StackOverflow Data Illustrates Why I Prefer Hiring Experienced Developers

Interesting conclusion.

I think there's a balance. Young hackers have amazing energy and still-empty lives (no mortgage, kids, etc). They truly enjoy coding for long stretches, reading about coding in their off time, etc. They also tend to be fearless learners. When was the last time you saw a 45 year old pick up a new instrument? Younger folks are more willing to jump on new technologies. That's powerful.

As you say, older folks are more efficient. But perhaps the wisdom they've gained makes them more powerful in lead dev/management roles where they can apply that wisdom to a larger group of younger rockstars.

Does one ask more questions if and only if they know less than those who ask more questions?

Maybe young folks are more inquisitive individuals.

Whatever happened to the idea of having wide range of skills and experiences in the workforce. The best way to actually get competent workers is to CULTIVATE them, not simply scrounge around endlessly trying to grab all the elites in an area.

Masters teach journeymen, journeymen become masters.

r

I think you should take the statistics with a good pinch of salt―and not only because of the issues brought up in the debate on the article about the Stack Overflow data[1].

> The junior developers ask more questions. This means they know less (which is why they ask).

I dare say they "know less", but this doesn't necessarily mean they are less expert. Junior developers might be more experimental, more curious, and more willing to actually ask questions―and these are all very desirable traits in a developer.

"You can't teach an old dog new tricks."

[1] http://coding-and-more.blogspot.com/2011/06/its-official-dev...

Maybe older developers have more time to go on SO?

tl;dr developers with more experience are more experienced

wow, what an arrogant post! I hope young and old devels alike will think twice before going to work for a manager who treats skilled labor as a sweatshop commodity and totally ignores basic economics (yes, experienced devs might provide more value, but they also cost more - you have to treat everyone on an individual basis - it's risk/reward what matters, not just reward!).

P.S. also, I don't think you'll be hiring your devs to answer questions all day long on an internet message board? So Stackoverflow statistics are useless.