14 ms·

I'm not sure why it should be a "dirty secret" that the tech world is predominantly driven by younger people who may at times be wont to push older people aside

by grellas 14y ago

I'm not sure why it should be a "dirty secret" that the tech world is predominantly driven by younger people who may at times be wont to push older people aside as suits their needs. Welcome to our capacity to be jerks if we indulge ourselves in that direction, as many will. It works the other way too, as all too many younger people can attest as they have occasionally been treated like dirt by those who are older. Is this good or fair when it does happen? No. Is it illegal? Sometimes, but making formal proof is daunting at best and usually not possible. Thus, it comes down to this: treat others as you yourself would want to be treated. If a workplace reflects that ethic, it will be a place where old and young alike will want to work and where older workers will receive their due as befits their experience, skills, and performance, good or bad; if it does not reflect that ethic, it is a place to avoid if at all possible. While Silicon Valley may represent the ageism problem in a particularly acute way owing to its youth culture, it really is no different from anywhere else. There is the good and the bad, and we each need to do what we can to uphold a high standard of common decency for ourselves and to make sure others do the same. It may not be a complete answer but it can help a lot in our immediate work environments and that will go a lot farther toward solving the problem than the law ever can.

DocSavage 14y ago
It always confused me that some really bright young people (e.g., Zuckerberg) can't grasp this: the variation in intelligence and capability due to non-age factors >>> the variation in intelligence and capability due to age factors. Put another way, I'd take Einstein in his 40s over a thousand other randomly-chosen physicists in their 20s
- erydo 14y ago
  > I'd take Einstein in his 40s over a thousand other randomly-chosen physicists in their 20s (I don't think I've seen a more clear example of a false dichotomy.) I agree that age is rarely the determining factor for someone's general competence: someone who's competent young is going to be competent when they're older. Their strengths do shift slightly, though. Depending on the mission, experience may extremely valuable; when breaking new ground, sometimes creativity and energy are more important. It's hard to argue that there's no correlation with age there over a person's life, even if it's relatively minor. Ageism to me seems a lot like sexism, racism, and every other -ism. The error is to use those characteristics as false metrics for someone's competence: e.g. "you're old, therefore you're slow" or "you're young, therefore you don't know what you're talking about". Let their work speak for itself and see if they're the right fit for the job at hand. The fact that there are age biases due to the type of work isn't always indicative of discrimination, though it often is. (In Zuckerberg's case, I would be unsurprised to hear about discrimination given his YC07 talk about "hiring young").
  - tripzilch 14y ago
    It should be easy to tell the difference: If it's mainly selection based on metrics of certain types of competence and strengths that may correlate with age, then we shouldn't be hearing stories about people having to shave or dye their hair, get a hipster-wardrobe, just to have a chance at getting a second interview. (or plastic surgery ...)

by grellas 14y ago

DocSavage 14y ago

It always confused me that some really bright young people (e.g., Zuckerberg) can't grasp this: the variation in intelligence and capability due to non-age factors >>> the variation in intelligence and capability due to age factors. Put another way, I'd take Einstein in his 40s over a thousand other randomly-chosen physicists in their 20s

erydo 14y ago
> I'd take Einstein in his 40s over a thousand other randomly-chosen physicists in their 20s (I don't think I've seen a more clear example of a false dichotomy.) I agree that age is rarely the determining factor for someone's general competence: someone who's competent young is going to be competent when they're older. Their strengths do shift slightly, though. Depending on the mission, experience may extremely valuable; when breaking new ground, sometimes creativity and energy are more important. It's hard to argue that there's no correlation with age there over a person's life, even if it's relatively minor. Ageism to me seems a lot like sexism, racism, and every other -ism. The error is to use those characteristics as false metrics for someone's competence: e.g. "you're old, therefore you're slow" or "you're young, therefore you don't know what you're talking about". Let their work speak for itself and see if they're the right fit for the job at hand. The fact that there are age biases due to the type of work isn't always indicative of discrimination, though it often is. (In Zuckerberg's case, I would be unsurprised to hear about discrimination given his YC07 talk about "hiring young").
- tripzilch 14y ago
  It should be easy to tell the difference: If it's mainly selection based on metrics of certain types of competence and strengths that may correlate with age, then we shouldn't be hearing stories about people having to shave or dye their hair, get a hipster-wardrobe, just to have a chance at getting a second interview. (or plastic surgery ...)