Enders Game is a good allegory for this.
It's good to have diversity and meritocratic process for decision making. It's good to have different perspectives, but recognize that sometimes bad experience is worse than little experience.
Enders Game is a good allegory for this.
It's good to have diversity and meritocratic process for decision making. It's good to have different perspectives, but recognize that sometimes bad experience is worse than little experience.
You are the one with a "platonic causation", namely, older = rigid thinking.
Enders Game is a child's book, written to appeal to children. Note we don't actually have 9 year olds making decisions in reality.
Prove it with some research. The current research shows that people really don't make their best contributions to their field before 35-45.
And, to be fair, I see more young people who attempt to hit the screw with a hammer because a hammer is the only tool they have.
Look at someone like John Carmack - before he was 35 he had done Command Keen, Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Quake 1-3. Guys like Steve Wozniak were basically out of the business by the time they hit 35. Linus released Linux when he was 22, and started git when he was 35. I doubt guys like Marc Andreesen have written much code since they hit 35 as well.
So, basically what you're saying is that young people can churn out software where you can undo your huge screwup, but if you have to get it right the first time like hardware, then you need some experience.
What you're saying is that some people don't learn from their experiences. You should focus on finding out if they have. That's worth way more than hoping that this young kid will.
Good developers do use pattern matching. But good developers just use it as a way to come up with ideas, and they use their experience to judge the ideas.
There's no such thing as "bad experience", just poor reasoning skills. And mostly people will improve their reasoning skills over time. Unfortunately, not always.