5 ms·

I'm 38. The difference in what I know, can do, and can do quickly, now vs. 10 years ago is staggering. I can't wait to see where I'll be in 5 years. It makes m

by ericb 14y ago

I'm 38. The difference in what I know, can do, and can do quickly, now vs. 10 years ago is staggering. I can't wait to see where I'll be in 5 years. It makes me confused about the "young founder" trope. Maybe some wunderkind can pick up a lifetime of learning before they are 22, but if so, I'd love to know how, and how this could be a common scenario. It just seems far-fetched to me. So much of what I know came from experience, but without that experience, I'm not sure how one would learn these things...

danielweber 14y ago
Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. Now, you know that there have been hundreds of flashes in the pan (or things that should have been flashes in the pan), and it's usually much easier to keep a high-level overview of a field and only dive into it when you need it, which usually takes a matter of days because you have worked with similar things anyway. But they don't know that you know that.
- ericb 14y ago
  Maybe that's the stereotype, but I'm more interested in what technology came out in the last 2 weeks than the last 2 years. Have fun in the slow lane, sonny!
- jmj42 14y ago
  >Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. Then the young founder is wrong. I'm also 38, and not only am I familiar with (intimately in many cases) with 2 year old technology, in many cases I'm in the process of _creating_ the future of technology (in my particular slice of computer science). You may be on to something with fads, though. My experience (purely anecdotal) is that more experienced developers are better able to pick out the fads vs. new tech that's likely to stick. That makes a difference. I'm not going to spend much of my valuable time on something that I don't believe is going to last, and after 20 years, I'm pretty good at picking those things out. I have a very long list of things I want to have a deeper look at, but I'm not going to waste my time on technology that won't last. Oh, I'll have a look at those things (the high level that you mention), but that's as far as it'll go. There's far to much on my plate. On occasion, I do get it wrong. That thing I thought would be a fad, ends up becoming important technology, and I have to play catch-up, but that doesn't actually happen much these days. I guess my point is, it may appear that we, older developers, lag behind, but really, our experience allows us to make better decisions about what technology to spend our time on.
- corresation 14y ago
  >Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. This would be a really silly assumption. There seems to be little correlation between age and acclimation to new technologies.
- 16s 14y ago
  And the young ones don't know the math behind why iterating over a list is slower than doing a lookup in a map. I don't care what new-fangled, whiz-bang language/framework is cool. If you don't grok data structures and when to use what, you're screwed when you try to scale.
untog 14y ago
I think the young founder trope persists for social reasons, not technical. The average 25 year old "understands" the internet on a very different level than the average 35 year old- simply as a consequence of having grown up around it.
- ericb 14y ago
  That's probably the meme, but being around during construction and occasionally being the one building it might get you a deeper understanding imho.
  - RHSeeger 14y ago
    A deeper understanding of how it works, etc sure... but not necessarily a deeper understanding of how the younger folk interact with it. I remember reading a discussion of how some technology (lets go with smart phones for lack of my memory) was going to make newer generations lives so much different. They'll be focused around them because they're so amazing and useful. What <the folks that said that> didn't really understand was that, to the younger generation, the smart phone wasn't some wonder, amazing device that can do lots of things. Rather, it just WAS. It's like a door. If you lived before doors, they would be amazing... you'd think everyone younger than you would be amazed they have it and love it. But they don't. To them, it has always been that way, the door just IS.
- camus 14y ago
  i dont think the 25 yo understand the internet "on a different level" because they are born with the internet. Using something early doesnt mean you understand how it works at all. Young people may learn faster though, but older people are supposed to know more already.
  - untog 14y ago
    My point is that "how it works" isn't that important. "What it changes", is. I was in college in the pre-Facebook era, so I don't really have a handle on how different it was to have access during college years. Now teenagers are Snapchatting each other, and I don't do that either- so I don't understand the behaviour as well as younger people than myself.
goodcanadian 14y ago
I think a big part of it is that the "young founders" are naive and don't know what they don't know. This allows them to strike out in unexpected directions and try things that no one with experience would actually do. Usually, they will fail, simply winding up older and wiser. Occasionally, however, they will succeed, possibly through nothing other than luck, and that makes them look like a genius. Now, I don't mean to belittle the inexperienced young founders; we were all inexperienced once. Also, a few of them probably truly are visionary geniuses (but I suspect most are not). All that said, many of the start-ups I hear about sound ridiculous to me, and most will fail. The few that are destined to truly succeed, however, probably will also sound ridiculous to me. And perhaps, that is why "young founders" are occasionally going to change the world.

by ericb 14y ago

danielweber 14y ago

Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. Now, you know that there have been hundreds of flashes in the pan (or things that should have been flashes in the pan), and it's usually much easier to keep a high-level overview of a field and only dive into it when you need it, which usually takes a matter of days because you have worked with similar things anyway. But they don't know that you know that.

ericb 14y ago
Maybe that's the stereotype, but I'm more interested in what technology came out in the last 2 weeks than the last 2 years. Have fun in the slow lane, sonny!
jmj42 14y ago
>Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. Then the young founder is wrong. I'm also 38, and not only am I familiar with (intimately in many cases) with 2 year old technology, in many cases I'm in the process of _creating_ the future of technology (in my particular slice of computer science). You may be on to something with fads, though. My experience (purely anecdotal) is that more experienced developers are better able to pick out the fads vs. new tech that's likely to stick. That makes a difference. I'm not going to spend much of my valuable time on something that I don't believe is going to last, and after 20 years, I'm pretty good at picking those things out. I have a very long list of things I want to have a deeper look at, but I'm not going to waste my time on technology that won't last. Oh, I'll have a look at those things (the high level that you mention), but that's as far as it'll go. There's far to much on my plate. On occasion, I do get it wrong. That thing I thought would be a fad, ends up becoming important technology, and I have to play catch-up, but that doesn't actually happen much these days. I guess my point is, it may appear that we, older developers, lag behind, but really, our experience allows us to make better decisions about what technology to spend our time on.
corresation 14y ago
>Young founders don't trust you because you don't know the latest technology that has come out in the past 2 years. This would be a really silly assumption. There seems to be little correlation between age and acclimation to new technologies.
16s 14y ago
And the young ones don't know the math behind why iterating over a list is slower than doing a lookup in a map. I don't care what new-fangled, whiz-bang language/framework is cool. If you don't grok data structures and when to use what, you're screwed when you try to scale.

untog 14y ago

I think the young founder trope persists for social reasons, not technical. The average 25 year old "understands" the internet on a very different level than the average 35 year old- simply as a consequence of having grown up around it.

ericb 14y ago
That's probably the meme, but being around during construction and occasionally being the one building it might get you a deeper understanding imho.
- RHSeeger 14y ago
  A deeper understanding of how it works, etc sure... but not necessarily a deeper understanding of how the younger folk interact with it. I remember reading a discussion of how some technology (lets go with smart phones for lack of my memory) was going to make newer generations lives so much different. They'll be focused around them because they're so amazing and useful. What <the folks that said that> didn't really understand was that, to the younger generation, the smart phone wasn't some wonder, amazing device that can do lots of things. Rather, it just WAS. It's like a door. If you lived before doors, they would be amazing... you'd think everyone younger than you would be amazed they have it and love it. But they don't. To them, it has always been that way, the door just IS.
camus 14y ago
i dont think the 25 yo understand the internet "on a different level" because they are born with the internet. Using something early doesnt mean you understand how it works at all. Young people may learn faster though, but older people are supposed to know more already.
- untog 14y ago
  My point is that "how it works" isn't that important. "What it changes", is. I was in college in the pre-Facebook era, so I don't really have a handle on how different it was to have access during college years. Now teenagers are Snapchatting each other, and I don't do that either- so I don't understand the behaviour as well as younger people than myself.

goodcanadian 14y ago

I think a big part of it is that the "young founders" are naive and don't know what they don't know. This allows them to strike out in unexpected directions and try things that no one with experience would actually do. Usually, they will fail, simply winding up older and wiser. Occasionally, however, they will succeed, possibly through nothing other than luck, and that makes them look like a genius. Now, I don't mean to belittle the inexperienced young founders; we were all inexperienced once. Also, a few of them probably truly are visionary geniuses (but I suspect most are not). All that said, many of the start-ups I hear about sound ridiculous to me, and most will fail. The few that are destined to truly succeed, however, probably will also sound ridiculous to me. And perhaps, that is why "young founders" are occasionally going to change the world.