Was it “discrimination” that I had to spend six months to be competitive in 2008 after being at the same company for a decade writing VB6 apps and writing programs in C++ with MFC/DCOM?
What about the six months in 1999 I spent playing around with C++/MFC because I spent the first three years of my career writing C and FORTRAN on DEC VAX and Stratus VOS mainframes?
If you want to stay an active software developer you have to always be learning to stay competitive.
As I suspect you know, discrimination rarely declares itself. It's usually subtle, sometimes even unconscious, but often it's still there. "I didn't care so I didn't try so I have no direct experience" is not a good argument for dismissing others' choices as inferior or their experiences as insignificant.
The modern $cool_kids framework would be more familiar to those boot camp kids than it would have been to that hypothetical guy who spent years doing WebForms. Every time I’ve interviewed since 2009 I’ve had to prepare myself beforehand for the types of interviews required for the type of job I wanted. I’m sure half the developers on this board have been targeted by one of the Big tech companies. Everyone knows what to expect at the interviews. The recruiters basically tell you. If I wanted to do the stereotypical r/cscareerquestions “work for a Big N”, I know just how to prepare for it. I have no reason to believe that if I prepared that I wouldn’t be just as competitive. In fact, I would be just as insulted if they gave me a different easier process because of my age because they thought I couldn’t handle a whiteboard interview as I would be if they gave me a different process because of my color if I’m applying for the same job.
Maybe even an algorithm that's objectively worse for that particular case, but arguing the point would only cost you more points. Those are things I've seen happen.
This is life. To paraphrase Buffett, the interview process can stay irrational much longer than I can stay solvent. If you’re an older developer, you should have the wisdom to know which battles you should fight and when you should just play along to reach the ends you want.
As I suspect you know, discrimination rarely declares itself. It's usually subtle, sometimes even unconscious, but it's still there. When evaluating such claims, it's helpful to look at what actually happens to others instead of projecting our own personal experience onto them.
He never said that he studied hard and thought that he was well prepared for the type of interview that he knew they were going to give but hired someone that wasn’t as prepared. If he doesn’t have time to prepare for the interview because of family obligations, that’s no more “discrimination” than me not being able to accept consulting gigs right now because I don’t want to be on the road right now because of family obligations.
You're still looking at this as a matter of how well you can play the game, not whether it's actually a fair game anyone should have to play. That still doesn't answer the OP's question, and I'm not interested in a strategy discussion right now. I've had plenty of those. If you can't bring yourself to think or talk about social problems as they might affect others, then we have no common ground or reason to engage with one another.
It isn’t any more discriminatory that a new college graduate has recently learned skills that an older developer will have to learn on his own than it is that I had to learn C# or Java on my own to be competitive since neither existed when I graduated from college and a new college grad could learn those languages in school.
We all signed up for field that requires constant learning and evolving with the landscape. I’ve been programming since 1986 in 65C02 assembly language in 6th grade. I’ve known exactly what I was signing up for the day I stepped foot on a college campus in 1992.
If someone has to put forth a little effort to qualify for a job that puts you well into the top decile of income - it’s not a bad tradeoff.
This isn't about whether people are willing to do the work. It's about whether they have to do the same amount of work and whether their performance is measured the same way. If not, that's discrimination. People who want to run a marathon should have to do the work, but they shouldn't have to wear weights on their ankles while others don't.
As I said, it didn't stop me personally. But I know others who also did the work and got the short end of that effort/reward disparity. That doesn't mean they were wrong for trying. Your choices might be right for you or they might be mere "sour grapes" rationalization. I don't know and I don't care, but they can't and shouldn't be projected onto others. Discrimination is discrimination even when it doesn't affect you.