Considering the state of modern software I wonder what they mean by "coding." Partying, sucking, fricking and giving each other jobs like most normaltards do? Interviews are just there to scare off competent autists.
I worked with a guy in his 60s and he wrote kind of shitty but passable code just like 25 year olds can. And later a guy in his late 40s who was about the same level of aptitude. Age does not seem to matter for this. It doesn't make you any better or worse.
Most people stop progressing at the craft past a certain point. Unless they really have the drive to push themselves forward, they'll settle for whatever level their peer are programming at.
However, there's more to being a developer and a long career provides a wealth of experience. The added life experience can also provide a lot to the younger devs who are still trying to figure stuff out.
Whether that makes it worth hiring an older dev depends on the company and the team. Many managers will certainly prefer young, clueless, malleable graduates.
this and you also have to take into account the fact that 90% of people want to have relationSHITs and most people in their mid 20s and late 20s start to settle down and relationships are 99% responsibility and stress and they require a lot of time and resources. Most of the decline starst in your mid 20s for that very reason
I really don't understand why you'd want to get promoted to the higher up roles seniors at my job spend pretty much all day in meetings, I think I'd Kms if I had to do that
>spend all my day in meetings but barely listening and on my phone the entire time >decide what work I'll do and what I'll dump into the team >don't spend the midnight oil on this but I promised an unreasonable deadline. I'll be fishing in the woods so I'll not be available >if team comes through I get the credit >if team falls short I can make an excuse or pin it on someone else
an individual contributor with multiple decades of experience will want more money because 'muh experience' while most people plateau in skill after ~5 years of learning. that is, their output will be indistinguishable from that of a much cheaper 27-30 year old. the boomer will likely have attitude problems (superiority complex) and might be set in his ways.
you can seethe all you want but this is how the world works, as evident by this guy's post. it's like that in most careers. if you're still doing entry level adjacent work in your 40s/50s/60s, people begin to suspect you're a moron. the only exception would be masters/PhD level R&D, although generally those types of environments have career ladders which are more nuanced than "entry level" and "senior."
Old people are just too expensive >muh experience
Not relevant compared to paying low salaries to young people. At most you need one old fart and he will most likely be the tech lead.
>Not relevant compared to paying low salaries to young people.
you might be able to israelite your way to free labour by exploiting interns but you have no fricking chance after that unless you are importing street shitters or sending that work offshore. >At most you need one old fart and he will most likely be the tech lead.
yes at 58 you should have your own company that sells apps if you are really into coding, either that or you should have retired off your 37 years of tech money and stocks
>58
Fricker should be playing with his grandchildren by now, and living off past investment/money from children. Probably programming for fun in his free time, rather than searching for a job
If you ask me, the real tragedy is today's economy and society
Considering the state of modern software I wonder what they mean by "coding." Partying, sucking, fricking and giving each other jobs like most normaltards do? Interviews are just there to scare off competent autists.
I haven't worked anywhere with juniors and mid-level engineers that age. But certainly seniors.
I worked with a guy in his 60s and he wrote kind of shitty but passable code just like 25 year olds can. And later a guy in his late 40s who was about the same level of aptitude. Age does not seem to matter for this. It doesn't make you any better or worse.
Most people stop progressing at the craft past a certain point. Unless they really have the drive to push themselves forward, they'll settle for whatever level their peer are programming at.
However, there's more to being a developer and a long career provides a wealth of experience. The added life experience can also provide a lot to the younger devs who are still trying to figure stuff out.
Whether that makes it worth hiring an older dev depends on the company and the team. Many managers will certainly prefer young, clueless, malleable graduates.
this and you also have to take into account the fact that 90% of people want to have relationSHITs and most people in their mid 20s and late 20s start to settle down and relationships are 99% responsibility and stress and they require a lot of time and resources. Most of the decline starst in your mid 20s for that very reason
Why did you post this shit again, you fricking moron?
for this one specific fictional recruiter, apparently
> on today's episode of "things that never fricking happened - boomer edition":
frick off, Black person.
I really don't understand why you'd want to get promoted to the higher up roles seniors at my job spend pretty much all day in meetings, I think I'd Kms if I had to do that
>spend all my day in meetings but barely listening and on my phone the entire time
>decide what work I'll do and what I'll dump into the team
>don't spend the midnight oil on this but I promised an unreasonable deadline. I'll be fishing in the woods so I'll not be available
>if team comes through I get the credit
>if team falls short I can make an excuse or pin it on someone else
an individual contributor with multiple decades of experience will want more money because 'muh experience' while most people plateau in skill after ~5 years of learning. that is, their output will be indistinguishable from that of a much cheaper 27-30 year old. the boomer will likely have attitude problems (superiority complex) and might be set in his ways.
you can seethe all you want but this is how the world works, as evident by this guy's post. it's like that in most careers. if you're still doing entry level adjacent work in your 40s/50s/60s, people begin to suspect you're a moron. the only exception would be masters/PhD level R&D, although generally those types of environments have career ladders which are more nuanced than "entry level" and "senior."
Old people are just too expensive
>muh experience
Not relevant compared to paying low salaries to young people. At most you need one old fart and he will most likely be the tech lead.
>Not relevant compared to paying low salaries to young people.
you might be able to israelite your way to free labour by exploiting interns but you have no fricking chance after that unless you are importing street shitters or sending that work offshore.
>At most you need one old fart and he will most likely be the tech lead.
Yes.
yes at 58 you should have your own company that sells apps if you are really into coding, either that or you should have retired off your 37 years of tech money and stocks
>is 58 really too old for code?
no
everyone can code if they want
dont listen to others
Indians prefer hiring other Indians.
>58
Fricker should be playing with his grandchildren by now, and living off past investment/money from children. Probably programming for fun in his free time, rather than searching for a job
If you ask me, the real tragedy is today's economy and society
>today's economy and society
retirement is a relatively recent concept, idiot
people used to work until their deaths
That's a lawsuit and a shitty recruiter.
How many CTOs does the zoomer think there are? Not everyone old can be in a chief position