Oddly enough, I find programming to move at a glacial pace. 10 years ago I thought it was a fast moving field, but I keep seeing the same ideas remixed over and over. If anything I think programmers should think like musicians at the beginning it seems like things are constantly changing. But, that's all superficial changes in style over time, after a while you focus on the ideas and it takes less time to keep up with trends because you have seen those ideas before.<p>PS: That and Google let's you leverage a lot of deep knowledge once you understand how to ask.
I think this author has confused "writing code" with "computer science". Ultimately, what I love about computer SCIENCE, is that it is just that, a science, a subset of maths. And maths are awesome. I would suggest he go back and read about Godel, Wittgenstein, Hilbert, Turing, and their compatriots, all of whose work influences computer science today. These giants were not "geeks" or "code monkeys". They were scientists. If one keeps in mind the august underpinnings of the field, one can remain inspired, even though surely the author is correct in that working for non-technical managers sucks. But if that is the case, then time to move to another job, or go into teaching, but do not abandon the field just because of one sucky work experience.<p>Also, I did not like the nativist, xenophobic remarks in the article. Literally half or more of the folks I work with on a daily basis are from India or various parts of Asia and they are all brilliant, hard-working, gracious people whom I consider it an honor and a priviledge to work for, and I am speaking as a white American. Nativism has no place in any serious discussion.
I'm amused at two things in his advocacy of law.<p>(1) Things have gotten much worse for law schoool graduates in the last 5 years, and
(2) I actually ~do~ like the intellectual property lawyers I know. As a class, they tend to be bright people who understand the intersection of technology and business in a broad way. I just wouldn't want to be getting a lawsuit from one of them. ;-)
As to the "Temporary nature of knowledge capital"<p>Some programmers want to learn a language or technology and continuously repeat the same basic project over and over again. I have been at it for more than a decade and am not using the same skill set that I started with - although some (*nix and SQL) have been in heavy use for quite awhile.<p>I know programmers that started "back in the day" and tell horror stories of stacks of punch cards being knocked to the floor. They are now coding in a modern language or helping to port legacy applications. In programming - and many other professions, you need to stay current and adapt.<p>Not to mention, you generally learn a lesson or two by simply dealing with people, working through large scale projects, and seeing technologies come and go. Some employers value this. Others opt for the cheapest salary available - and have results that prove that this is their approach.
This guy should learn to program in C, and then find a job where software is a profit center and not a cost center, and his whole perspective will change.<p>My first two jobs out of college were in engineering, and I made the switch to software and have never looked back. Much better working conditions with much better pay.<p>I do spend a lot of time learning new technologies, but the time spent learning the old ones is not at all wasted, since the concepts are applicable and make learning the new stuff really easy.
This is so full of bullshit I don't even know where to begin. Has this person never worked an actual job that sucks? Dude needs to watch some episodes of Dirty Jobs.
Oh wow, this article is 5 years old. Heh. (I was tipped off by his $900 21" flatscreen.)<p>Kind of funny since the law field that he advocates has cratered in the meantime.
I don't necessarily agree with the author. I'm not sure about anyone else here, but after I learned a couple languages each additional language was "that" much easier to learn. While the syntax and general structure may vary from one to the next, the overall thought process is relatively the same.<p>In my opinion (and experience), a 60 year old with 30 years of programming experience across various languages would probably be a better programmer than a 27 year old of equal competence who only has, say, 5 years of professional experience.<p>Just because you're using a new language doesn't mean you can't draw from previous experiences. The same could be said for architects, animators or graphics designers. New software is constantly coming out but the style you've developed over the years is what can make or break you. Of course this isn't a perfect comparison to programming, but it's still a new set of tools to learn.
My advice to the author: Learn the fundamentals of computer science. Learn data structures and algorithms. Maybe he'll realize that there is a lot more to a career in computer programming than simply knowing the latest language hotness.
This is a pile of conjecture - devoid of any useful analysis or data-driven conclusions.<p>If you have the Karma to, please vote this rubbish off the front page.
Instead of just claiming "these are all craps", why isn't someone addressing the things what he is actually said. Point by point. Here are the points he talked about.<p>- Temporary nature of knowledge capital<p>- Low prestige<p>- The foreignization of computer programming<p>- Project management sucks<p>- The working conditions suck
A friend passed me this article. Despite that it has some serious holes, it also has some serious truth to be reckoned with. Sure, if you learn the fundamentals you can keep your skills from going stale. But statistics indicate that it's probably more of a fantasy than true. I'm pretty young, and I can carry far more credibility with older colleagues than if I was in a different profession. I also can name numerous past colleagues that worked the programming field for decades and carry absolutely no credibility. Personal experience says that this link is not garbage.