Hacker News Reader

Comment by maerF0x0 | Hacker News Reader

This should have been known from the beginning.

1) The dotcom crash (and to a lesser extent 2008) showed us how transient these jobs are

2) You're going to age out at about 45ish unless you can secure a less common role at a less common company that values tenured folks. You're paid well partially as an advance on your unemployability later. One option is to move into management before such a time, or on to wood working or another profession.

These are never explicitly said, but if you're observant you'll realize it's the case.

View on HN

> age out at about 45

Maybe it's different in America but that just hasn't been my experience in the UK. Loads of people over 50 still working in tech. Obviously most in management but that's to be expected. There are plenty still doing "actual work". I'm not really worried about ageism.

Of course you have to keep learning. Nobody is going to hire a 60 year old who only knows Pascal or whatever (sorry Pascal programmers).

> Nobody is going to hire a 60 year old who only knows Pascal or whatever

Lots of legacy code is still out there. But that's probably a pretty thankless job.

Yes, exactly. I just turned 66, and have a technical lead role at an autonomous vehicle company. The technologies and languages that I use on a daily basis did not exist when I was an undergrad. Keeping up is essential if you want to remain technical. (I have done 3 or 4 stints as a manager, but always managed to reach escape velocity. The worst day on the bench is better than the best day driving a spreadsheet.) Why am I often the one trying to sell the 20-somethings on trying out the latest language features? Not all luddites are 40+.

I have seen this in the UK definitely.

I think it is more a question of whether the company actually understands technology. Lots of companies, particularly in the UK, have ended up in the tech business so they are always one step from outsourcing everything to India (or elsewhere, India is getting expensive now).

In that environment, it is very hard to understand what an older person brings to the table beyond costing more.

The stuff about "you have to keep learning" is also something you hear a lot in the UK. Yes mate, I know React but haven't used styled-components...your company uses it, but there is no way I will be able to learn it. When you are in a job, you are continually learning and no company fires everyone when they move a system to a new language or whatever. Part of the reason why the UK has a "skills shortage" is because, as explained above, most companies have no idea what they are hiring for. Oh, you last worked on Java 8...sorry, you will never be able to catch up to Java 1X.

This is part of the ageism situation because younger people view older people as unable to learn in almost every context. But the reality is that many companies are unwilling to learn about the things people can do if you give them an opportunity.

Some companies aren't like this but the small size of the startup market/the use of the UK as an outsourcing hub/the dominance of large non-tech companies in tech hiring means that this is the case in most of the UK.

I think in other industries they're called sweat shops. maybe mental sweat shops. since it's not physical labor but mental.

Sweat shops usually don't have a six figure entry level salary.

do you prefer mental gerbil mill instead?

> You're going to age out at about 45ish

This isn't actually very true outside of SV and FAANG.

It’s not true anywhere I have ever worked.

Perhaps, but unfortunately that's where much of the money is. So unless an engineer is ok with their income getting cut in half or so...

Well, a smart engineer would look at their income adjusted according to their CoL. Those amazing-sounding salaries in SV are offset by how expensive everything is.

If I can live with a higher standard of living at half the nominal salary, am I really making less?

Is it really a higher standard of living if you lack the amenities that make those places popular and as a result expensive?

Well, it depends on what you value. If you consider being in a specific area critical for your standard of living, then the computation changes accordingly, of course.

But not everyone considers living there to have a positive impact on their standard of living. They live there to get a high-paying job. Of the dozen or so people I personally know who live in that area, half of them would prefer to live somewhere else.

That isn't true in SV and FAANG either.

I didn't really mean to imply it was. I just omitted them because I don't know first-hand how such things are with those companies.

I got my first FAANG job at 45 years old. So I’m not really sure what they mean here.

I'm 60 in a few days. I slid into Verilog (now SystemVerilog) about 12 years ago, mostly on FPGAs. These days I've got more work than I know what to do with. I'm planning on retiring in December.

There's something to be said for a less common role, even if it does give me a splitting headache every now and then.

Its really rare to get a Verilog related job with stock options/good pay though. You can do an infinite amount of it making terrible money working in defense; doubly so if you want to live somewhere awful.

I guess I've been lucky.

When you say move into management, is that something that an individual can really control? I'm an IC and I've performed well but I've never thought of management as something I could actually go into. Instead, I've always seen management as something a company decides to open the door for.

It can start by telling your manager you’re interested in management.

If you have really good EQ and want to increase your EQ then management or sales is a good path to pursue.

It can be fairly trivial to hide your age and if you’re doing remote work using filters will make you look deceptively young. By the time the company ever finds out your actual age it’s too late. You should also avoid revealing your age to coworkers or other clues that may hint your age.

This is the grim cyberpunk future we were promised in Gattaca, finally here!

Now I’m imagining a whole company full of 40 year olds unsuccessfully impersonating 20 year olds, but nobody can tell because we’re all using the same outdated slang.

“You really yeeted that code review,” the term leader says, a slight waver in his voice as he wonders if this will be the one that gets him caught.

“Yes it was yolo,” nods the coder.

They quickly break up the meeting, happy to have survived the interaction.

Actually I think I have to update my slang too…

Poggers.

Anecdote: I was asked a cultural/generational question when bronies were the rage to settle an argument.

(will the old guy get it). I didn’t like it; I should’ve used the culture card and dodged the question.

Are brownies still a thing? I’m hoping “what’s a bronie” becomes a completely information free response ASAP.

> or other clues that may hint your age.

So do not reveal you have 20 years experience and graduated in the previous century?

You don’t need to reveal 20 years of experience. You could talk about how many years of experience will satisfy them. If they ask for 5 years of experience with some tech stack talk about stuff you did with it 7 years ago and onward. Be vague.

A person of less experience will get the job and be paid the same as you anyway.

Aging out is one of those myths that sound true until you think about them. The number of developers doubles every 7 years or so. Which means there are twice as many 20 year olds as 30, 30 as 40 and 40 as 50. So if you're at the average shop then for every 50 year old you see there should be 8 20 year olds. Which is pretty close to what you get.

And that's before we even start talking about the fact that js was just invented when the average 50 year old was entering the workforce.

If you start at 22-ish, I thought the risk of aging out started around 30-ish? Older people have external lives, cost more in salary, cost more in health care, ... They also have been known to push back re: overwork and to not get swept up in current fads.

perhaps the gradual ageism begins at 30, but look around and try to see how many >40yr engineers are around you. Every year there is a dice roll to remove folks, and an extremely low intake of new "older" folks. (ie, 5% of 40yr old engineers might leave per year, and only 1% of 40yr old engineers are entering as their first year due to starting a new career)

Typically the older you get, and the more knowledgable you become, you step into different positions that tend to pay more (PM, Leadership). The more experienced individuals are just more beneficial in those roles, rather than strictly coding.

Except expecting everyone to want to go toward managerial roles is a nasty (and very common) antipattern.

Having to work with toxic people or completely give up an interpersonal leadership role as a condition of being a staff engineer is another.

I'm in a weird spot career wise because I turned down 3 management roles to oversee multiple teams and now have to signal my non-interest in stepping out of team leadership and into a staff engineering role.

I just really like managing ICs in the day to day and everything that would make me good at those other roles is incidental to me liking managing ICs.

Speaking as someone whose age starts with a 5, I don't expect/agree older people should earn more based on being older. If they earn more by bringing more value to the company, that's welcome and fair on both sides, but if you're 53 and you don't bring more value in than someone who is 35, you shouldn't expect to take more home either.

As a fiftysomething, I agree entirely. As near as I can see, very few people get paid more based on simple longevity. They get paid more because their increased experienced and larger skillset provides more value to the company.

I agree, with the caveat that many employers don’t see it that way. They will think you are too expensive for the value you can provide, without even giving you an offer. It is just expected that the 53 year old has more ability than the 35 year old, making it hard for career changers or late bloomers.

This is an example of ageism. I'm pushing 50, let's see how I stack up:

> cost more in salary

If the salaries that show up in HN posts are true, this is a no.

> cost more in health care

My only health care needs in the past 30 years have been a couple of dental cleanings per year.

> have been known to push back [...] and to not get swept up in current fads.

Ok, you've got me on this one. I do keep up with new languages, libraries, etc. I've also lived through enough hype cycles to separate the good stuff from the fluff.

> My only health care needs in the past 30 years have been a couple of dental cleanings per year.

I hate to be disagreeable but that might be an example of past observations not necessarily predicting future ones.

> cost more in health care My only health care needs in the past 30 years have been a couple of dental cleanings per year.

The answer here, I feel, is to slowly phase recipients to medicare to offset some of the costs.

Even better if medicare were for all; or outright remove the private sector and the employer from paying for our health insurance.

If you're an experienced professional competing for the same jobs as fresh graduates, something has gone awfully wrong with your career. At some point you gotta start bringing more to the table than pure grind.

Good lord, what kind of brutal hellscape do you work at that ages people out at 30?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com