5 ms·

Yup. You can check out of FAANG anytime you like, but you can never leave. Was path dependency for careers always this bad?

by samr71 2y ago

solarmist 2y ago
I don’t feel like it was. Every role is hyper specific nowadays. And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience.
- nickff 2y ago
  >"And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience." This is often because the culture of job-hopping for better pay every 18 months has eroded the willingness to pay for training or adaptation. Why pay for someone to learn if they're just gonna leave soon; the pre-trained person is a better deal if you'll have to pay to retain anyway.
  - solarmist 2y ago
    Which was caused by cost cutting measures, MBA disease, in companies to begin with. We’re just seeing the end of the cat and mouse struggle that’s been going on since the 60s. And massively accelerated in the 80s. It’s unfortunate for companies though because they’re the ones that will lose out in the end when all the experienced people start retiring and they have no one to hire. It’s an untenable position to not train people, period. There is no schooling you could go through that would educated junior dev to the level of a senior dev. And it’s the same for any other role. Experience is not optional.
    - nickff 2y ago
      I think the primary stimulus which creating the “job hopping culture” was actually the hot labor market for software developers. Other fields experienced real ‘cost-cutting’, without resulting in a lot of ‘job-hopping’. I agree that this situation is undesirable, but it seems to be stable, somewhat like the result of repeated play of the prisoner’s dilemma.
      - solarmist 2y ago
        That definitely massively accelerated it but you’re looking way too short term that’s only been in the last 10 to 15 years. I agree that other industries are not YET at the point where software is , but you’re not looking hard enough if you don’t see the short tenures compared to the 25-30 years they used to have. And yeah, it might be in an equilibrium now, but how long can it stay in an equilibrium? I’d guess at max 10 to 15 years.
ghaff 2y ago
It's a more mature industry. I'm guessing the majority of people now in their 50s and 60s in computer-related careers had very eclectic jobs before settling down in computer-related stuff. After all, many never used computers at all until college or beyond.
- solarmist 2y ago
  My understanding is even in the early 2000s it was pretty much just firmware versus desktop software with a small niche for Mac developers. Edit: my point was not that specialized software applications didn’t exist. It was that people were expected to be able to jump from stack to stack when they change roles in a way that has disappeared from modern job applications.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    Plenty of server software being developed in the early 2000s. (Though minicomputers were mostly off the scene by then.)
  - swatcoder 2y ago
    Pretty much. Well, and mainframes. And trading and financial systems. And numerical/scientific computing. And network services. And web sites and e-commerce. And flash, java applets, and browser plugins. And control systems. And operating systems and tooling. And cell phone applications. And games. And video/image/audio/music processing. etc etc Oh, wait... maybe not!
    - solarmist 2y ago
      So you’re saying that none of those roles could be cross hired in the early 2000s between any of the other roles? That’s the point I was trying to make. Not that the software didn’t exist or people weren’t doing specialized applications.
      - ghaff 2y ago
        I basically agree with your edit. There was a lot more fluidity among roles and even just moving into computer roles from other engineering (and even non-engineering) fields. But that's not really what you wrote initially.

Yup. You can check out of FAANG anytime you like, but you can never leave. Was path dependency for careers always this bad?

by samr71 2y ago

Yup. You can check out of FAANG anytime you like, but you can never leave. Was path dependency for careers always this bad?

solarmist 2y ago

I don’t feel like it was. Every role is hyper specific nowadays. And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience.

nickff 2y ago
>"And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience." This is often because the culture of job-hopping for better pay every 18 months has eroded the willingness to pay for training or adaptation. Why pay for someone to learn if they're just gonna leave soon; the pre-trained person is a better deal if you'll have to pay to retain anyway.
- solarmist 2y ago
  Which was caused by cost cutting measures, MBA disease, in companies to begin with. We’re just seeing the end of the cat and mouse struggle that’s been going on since the 60s. And massively accelerated in the 80s. It’s unfortunate for companies though because they’re the ones that will lose out in the end when all the experienced people start retiring and they have no one to hire. It’s an untenable position to not train people, period. There is no schooling you could go through that would educated junior dev to the level of a senior dev. And it’s the same for any other role. Experience is not optional.
  - nickff 2y ago
    I think the primary stimulus which creating the “job hopping culture” was actually the hot labor market for software developers. Other fields experienced real ‘cost-cutting’, without resulting in a lot of ‘job-hopping’. I agree that this situation is undesirable, but it seems to be stable, somewhat like the result of repeated play of the prisoner’s dilemma.
    - solarmist 2y ago
      That definitely massively accelerated it but you’re looking way too short term that’s only been in the last 10 to 15 years. I agree that other industries are not YET at the point where software is , but you’re not looking hard enough if you don’t see the short tenures compared to the 25-30 years they used to have. And yeah, it might be in an equilibrium now, but how long can it stay in an equilibrium? I’d guess at max 10 to 15 years.

ghaff 2y ago

It's a more mature industry. I'm guessing the majority of people now in their 50s and 60s in computer-related careers had very eclectic jobs before settling down in computer-related stuff. After all, many never used computers at all until college or beyond.

solarmist 2y ago
My understanding is even in the early 2000s it was pretty much just firmware versus desktop software with a small niche for Mac developers. Edit: my point was not that specialized software applications didn’t exist. It was that people were expected to be able to jump from stack to stack when they change roles in a way that has disappeared from modern job applications.
- ghaff 2y ago
  Plenty of server software being developed in the early 2000s. (Though minicomputers were mostly off the scene by then.)
- swatcoder 2y ago
  Pretty much. Well, and mainframes. And trading and financial systems. And numerical/scientific computing. And network services. And web sites and e-commerce. And flash, java applets, and browser plugins. And control systems. And operating systems and tooling. And cell phone applications. And games. And video/image/audio/music processing. etc etc Oh, wait... maybe not!
  - solarmist 2y ago
    So you’re saying that none of those roles could be cross hired in the early 2000s between any of the other roles? That’s the point I was trying to make. Not that the software didn’t exist or people weren’t doing specialized applications.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      I basically agree with your edit. There was a lot more fluidity among roles and even just moving into computer roles from other engineering (and even non-engineering) fields. But that's not really what you wrote initially.