Hacker News Reader

Comment by MagicWishMonkey | Hacker News Reader

Agreed. Sounds like there's something else at play with this guys inability to find work. Maybe he doesn't interview very well?

View on HN

Some people are terrible at interviews. A few months ago I interviewed a developer in his thirties who had a great looking resume. Worked on lots of big projects in positions of both making decisions about software architecture, technology to use, etc.. and also being a programmer doing the actual work. His resume was really awesome.

When we received him in our interview, we asked him to tell us a bit about his past projects, what he liked, disliked, etc. He didn't talk much and it took us a lot of questions to dig up helpful things.

Then we asked a couple programming related questions and he bombed them all. He couldn't put an algorithm into words, write code that compiles or gives the proper results. Our interview programming questions start very easy and we slowly iterate by adding more constraints that shows if a dev has a deep knowledge of the language and framework.

I have a feeling like this developer was good when he's working alone on a project with no one to talk to. He would have never fit in our company culture and we couldn't evaluate his skills in an interview.

> developer was good when he's working alone on a project with no one to talk to

or he/she could have faked the resume, or dressed it in a good way. I find that excellent programmers tend to be good communicators, because good, clean programming is about communicating with future programmers (which could be yourself in 5 yrs time). Having clarity in thought and being able to express ideas to other people is so crucial that i would rank that above experience with a certain stack/tech.

He might have made it look better but it definitely wasn't fake, since he worked at one company I had previously worked at too. We weren't there at the same time but I asked him which team he worked in, who he worked with, who was his team lead, etc.. and he gave me all legit answers. We talked about the processes there and what he liked/disliked since we had both worked in the same environment.

It's possible he wasn't prepared for the interview, and was thrown for a loop early on and failed to recover. It happens. Although that is equally as bad.

He's old (early 40'). Taboo subject in the sector.

This is something being glossed over by most of the responses. Age discrimination (or rather, age preconception, if that's a less loaded term) is frighteningly real.

i would expect that an older person with more battle tested experience ought to fair better tbh, so i don't get it with the agism. Unless the position is meant for a high strung startup where you're expected to basically live there, with no dependents to look after etc.

There are several reasons younger developers are sometimes valued over older candidates. Work life balance is part of it, but there are other factors at play. This is a pretty well trodden topic, and you can find a lot of the typical discussion points by Googling. A common explanation, for instance, is that experience in tech doesn't accrue a ton of value due to tech obsolescence - 20 Cobol experience doesn't really translate to much of anything these days.

However, rather than re-hash all that, it's worth taking a look at the numbers - numbers that absolutely indicate a younger skewing workforce. For instance, the average age at Facebook is 26, and 31 at Google. Tech as a whole leans young, with the "oldest" tech company workforce (HP) still younger than the national median [1]

Now, whether simply having a younger workforce points towards actual age discrimination is a matter of fair debate. A perfectly reasonable explanation might be that tech is a young field, hence a young workforce. However, there are enough confounding factors (limitations of experience, work/life balance in dev roles, etc.) that certainly make for rational arguments in favor of age being more of burden than boon.

Then, of course, you have stuff like this :

> "Young people are just smarter. Why are most chess masters under 30? I don't know. Young people just have simpler lives. We may not own a car. We may not have family. Simplicity in life allows you to focus on what's important." -- Zuckerberg

True or not, it would be weird to argue that his opinion is somehow a rare isolated outlier. It speaks to a common conception - both in the valley and in tech - that this is a business for the young.

[1] http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/technology-workers-...

It speaks to a common conception - both in the valley and in tech - that this is a business for the young.

Most programming work doesn't require a genius level iq. It requires being able to build simple things very, very quickly. As a result, the experience level at a company matches the structure pyramid. The smart, older guys at the top make all the tough decisions and the fresh, younger guys at the bottom code as fast as they can. As those at the bottom age, they find themselves competing with other programmers their age for far fewer jobs toward the top of the pyramid.

In some cases, those with less experience are threatened by people who have more, and if a company has a low median age experience might be an issue to the interviewers. The problem is exacerbated when the interviewee is not impressed when the latest, bleeding edge tech is in use at the target company, and has seen similar projects completed with stable and boring tech.

In others, especially those with the high-strung startup mentality you mention, they are looking for people to work more hours for less pay and promises. Younger people are more able / willing to take risks. Experienced workers are not as interested in promises, but prefer defined returns on their individual investments.

Yeah, that was my first thought on reading that article. He's old and doesn't have a gazillion skills on his resume because he stayed in one place for a long time.

Since he was explicitly told that they wouldn't be sending his resume to anyone else that pretty much means the failings are purely resume-based, not ability or interview skills. I have a hard time picturing a resume making one unemployable other than due to age discrimination.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com