Hm that makes sense given the relative infancy of the software industry.
Not to mention that enrollment in CS programs has been increasing so the talent pool is skewed towards younger people
I'm no expert, but the only published research I've read on this is "Thinking, Fast and Slow", and the original researcher has recently cast doubt on his own results on that study. Regardless, the evidence there was that all that mattered was "any objectively measurable metric" -- which would mean that FAANGs are wasting a lot of time and money on useless interviews. (Of course they have money to throw away, but still...)
What kind of evidence that tech interviews work well are you looking for, exactly? Isn't the obvious evidence of your own eyes sufficient?
Do you have a reference for this? I'm interested in reading more.
For example, "it was a close call" could mean:
- you were late to the interview, and we didn't like that
- we closed the job and stopped recruiting everyone
- you had mustard on your shirt, and we didn't like that
- an interviewer was late to an interview, insisted you proceeds anyway, and you could not possibly have received a vote of confidence for the questions asked in the time allotted
And so on and so on. The only things you can really trust are got hired, didn't get hired, and never heard back. That's it.
And apparently at Google - the negatives carry the day.
That's what I was getting at - apparently it's negativity-driven, all the way down.
The signal was what I was told when I got a subsequent unsolicited contact from a Google recruiter. She communicated this information to me verbally. (I believed her, and in retrospect still do. She was great during the whole process; never gave me the slightest indication that she was in any way deceptive or dishonest.)
I've started to loosen up regarding that and finally finding a path I could take. However, instead now I'm intimidated by the job market and age discrimination.
A lot of the work is more boring business oriented work, and not a lot of startups. But it's steady, there's plenty of it and it pays relatively well compared to cost of living.
Start with Dive Into Python... then decide on something you want to make for yourself and work from there. Python is one of the better options to start from. JS is my personal favorite, second is now Rust, but they're harder to jump into as a beginner.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/phoenix-senior-software-d...
From my experience, at least half of the devs I've worked with have been within 5 years of my age (currently 44) and where I am now, and my last two positions that's been the case as well.
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/
The first online book linked from the author's homepage is:
MATHEMATICS OF THE DISCRETE FOURIER TRANSFORM (DFT) WITH AUDIO APPLICATIONS SECOND EDITION
IMHO the author does a brilliant job of presenting the mathematics with rigor, but with accessible "on-ramps" via examples.
Appreciate it!
Most old people don't learn as many new things as younger ones, which makes it harder for older people who do to get the chance to prove themselves.
"Most old people don't learn as many new things as younger ones..." - this is demonstrably ageist. People performing a mid-life career change can be as focussed and driven to succeed in IT as anyone; the determination to acquire and master new skills is, in my view, a personality thing, not an age-related thing.
FWIW - My only concern with older folks is that they’re either jaded, stuck in their ways technologically, or obstinate towards being managed by people younger than them. Strong opinions held strongly is a net negative. This isn’t everyone or even a majority, but it’s quite a few.
Again, (mostly) stereotyping:
"jaded" - I'd argue this hits a lot of front end developers after about 5 years. How many new frameworks have there been in the last 5 years? There comes a point when any sane person will look at the newest "killer" framework and decide to wait a couple of years before investing time in learning it, just in case next year's "killer" framework turns out to be more fun to learn.
"stuck in their ways" - this is more a personality thing, I think. Most people will find their comfort zone pretty quickly, and then get grumpy when asked/required to venture outside of it. Risk aversion and/or laziness doesn't, in my view, increase significantly with age.
"obstinate towards being managed" - this one is a problem that everyone has to face as they grow older. The sad fact (from what I've seen in my age group) is that some people just cannot come to terms with the ageing process, that there's going to be younger people who are better placed to do a team-leader/manager job than they are (because: longer experience in the industry). But that is something that can be worked on - the important thing is to demonstrate a willingness to at least give it a go, offer support to the younger manager (be a wise owl, not an old owl), and be an excellent team player. At least that's my attitude.
In other words: not only is there no hard data behind this view; there isn't any (from a gut perspective) that much of a correlation -- but it's a strong opinion, strongly held nonetheless.
Strong opinions like your opinion on older folks?
Most old people don't need to learn as many new things. It's called "experience."
... are you sure about that? I'd avoid sweeping generalizations, it does not help your argument.
At the same time I'm much more concious about spending my thinking energy, and because of my experience I'm making much more money than when I was younger _despite_ my slower thinking.
Discrimination involves hate, and I definately not hate old people, just accept the facts of life (and I'm also hoping for a cure for aging).
Not always, no. That would give an unworkably narrow definition.
But yeah, just today there was a comment here on Hacker News saying (I'm paraphrasing): I learnt C then C++ then Java, then enough was enough. Which is just sad, that's like going from oatmeal to porrige.
Learning C, then C++, then Rust, then Java, then Ruby (rails), then Objective-C, then Swift, then JavaScript, then Angular, then React, then Flutter, then ....
Depending on the timeframe in which all that learning happens, there's simply no way you can reach expert level with such a diversified knowledge base.
What are you talking about? I’ve checked in production code in 4 languages in a day.
Once you learn your first few languages you should be able to learn the new syntax of a language in a day or two and a good portion of their idioms in the next month (as you know more languages you’ll notice what’s unique about each language and glean idioms from online tutorials and your local codebases).
Being a polyglot is a huge part of many in our industry, especially full stack development. For one project alone I had to work with a backend that was part Java and part Go that hosted customers’ Node backend. I oversaw client SDKs in Objective-C, Java, and C++ and helped prototype the server-side SDK for Go. That’s not fatigue, it’s enjoyable and a skill I can offer my team. Sure I get rusty with a language, but it doesn’t take long to blow off the dust with a skill.
My family came up with a new name for my category of programmers: the gerihacktric demographic.. :-)
I have interviewed with Alphabet twice, no offers. One time apparently it was a close call..
It would be fun to be the all-time record holder for oldest new hire!