A Forty-Year Career (2019)(lethain.com)
lethain.com
A Forty-Year Career (2019)
https://lethain.com/forty-year-career/
90 comments
Seems like you're going to have to fight for that kind of society where having a middle class life affords you free time.
Agreed with your concerns, though to me it sounds like this guy in the article is also trying to limit his hours spent on learning and side projects outside of work, which is healthy. But I think the case you bring up is more interesting and prevalent in our field.
I used to be the guy who lived in software development. Lived as in spent every waking moment doing something with development, including working stupid hours that in retrospect could not possibly have been productive. I woke up one morning and I was 30 years old, divorced in large part because I lived at work, had developed diabetes because I didn't take care of my body, and almost friendless because I chose my computer over my friendships nearly every time.
That wasn't living. When I finally woke up I realized that I had wasted my 20's: I was an addict getting a fix, not some genius reaching enlightenment.
Maybe some people are able to do both, but when I had that realization I decided to leave my software endeavors at work unless I knew it was a side project of a very short duration. If I wasn't being paid at my 40 hour a week - and not more than 40 hour a week - job, I needed to actively resist plunging into it as a default rather than vice versa.
As a result of this, I know I have become a worse engineer. But I also have a wife and kids, several hobbies, friends I care about who care about me, and while my health will never fully recover from developing diabetes I would say that I am in astonishingly better health than I was at 30. I will take that over my addiction to the software treadmill.
I used to be the guy who lived in software development. Lived as in spent every waking moment doing something with development, including working stupid hours that in retrospect could not possibly have been productive. I woke up one morning and I was 30 years old, divorced in large part because I lived at work, had developed diabetes because I didn't take care of my body, and almost friendless because I chose my computer over my friendships nearly every time.
That wasn't living. When I finally woke up I realized that I had wasted my 20's: I was an addict getting a fix, not some genius reaching enlightenment.
Maybe some people are able to do both, but when I had that realization I decided to leave my software endeavors at work unless I knew it was a side project of a very short duration. If I wasn't being paid at my 40 hour a week - and not more than 40 hour a week - job, I needed to actively resist plunging into it as a default rather than vice versa.
As a result of this, I know I have become a worse engineer. But I also have a wife and kids, several hobbies, friends I care about who care about me, and while my health will never fully recover from developing diabetes I would say that I am in astonishingly better health than I was at 30. I will take that over my addiction to the software treadmill.
I mean, you can do that. that's what most normal people already do anyway. the bulk of audience on this website is not really "normal" though...
> Meeting my new coworkers, they structured their jobs as lottery tickets bought with their lifeblood, trading tips on managing the symptoms of work until the pearly gates of liquidity opened.
That's a true statement and a painful insight.
That's a true statement and a painful insight.
It's five mixed metaphors is what it is.
I really like all of Will Larson content, and this one post is a gold mine. I always recommend to mentees early in their career. I find the sections about Pace and Prestige particularly insightful.
Unfortunately during the last decade+ we haven't really talked that much about long careers in tech. Instead it's been mostly about FIRE, or people quitting the industry due to burnout.
When instead of thinking how can you make the most money to quit your job the fastest, you think how you can sustain and grow in your job the longest, the whole framing of your career changes. I personally joined the industry because I love tech, and imagine myself working on it on some form for a really long time. At the same time I have been burn out more than once (this is actually and ongoing issue) so more discussion on how to handle career long term is appreciated.
Unfortunately during the last decade+ we haven't really talked that much about long careers in tech. Instead it's been mostly about FIRE, or people quitting the industry due to burnout.
When instead of thinking how can you make the most money to quit your job the fastest, you think how you can sustain and grow in your job the longest, the whole framing of your career changes. I personally joined the industry because I love tech, and imagine myself working on it on some form for a really long time. At the same time I have been burn out more than once (this is actually and ongoing issue) so more discussion on how to handle career long term is appreciated.
Well, for many people, FIRE means Forced Into Retirement Early so the retire early with financial independence is really the only winning strategy.
I'd retire but I don't want to deprive the tech world of my works of art (microsauvice-spaghetti au cloud) /s
[deleted]
This made me think, I'm 45 right now, and this week is 30 years working in IT for pay, not a hobby. If I'm still in tech (which I don't see that changing too much) I'll have a 40 year career at 55. If I retire at 65, that'll be 50 YEARS in tech. Wild how time both flies and stacks up.
Do yo see many 55-65 year olds doing technical work at your company? Or any company you’ve been at in the past?
To be a 60 year old software engineer now you would have to have started in 1984. (Assuming graduating age 21 and going straight into work*)
There just wasn't the same number of developers back then.
I can't find good numbers, but according to [1], there were 612,000 developers in the US in 2002, compared to 4.4 million in 2023 in the. It's reasonable to assume that there were probably an order of magnitude less again in 1984. So very little opportunity to become a 60 year old software engineer in 2023.
I'd hazard a guess that in another 40 years there will be a lot more 60 year old developers. (Either that, or zero because ChatGPT 15 has taken over)
[1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering_demogra...
* Yes, I know this doesn't quite hold as I'm sure people switched careers. Particularly early on in the computer industry where I imagine many people switched into software from more technical electrical/hardware type roles. But I still think the major point still stands which is the main reason for the lack of older developers now, is just the lack of younger developers 40 years ago.
There just wasn't the same number of developers back then.
I can't find good numbers, but according to [1], there were 612,000 developers in the US in 2002, compared to 4.4 million in 2023 in the. It's reasonable to assume that there were probably an order of magnitude less again in 1984. So very little opportunity to become a 60 year old software engineer in 2023.
I'd hazard a guess that in another 40 years there will be a lot more 60 year old developers. (Either that, or zero because ChatGPT 15 has taken over)
[1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering_demogra...
* Yes, I know this doesn't quite hold as I'm sure people switched careers. Particularly early on in the computer industry where I imagine many people switched into software from more technical electrical/hardware type roles. But I still think the major point still stands which is the main reason for the lack of older developers now, is just the lack of younger developers 40 years ago.
Adding anecdata, but my mother just turned 70 and is still software engineer (Edit: cobol and rpg still pay off! :)). She never went the manager path, preferring talking with computers rather than humans seems to run in the family :).
I started in '83 (paid to code, at 84-5).
I would still be working for someone, except the industry doesn't believe that I should be. I was frozen out, pretty hard.
Instead, I work for free. I really enjoy coding, and it's actually been vastly freeing, having my own schedule and structure.
I would still be working for someone, except the industry doesn't believe that I should be. I was frozen out, pretty hard.
Instead, I work for free. I really enjoy coding, and it's actually been vastly freeing, having my own schedule and structure.
Could you say more about how you were frozen out? (or link to it if you've already written about it) Thanks in advance!
Well, it's kind of a well-worn whine, with me. If you browse through my history, you'll see me mention it, from time to time.
TL;DR: I worked four jobs, in my career, with the last one being 27 years (25 of them as a manager, as well as tech). That was at a pretty highfalutin joint (a famous Japanese imaging company).
I finally got laid off, at 55, and started looking for work, and found the culture had changed drastically (I actually had done fairly well at keeping up with the tech, as that was my job). Old people like me, were very unpopular.
The interview process was pretty damn humiliating. It was made clear, that, even if some company did me the huge favor of granting me a job, I would be treated like crap. It was personal. People didn't like me, because of my age. In a couple of cases, they didn't bother hiding it, at all.
I decided "Bugger this for a lark," and retired early. I had the means, but hadn't been planning on it, for at least another decade.
As it has turned out, it was a blessing in disguise. Being able to do my own designs, process, and releasing, has been a joy. I've had to keep the scope humble, but it's really been great. I'm working with a nonprofit startup, where I'm actually helping a few younger folks to learn the ins and outs of what it takes to ship software.
I like working. I would have been happy to work for a great deal less than most folks, was willing to take risks on startups (as I was already set, anyway), had thirty years' experience shipping, would have been loyal, honorable, and had a fairly vast array of skills and experience, but, you know...eewww...gray hair...
TL;DR: I worked four jobs, in my career, with the last one being 27 years (25 of them as a manager, as well as tech). That was at a pretty highfalutin joint (a famous Japanese imaging company).
I finally got laid off, at 55, and started looking for work, and found the culture had changed drastically (I actually had done fairly well at keeping up with the tech, as that was my job). Old people like me, were very unpopular.
The interview process was pretty damn humiliating. It was made clear, that, even if some company did me the huge favor of granting me a job, I would be treated like crap. It was personal. People didn't like me, because of my age. In a couple of cases, they didn't bother hiding it, at all.
I decided "Bugger this for a lark," and retired early. I had the means, but hadn't been planning on it, for at least another decade.
As it has turned out, it was a blessing in disguise. Being able to do my own designs, process, and releasing, has been a joy. I've had to keep the scope humble, but it's really been great. I'm working with a nonprofit startup, where I'm actually helping a few younger folks to learn the ins and outs of what it takes to ship software.
I like working. I would have been happy to work for a great deal less than most folks, was willing to take risks on startups (as I was already set, anyway), had thirty years' experience shipping, would have been loyal, honorable, and had a fairly vast array of skills and experience, but, you know...eewww...gray hair...
It's very sad, and that'll affect most of us. Ironically, with all the "woke" thing going on, you would expect people to be more inclusive, but it's not the case.
Age is not a variable in anyone's DEI calculus.
Ageism is actually just as illegal as racism, homophobia, sexism, or religious bigotry. Hard to prove, though (unless you are IBM, and discussing it via emails).
It’s just that the American culture, writ large, and, more specifically, the tech industry, has deified youth, to a ridiculous level. It’s sort of a “cargo cult/magical thinking” thing, where people think younger folks can do the impossible, because they don’t have any old people around, telling them that it’s impossible.
Also, my generation has done a pretty good job of screwing things up, and it’s fairly understandable, that the succeeding generations have some resentment, about that.
Eh. It’s water under the bridge, for me, these days. I’m still miffed, but it’s not something I chew over, every night, before bed (I did for a while -I was pissed off). I have lot to do. It would be nice to have the money, and nice to have folks to work with, but I’ve adjusted.
It’s just that the American culture, writ large, and, more specifically, the tech industry, has deified youth, to a ridiculous level. It’s sort of a “cargo cult/magical thinking” thing, where people think younger folks can do the impossible, because they don’t have any old people around, telling them that it’s impossible.
Also, my generation has done a pretty good job of screwing things up, and it’s fairly understandable, that the succeeding generations have some resentment, about that.
Eh. It’s water under the bridge, for me, these days. I’m still miffed, but it’s not something I chew over, every night, before bed (I did for a while -I was pissed off). I have lot to do. It would be nice to have the money, and nice to have folks to work with, but I’ve adjusted.
> my generation has done a pretty good job of screwing things up, and it’s fairly understandable, that the succeeding generations have some resentment, about that.
(I think we're of the same generation.)
I agree. But I also remember being young and realizing that my parent's generation also did a pretty good job of screwing things up, leading to resentment in our generation, and a fairly overt sentiment that once the old farts have moved on, we'd be the generation that puts things right.
Funny, that.
I rather suspect that every generation thinks like this.
As the truism goes, every generation thinks both that they invented sex and that they're the last generation before the fall of civilization.
(I think we're of the same generation.)
I agree. But I also remember being young and realizing that my parent's generation also did a pretty good job of screwing things up, leading to resentment in our generation, and a fairly overt sentiment that once the old farts have moved on, we'd be the generation that puts things right.
Funny, that.
I rather suspect that every generation thinks like this.
As the truism goes, every generation thinks both that they invented sex and that they're the last generation before the fall of civilization.
I heard a very similar story about Kent Beck's father. We also interviewed a couple superstar candidates at my company that somehow never progressed through.
I'm just about 45 now, though I'm still able to pass as in my 30's for a while still. But I'm trying to plan for a future where I'm boxed out of doing a job I'm very good at.
This seems like an easy competitive advantage and hiring edge, not sure why some haven't really taken it on.
I'm just about 45 now, though I'm still able to pass as in my 30's for a while still. But I'm trying to plan for a future where I'm boxed out of doing a job I'm very good at.
This seems like an easy competitive advantage and hiring edge, not sure why some haven't really taken it on.
> not sure why some haven't really taken it on.
I thought about it, but, in my case, I hated being a manager, and founding something like that would have taken a lot of non-technical, manager-style work.
In my current position, I am mentoring, but in a much less "official" capacity, and I'm very "hands-on" technical.
I thought about it, but, in my case, I hated being a manager, and founding something like that would have taken a lot of non-technical, manager-style work.
In my current position, I am mentoring, but in a much less "official" capacity, and I'm very "hands-on" technical.
It's true, though; people who tell you it can't be done are usually older. They could be right, but they could be wrong. To paraphrase Planck, progress is made one funeral at a time.
I think America's cultural preference for the young and the new is serving it well. Making way for the new is why we are programmed to die.
I think America's cultural preference for the young and the new is serving it well. Making way for the new is why we are programmed to die.
> I think America's cultural preference for the young and the new is serving it well
I disagree with this. I think it does the nation a serious disservice. Both the younger and older generations bring distinct and important things to the table. Missing either of them is a serious strategic mistake.
I disagree with this. I think it does the nation a serious disservice. Both the younger and older generations bring distinct and important things to the table. Missing either of them is a serious strategic mistake.
That's a valid point, but I would find issue about the "serving it well" part.
Some of these Jurassic-scale disasters we read about, all the time (unprofitable -yet huge- companies, imploding, ponzi schemes galore, falsified data, megahacks, etc.), are often of the "Didn't anybody even think about the ramifications?" type of things.
Many of these were almost entirely predictable.
I think the tech industry is experiencing sort of a reboot, right now, with a significant coefficient being decisions (or indecisions) made by people way too inexperienced (not always young. I have watched older folks that retire, jump into a new career, and make the same kinds of mistakes younger folks make, or that try to jump onto the latest buzzword, without understanding) to be in positions to make those decisions.
I agree that older folks are often "killjoys," and can be too damn cautious, but they are also a great resource, if you want your "impossible" projects to succeed. I suspect that a lot of these failures would have been successes, if the principals had simply proceeded in a more disciplined fashion.
The best team, is one made up of a mix of older and younger; with mutual respect, cooperation, and shared values.
The one that comes to mind is SpaceX. Despite their rather ... colorful ... CEO, they have a team made of many younger folks, but also a great many older folks in leadership positions (Gwynne Shotwell is nearly my age).
At the Japanese corporation, where I worked, many employment positions were not available, until the employee had reached a certain age (probably would be illegal, in the US). The company was run by older folks. In fact, they had to carve out exceptions to the mandatory retirement age, to allow the most senior executives to remain.
I'm really big on hybrid/heterogenous teams. I worked on many, in my career.
We don't always get along. A real creative team is always battling and arguing, but they also come together, and pitch in for the finish line. When I was at my last job, I worked with some of the top engineers and scientists in their field. We often wanted to strangle each other, but did great work.
In my experience, the really sick teams tended to be almost preternaturally quiet and "smooth-running." A real productive, creative, team can give the appearance of chaos. It's almost impossible to throw together a bunch of high-functioning, self-confident, ego-driven folks, without friction. Good management prevents the friction from becoming destructive.
Some of these Jurassic-scale disasters we read about, all the time (unprofitable -yet huge- companies, imploding, ponzi schemes galore, falsified data, megahacks, etc.), are often of the "Didn't anybody even think about the ramifications?" type of things.
Many of these were almost entirely predictable.
I think the tech industry is experiencing sort of a reboot, right now, with a significant coefficient being decisions (or indecisions) made by people way too inexperienced (not always young. I have watched older folks that retire, jump into a new career, and make the same kinds of mistakes younger folks make, or that try to jump onto the latest buzzword, without understanding) to be in positions to make those decisions.
I agree that older folks are often "killjoys," and can be too damn cautious, but they are also a great resource, if you want your "impossible" projects to succeed. I suspect that a lot of these failures would have been successes, if the principals had simply proceeded in a more disciplined fashion.
The best team, is one made up of a mix of older and younger; with mutual respect, cooperation, and shared values.
The one that comes to mind is SpaceX. Despite their rather ... colorful ... CEO, they have a team made of many younger folks, but also a great many older folks in leadership positions (Gwynne Shotwell is nearly my age).
At the Japanese corporation, where I worked, many employment positions were not available, until the employee had reached a certain age (probably would be illegal, in the US). The company was run by older folks. In fact, they had to carve out exceptions to the mandatory retirement age, to allow the most senior executives to remain.
I'm really big on hybrid/heterogenous teams. I worked on many, in my career.
We don't always get along. A real creative team is always battling and arguing, but they also come together, and pitch in for the finish line. When I was at my last job, I worked with some of the top engineers and scientists in their field. We often wanted to strangle each other, but did great work.
In my experience, the really sick teams tended to be almost preternaturally quiet and "smooth-running." A real productive, creative, team can give the appearance of chaos. It's almost impossible to throw together a bunch of high-functioning, self-confident, ego-driven folks, without friction. Good management prevents the friction from becoming destructive.
Thank you for the detailed response--I found this entire subthread interesting!
What are you working on?
It’s a “resource locator,” app for iOS, that helps people find other people, and gatherings of a particular organization. Basically, a very simple, secure, social media app.
Quite specific demographic and workflow.
Also, I won’t really be publicizing the app, when it’s done, because the last thing we need, is to have a bunch of curious people, with no interest in the organization, signing up for a quick look-see, then abandoning their accounts.
Quite specific demographic and workflow.
Also, I won’t really be publicizing the app, when it’s done, because the last thing we need, is to have a bunch of curious people, with no interest in the organization, signing up for a quick look-see, then abandoning their accounts.
> be a 60 year old software engineer now you would have to have started in 1984
My uncle is a 60 year old software developer, but he started writing software much later in life.
He started off in EE working for Sperry, went with the divisions wherever they went and switched over at the ripe old age of 47.
His previous work was all about state machines, so is his new work.
So "40 years of experience" isn't the same as 60 years old developer.
There's more of the EE/Physics grad turned software developer around than people who wrote software in the 80s.
My uncle is a 60 year old software developer, but he started writing software much later in life.
He started off in EE working for Sperry, went with the divisions wherever they went and switched over at the ripe old age of 47.
His previous work was all about state machines, so is his new work.
So "40 years of experience" isn't the same as 60 years old developer.
There's more of the EE/Physics grad turned software developer around than people who wrote software in the 80s.
I'll be a 60 year old software engineer next year(class of '87), my brother just retired as a 60 year old engineer(class of '85). We exist but the educational/career pathways at that time were very limited.
I've been programming professionally for 45 years now (55 atm).
Started writing invoicing systems on heathkits and database systems for real estate on C-64..then Cobol/PL1,C,Perl,Python..
oh - and I don't have any degree at all.
I'm quite optimistic I'll be able to work another 5+ years, if I choose to..
I'm quite optimistic I'll be able to work another 5+ years, if I choose to..
So a bit more than 1% of all Americans is developing software. I wonder what fraction are truck drivers?
Quick search:
> 7.99 million people employed throughout the economy in jobs that relate to trucking activity in 2021
so, about 2.5%
> 7.99 million people employed throughout the economy in jobs that relate to trucking activity in 2021
so, about 2.5%
To nitpick, the number of actual truck drivers is likely much lower. My guess is 2.5% includes mechanics, loaders, dispatchers, etc.
ONet lists ~2.1MM tractor trailer truck drivers.[1]
BLS lists ~132MM total 16+ year old workers in the US. Or 117MM working full-time. [2]
So about 1.6% - 1.8% maybe a bit more accurate?
[1] https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/53-3032.00
[2] https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htm
BLS lists ~132MM total 16+ year old workers in the US. Or 117MM working full-time. [2]
So about 1.6% - 1.8% maybe a bit more accurate?
[1] https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/53-3032.00
[2] https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htm
fascinating.
I'm turning 65 in a couple of months, been making a living doing this stuff for money since I was in college - started programming 53 years ago (using cards) - in '84 I moved to the US I think most of the people I worked with then are working now
I'm not sure about others, but as a very young programmer I was lucky enough to be mentored by a succession of 60ish year old seasoned developers still writing code every day. It was very formative and helpful to have a guide who had seen the growth of the modern software industry from infancy forward.
I now try to pay back that mentoring investment, and I encourage other people in the last half of their career to do the same - much of the challenge of software as an occupation and avocation is self-doubt and mentoring really helps provide objective feedback and perspective on what is truly important.
I now try to pay back that mentoring investment, and I encourage other people in the last half of their career to do the same - much of the challenge of software as an occupation and avocation is self-doubt and mentoring really helps provide objective feedback and perspective on what is truly important.
One of my first jobs was a consulting gig in the mid-80s with a Very Large Airline that had a strong, effective "train and promote from within" ethic. That meant a lot of people who 1) didn't start out it IT (or often in technology) and 2) lots of folks who had some amount of a career before getting into IT, so trended older. It was extremely formative.
My 2 supervisors were in their 50s, and started out slinging bags on the tarmac. Knew their stuff cold...not just about the tech, but how to actually deal with and manage people. Lots of life experience shared with this very green kid who on paper was the technical 'expert'. And because they'd been there and seen waaay more than just the inside of an office, they understood the business we supported intimately. "Knew were all the bodies are buried" was the key phrase. I went on to consult with a Very Large Telco, which had a similar culture of valuing experience and worked with some of the most knowledgeable techs I ever met, most several decades older than me. Shoot...there was a lot of grey hair at IBM when I was there, before someone decided ageism as official corporate policy was a swell idea.
And that has made all the difference.
My 2 supervisors were in their 50s, and started out slinging bags on the tarmac. Knew their stuff cold...not just about the tech, but how to actually deal with and manage people. Lots of life experience shared with this very green kid who on paper was the technical 'expert'. And because they'd been there and seen waaay more than just the inside of an office, they understood the business we supported intimately. "Knew were all the bodies are buried" was the key phrase. I went on to consult with a Very Large Telco, which had a similar culture of valuing experience and worked with some of the most knowledgeable techs I ever met, most several decades older than me. Shoot...there was a lot of grey hair at IBM when I was there, before someone decided ageism as official corporate policy was a swell idea.
And that has made all the difference.
> I was lucky enough to be mentored by a succession of 60ish year old seasoned developers still writing code every day.
I'm in my late 50s and have been programming professionally for 30 years or so. And, right now, I'm being mentored by 78 year old engineer still writing code every day!
I'm in my late 50s and have been programming professionally for 30 years or so. And, right now, I'm being mentored by 78 year old engineer still writing code every day!
Heh. Lots, actually. I'm one of them. Been at my current job for 25 years. Started in tech as a second career when I was 41. A colleague who is actually a year younger than me has been at it for well over 40 years (came on while still in school as a summer intern). In fact, the one thing my hiring director said that really got my attention was, "I've got people out there who are retiring after 30 years". People sometimes forget that tech isn't just about the FAANGs or startups. There are lots of us out here who working for big and small enterprises where 50 years and the gold watch are the norm.
Hundreds where I'm at now. Same as many places in the past. Not every company sidelines or discards employees based on age.
67, been paid for throwing code since 1975. Still employed full-time, still enjoying what I do. Wish my job wasn't 20% coding and 80% "DEVOPS", but I guess times have changed ...
> Do yo see many 55-65 year olds doing technical work at your company? Or any company you’ve been at in the past?
I have. At the last company I worked for, 3/4 of the devs were over 50. At the company I work for now, about half are.
Both companies are doing real cutting-edge stuff requiring skills with modern tools and technologies.
I have. At the last company I worked for, 3/4 of the devs were over 50. At the company I work for now, about half are.
Both companies are doing real cutting-edge stuff requiring skills with modern tools and technologies.
Raises hand. I retired at 65 in Sept, 2021, closing out a 43 year career as a software engineer, software systems engineer, and, finally, a full systems engineer at retirement. My final job was writing and running test procedures on very complicated signal processing system my company built. I also ran several IR&D programs in what little spare time I had. A number of similarly aged colleagues were doing similar work. Some have retired, a few are still on the job.
There were far fewer developers back then, so we are hard to find. But I am in that bracket, I started in the late 80’s. Very fortunate timing for me to literally grow up with technology.
I'm in healthcare, and top management, so we don't have a huge IT staff. I transitioned from purely technical work about 8 years ago to avoid the age-ism trap for non-management people. But in general, 30 years ago PCs were still relatively rare as compared to today, and there's a LOT more to the IT industry than being a developer in Silicon Valley. I've met plenty of 50 and 60+ year olds in IT, and a few years ago I had to tap on an 70 year old for some ancient AIX knowledge.
Why wouldn’t you, other than ageism? How about other professionals like lawyers and doctors?
In software development the other big elephant in the room is the age of the field itself.
If the world thirty years ago needed fewer software developers, then you'd have fewer 20 year old new software developers - and that strongly reduces the odds of having as many 50 year old developers today as 20 year old developers today.
If the world thirty years ago needed fewer software developers, then you'd have fewer 20 year old new software developers - and that strongly reduces the odds of having as many 50 year old developers today as 20 year old developers today.
If your definition is focused on javascript slingers, ok. But it’s been ~eighty years since WWII and the Top Secret Rosies and Bletchley Park. Business and govts got the on board with automation early.
Population has vastly increased as well, which affects all professions.
Population has vastly increased as well, which affects all professions.
80 years is a very young profession, still. How long have their been lawyers training in university programs? Doctors? The answer is in centuries and so you'd expect a lot more supply/demand equilibrium.
How many times has that automation resulted in the business saying "great, things are easier" instead of "great, that's quicker now, let's do more things with the time we freed up?" I've only seen the latter, which just breeds more* need for more automation.
You can see it in how much software the average business employee used 40 years ago vs today, even halfway through your timeline.
How many times has that automation resulted in the business saying "great, things are easier" instead of "great, that's quicker now, let's do more things with the time we freed up?" I've only seen the latter, which just breeds more* need for more automation.
You can see it in how much software the average business employee used 40 years ago vs today, even halfway through your timeline.
Yes, though 80 years of workers is enough for almost everyone starting to be dead already. So “centuries” is not quite as biting as it sounds. Engineering does happen to be that old of course.
My father ran his two-person business with spreadsheets, word processing, and games (haha) about 40 years ago.
I think people forget how much tech was around in the old days. Moon landing and SR-71 happened in the late sixties. Mythical Man Month talks of the software/PM angle and most chapters apply directly to today.
My father ran his two-person business with spreadsheets, word processing, and games (haha) about 40 years ago.
I think people forget how much tech was around in the old days. Moon landing and SR-71 happened in the late sixties. Mythical Man Month talks of the software/PM angle and most chapters apply directly to today.
A couple of years ago I went to a birthday party for a fellow who was one of my attorneys back it the wild, wild dot-bomb days. He's still a respected partner, go-to contract law guy and absolutely as sharp as the day I met him. He was turning 80.
> other than ageism
Ageism is a thing.
Then our field is somewhat unique because it's evolving extremely fast, I don't know about Lawyers and Doctors, but I doubt things change nearly as fast.
I used to teach CS. I routinely had to teach stuff I just learned a few years before, even in undergraduate classes. Sometimes I learned things from my students... In comparison, my 60 years old maths colleague has been teaching the same linear algebra class his whole life.
Ageism is a thing.
Then our field is somewhat unique because it's evolving extremely fast, I don't know about Lawyers and Doctors, but I doubt things change nearly as fast.
I used to teach CS. I routinely had to teach stuff I just learned a few years before, even in undergraduate classes. Sometimes I learned things from my students... In comparison, my 60 years old maths colleague has been teaching the same linear algebra class his whole life.
I don’t know, I’ve seen maybe 10 in my 25 years in the industry and they were mostly all at the start of my career in a mainframe shop. I ‘taught’ them AIX as we moved a critical system off the big iron onto a RISC system. I don’t think I’ve seen any in the wild in over 15 years. Other professions age doesn’t seem to matter much at all.
At a certain point internet shops refused to hire me, so not surprised you don't see any. (No, I specialize in Python and JS not COBOL so shouldn't be considered out of date.)
At my previous job, I was the youngest person in my group, at 52. The others in my department were alkl developers (even my msnager, who was a developer turned relunctant manager). Many of the other developers were 40+.
Yes, I'm one of them.
[edit]
I just remembered that before I interviewed for my previous job, the recruiter mentioned that the company preferred to hire "more seasoned" engineers :-)
[edit]
I just remembered that before I interviewed for my previous job, the recruiter mentioned that the company preferred to hire "more seasoned" engineers :-)
My career in IT didn't exist at my place of business that far back. That said one of my coworkers is 53 and started in IT about 15 years ago.
There will be a lot more of then in 10-20 years.
Good post. There's an interesting tension in software between the cynical and idealistic. On the one hand, there's the notion that writing software is a craft and that what we're doing has an aesthetic component. On the other hand there's a mercenary attitude; we're guns for hire, here to make our fortune, and our loyalty to the job lasts only as long as the paychecks clear.
While loyalty to the craft can have the side effect of generating more value to an employer, I don't think the two notions are antagonists. Get better at your craft and you'll have more opportunity to operate as a mercenary.
A crafts-merc is the ideal, a pure merc won't contribute beautiful code and a pure crafter won't grasp the business value of their elegant monads.
Perhaps you're right. Perhaps I am being to literal in my comparison, but I see tension when I compare craftspeople of the past / other industries with our own. Instead of honing our skills under an expert for many years, we swap jobs and even sub-disciplines frequently. Can we cultivate "craftsmanship" in that manner?
I see it more as realist vs idealist. We need to get this done vs we need the highest quality code base
I think the tip for 40 yr old FIRE is still gold. At 40 I'm mostly bored by work and just want more time for myself. My regret is that I messed up most of my time pre 35 so missed tons of chance. But still cherish what I have right now.
This one?
> At Digg, one mentor gave me the savvy advice that the fastest path to financial success was working for four years at three different just-about-to-IPO companies. A surefire way to retire by forty. (This is, for the record, pretty good advice.)
I don’t think it has been applicable for many years.
> At Digg, one mentor gave me the savvy advice that the fastest path to financial success was working for four years at three different just-about-to-IPO companies. A surefire way to retire by forty. (This is, for the record, pretty good advice.)
I don’t think it has been applicable for many years.
It was super applicable just 3 years ago, anyone who hopped into zoom/snowflake/mongodb had a nice few years.
I thought for the past decade or more now, the “surefire” way to FIRE was to work at a big publicly traded tech company and keep frivolous expenses low, and a few million by 40 would have been nearly guaranteed (since you are earning a couple hundred thousand or more per year).
Marry a similar high earner to make it even more guaranteed.
Marry a similar high earner to make it even more guaranteed.
Do you have specifics on size of equity grants and timings and levels?
There are lots of recent counter-examples; I have a relative who joined Uber shortly before IPO, he didn't get much. The pre-IPO valuation was already high and there were enough employees that grant sizes were not large.
Even joining Zoom/Snowflake/Mongo seems like you would've had to time it very well to make sure you got in before the peak and vested in time to sell before the fall.
Some other googling of recent tech IPOs shows a lot of drops: HashiCorp, Confluent, Monday.com, Squarespace... do you retire if you join companies like that just before IPO a few times in a row?
There are lots of recent counter-examples; I have a relative who joined Uber shortly before IPO, he didn't get much. The pre-IPO valuation was already high and there were enough employees that grant sizes were not large.
Even joining Zoom/Snowflake/Mongo seems like you would've had to time it very well to make sure you got in before the peak and vested in time to sell before the fall.
Some other googling of recent tech IPOs shows a lot of drops: HashiCorp, Confluent, Monday.com, Squarespace... do you retire if you join companies like that just before IPO a few times in a row?
I think timing and connections are important. Very difficult to get right. Anyway I'm pretty far from the "core" of the crowd.
In my experience the biggest challenge isn’t just identifying that pacing is important (because the author’s section on Pace is a complete gold mine of wisdom) - it’s having your direct manager and/or the company culture support that.
He correctly states that you should ‘change your situation’ (your job) if you’re not allowed to pace appropriately - but there’s a real tangible risk to getting recruited if your resume paints you to look like a mercenary who leaves every year.
Again, it just feels fuzzy and not black and white. Really great read though!
He correctly states that you should ‘change your situation’ (your job) if you’re not allowed to pace appropriately - but there’s a real tangible risk to getting recruited if your resume paints you to look like a mercenary who leaves every year.
Again, it just feels fuzzy and not black and white. Really great read though!
> there’s a real tangible risk to getting recruited if your resume paints you to look like a mercenary who leaves every year.
Yearly would be a bit much, but every 3-5 years isn't really that big of a deal.
Yearly would be a bit much, but every 3-5 years isn't really that big of a deal.
> At Digg, one mentor gave me the savvy advice that the fastest path to financial success was working for four years at three different just-about-to-IPO companies. A surefire way to retire by forty. (This is, for the record, pretty good advice.)
Why is it good advice? What is the context in which it operates?
Why is it good advice? What is the context in which it operates?
Retiring at 40 is not always good. Being able to retire at 40 is of course stress reducing, because you can stop worrying a bit. Actually stopping might not be a good idea: Rates of depression and disease in retired people are not just a function of "being old" -being unoccupied and inactive also play a part.
100%. The converse is true, too. Often, people that carry on working well beyond retirement age, are more happy and engaged than peers who retired. The key thing is having enough time to pursue your own interests and time with friends/family rather than employer owning all your time and energy. Also, if one has the health to work part-time into one's 80s, one doesn't then need huge savings or pension because by, say age 65 when you'd hope all mortgage was paid off, you can live on a half-time wage probably . All depends on maintaining your health though....
At venture-funded startups, a generous portion of compensation will be equity. And four years typically allows said equity to vest fully.
Yea, all you have to do is pick three consecutive winners.
Which is trivial, with hindsight.
Less so in the moment. You could equally well pick three failures, and end up with close to nothing.
Less so in the moment. You could equally well pick three failures, and end up with close to nothing.
Your odds are much better with 3 companies, that one might succeed. Especially if you are joining late-stage startups. But at the same time, your equity package will be smaller, so the exit won't be as impactful.
[deleted]
Great post, thanks for sharing Alex!
I would have to do these kind of things on the side and I don't want my whole intellectual inner life and my hobbies to become software. I don't want to write software blogs in the evening. I want to read history books and cook dinner. I don't want to do podcasts on Saturday. I want to tear the drywall off my entryway and frame in a new window. I don't want to do side hustle paperwork on Sunday. I want to teach my kid how to shoot. I don't want to take a day off to go to a developer meetup. I want to go march for Medicare.