4 ms·

I view the constant learning and changing requirements of careers in software development to be one of its largest advantages and draws over, how I imagine some

I view the constant learning and changing requirements of careers in software development to be one of its largest advantages and draws over, how I imagine some of those careers you listed are (others like lawyers and doctors I am certain have their own knowledge bases they have to learn constantly). I get to learn a new or modified API, language, or project domain every year if not more frequently, and I love it. You viewing it as 'having to re-learn a new API every year' indicates to me that you view it as a negative. In regards to the under appreciated part, I also was well aware this wasn't a job like fire fighting or being a doctor where I was going to be appreciated on a daily basis, or even a job like teaching where I would get the occasional student that appreciated me making all the thankless bastards I had to deal with hopefully worth it. I mean there is no reason you shouldn't try to find a place where you personally don't have to re-learn stuff every year, and are appreciated. But I like learning and being appreciated adds no value to me, I assume at least some others feel the same. I am always in favor of being paid more, but I would be hard pressed to argue why I should be.

logfromblammo 13y ago
The ability to continue learning new things (and also implementing them) over the course of your entire career may be less common than you think. Doctors and lawyers have a large body of working knowledge that they must learn, but the portion relevant to their specific practice might not change that much over their entire career. Software writers can get started on a tiny corpus of knowledge, but a huge portion of it has to be updated on a nearly constant basis. It's like accelerating over the entire length of a foot race, except instead of sprinting the 50m dash, you are running an ultramarathon. By the time you retire, you have already forgotten more things than most people have ever bothered to learn. I have already written software for doctors and nurses, lawyers and paralegals, rocket scientists, aircraft pilots, and other software writers like me. Every job required learning a significant amount of domain knowledge, even if only on a temporary basis. As a result, that quote by Heinlein from Time Enough for Love--the one about specialization being for insects--definitely applies. I can now convincingly bullshit any non-expert on practically any topic after only about 2 days of Internet research. That's because I have learned to identify and focus upon the core elements of a problem and discard all irrelevancies. It may be odd to you, since you probably have the same skill now, but the vast majority of humanity is completely incapable of viewing a problem objectively. That is why we are valuable. We are the Professors surrounded by billions of Gilligans. We are the MacGyvers in a world of ticking time bombs. Bunsen and Beeker to a bunch of talking animals. Lisa Simpsons beset by Homers. Farnsworths (and Wernstroms) babysitting Benders and Frys. That's why we get paid the big bucks.

logfromblammo 13y ago

The ability to continue learning new things (and also implementing them) over the course of your entire career may be less common than you think. Doctors and lawyers have a large body of working knowledge that they must learn, but the portion relevant to their specific practice might not change that much over their entire career. Software writers can get started on a tiny corpus of knowledge, but a huge portion of it has to be updated on a nearly constant basis. It's like accelerating over the entire length of a foot race, except instead of sprinting the 50m dash, you are running an ultramarathon. By the time you retire, you have already forgotten more things than most people have ever bothered to learn. I have already written software for doctors and nurses, lawyers and paralegals, rocket scientists, aircraft pilots, and other software writers like me. Every job required learning a significant amount of domain knowledge, even if only on a temporary basis. As a result, that quote by Heinlein from Time Enough for Love--the one about specialization being for insects--definitely applies. I can now convincingly bullshit any non-expert on practically any topic after only about 2 days of Internet research. That's because I have learned to identify and focus upon the core elements of a problem and discard all irrelevancies. It may be odd to you, since you probably have the same skill now, but the vast majority of humanity is completely incapable of viewing a problem objectively. That is why we are valuable. We are the Professors surrounded by billions of Gilligans. We are the MacGyvers in a world of ticking time bombs. Bunsen and Beeker to a bunch of talking animals. Lisa Simpsons beset by Homers. Farnsworths (and Wernstroms) babysitting Benders and Frys. That's why we get paid the big bucks.