5 ms·

There are "ageist" technology employers out there, especially on Wall Street where 35 is considered "old" (you're either MD-level or at the top of the RIF list)

There are "ageist" technology employers out there, especially on Wall Street where 35 is considered "old" (you're either MD-level or at the top of the RIF list), but my observation is that if you're good, you can always find someone who will hire you. I think that a problem a lot of aging developers face is that many of them went into "programming" because, like law or medicine, it was a respectable career choice that provided a middle-class standard of living and a cozy work environment. This is fine, but if you're not willing to dedicate serious energy to keeping your skills up to date, you are going to be forced to contend either with an income plateau, or a move into management.

gaius 18y ago
I think that at many employers experience can work against you especially if the manager isn't too technical. A 22-year-old will be like "I'm a net-generation Ruby rockstar and I'll build you a ninja terrorist website" whereas a 40-year-old will be more, umm, realistic.
- olefoo 18y ago
  The 22-year old will also be willing to accept a lower salary; and be less able at the politics of the workplace and more willing to be abused.
  - olefoo 18y ago
    I am curious as to why this comment is garnering so many upvotes. Let me be clear; I do not think those traits are net positives overall. The fact that when we are young we are a bit too willing to defer to authority is an artefact of buggy monkeyware. Any Manager/CTO who hires youngsters because they are easy to browbeat and relatively cheap is on crack; it feels real good at first, but it destroys you sooner rather than later. Most teams benefit from a diversity in age as well as in outlook. You need people who are experienced enough to be able to see through the bullshit, but you also need people who will stay up late hacking on a skunk works project because they are excited about the work.
    - tptacek 18y ago
      I don't understand your point here. Holding the quality and priority of the work constant, the employee who is cheaper and easier to "browbeat" is in fact lower drag. The market is very rationally going to select for the lowest drag fit for any role.
      - deleted 18y ago
        [deleted]
      - jimbokun 18y ago
        "Holding the quality and priority of the work constant" That is a large qualification. It is possible that quality of work and willingness to be browbeaten are inversely correlated.
        tptacek 18y ago
        That isn't my experience at all. I've found no correlation at all.
      - olefoo 18y ago
        It is my observation that toxic work environments are especially unproductive in software companies. Someone who hires a team with the idea of getting the cheapest and and most pliant workers is setting himself up to be forever surrounded by incompetence; real or perceived. A sailboat with no friction (keel) can only run before the wind; it is wholly unable to sail against the wind.

gaius 18y ago

I think that at many employers experience can work against you especially if the manager isn't too technical. A 22-year-old will be like "I'm a net-generation Ruby rockstar and I'll build you a ninja terrorist website" whereas a 40-year-old will be more, umm, realistic.

olefoo 18y ago
The 22-year old will also be willing to accept a lower salary; and be less able at the politics of the workplace and more willing to be abused.
- olefoo 18y ago
  I am curious as to why this comment is garnering so many upvotes. Let me be clear; I do not think those traits are net positives overall. The fact that when we are young we are a bit too willing to defer to authority is an artefact of buggy monkeyware. Any Manager/CTO who hires youngsters because they are easy to browbeat and relatively cheap is on crack; it feels real good at first, but it destroys you sooner rather than later. Most teams benefit from a diversity in age as well as in outlook. You need people who are experienced enough to be able to see through the bullshit, but you also need people who will stay up late hacking on a skunk works project because they are excited about the work.
  - tptacek 18y ago
    I don't understand your point here. Holding the quality and priority of the work constant, the employee who is cheaper and easier to "browbeat" is in fact lower drag. The market is very rationally going to select for the lowest drag fit for any role.
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
    - jimbokun 18y ago
      "Holding the quality and priority of the work constant" That is a large qualification. It is possible that quality of work and willingness to be browbeaten are inversely correlated.
      - tptacek 18y ago
        That isn't my experience at all. I've found no correlation at all.
    - olefoo 18y ago
      It is my observation that toxic work environments are especially unproductive in software companies. Someone who hires a team with the idea of getting the cheapest and and most pliant workers is setting himself up to be forever surrounded by incompetence; real or perceived. A sailboat with no friction (keel) can only run before the wind; it is wholly unable to sail against the wind.