorithms and scary assembly debugging, but can't and won't ever be able to design a simple form-based app that makes any sense to normal humans. From a programmer stand-point I don't think either one is any better (although the algorithms guy is likely to think his work is more important :-) But depending on the job or position, one of them may be more useful than the other.

fennecfoxen 14y ago

The problem with hiring an older coder is the same as the problem as hiring a younger coder: they might not actually be very good. The thing you need to do with the older coder is make sure that their instincts and domain-specific knowledge of something you're hiring for won't mask a deficiency in general programming and problem-solving skills - like the ability to extensively think through all the consequences of their code changes and decisions, or operate in an unfamiliar environment - which will show up later when the rubber actually hits the road. With the younger coder, the general-purpose programming skills are probably all they have to show you. This is something you need to address in your interview process: just make sure you're interviewing for what you're actually going to need.

eshvk 14y ago

The problem lies in how a start up should evaluate an "older person". I am fresh out of school and think it is completely natural to be asked about new technologies, dynamic programming etc. However, I know a guy in his late thirties who has this inhuman ability to learn a fancy new technology in a week's time and then apply it to solve a complex old problem. Unfortunately, he doesn't necessarily have as good an algorithms background as I do. However, the speed at which he gets stuff is amazing. Does that mean that he is not a valuable asset? Also, how do you distinguish between such a person and a person who has spent a decade in industry and can run circles around you on high level stuff but is lacking when you dig deeper? When I am interviewed for a position, I expect (and even appreciate) being given a coding challenge and being asked to present my github account but I am unsure how scalable that model is for a senior person who has family etc.

cunac 14y ago
it is given that minimum you should be able to do is to code but that doesn't say at all can you actually develop something (think about that for moment) Low level stuff is generally easier to master (hence low part in name) than high level abstract thinking and concepts. Most people can learn low level stuff but most people doesn't grok high level stuff and implications of decisions they make.
- eshvk 14y ago
  Yeah but I would think that evaluating whether a person can code or not is hard. (From both personal experiences as an interviewee/interviewer and the large number of posts regarding interviews that we see on HN every day). During my limited "oldster" interviewing experience as part of my startup job, I have found that people who have spent a long time out of academia find it (slightly) harder to solve questions on trees, graphs etc. On the other hand, they do cream the shit out of problems that you face in your day to day job in industry. On the other hand, people who are fresh out of school typically have the situation in reverse. I myself again feel the best way to evaluate a person's coding ability is to ask them to work on a tiny project. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to ask a person coming in for a senior position to work on a silly coding challenge.
jakejake 14y ago
I think what you're saying really can apply to all ages. Different programmers have different skills they bring to the table. Some have an amazing ability to crank out a utility app that is easy to use. Some are amazing at complex algorithms and scary assembly debugging, but can't and won't ever be able to design a simple form-based app that makes any sense to normal humans. From a programmer stand-point I don't think either one is any better (although the algorithms guy is likely to think his work is more important :-) But depending on the job or position, one of them may be more useful than the other.