This article reminds me of the one truly explorative news aggregate app I used some years ago called Zite.
Zite would not only pull news from the usual major sources, but it would also pull up obscure blogs and micro niche indie publications on the topic. It was my first time discovering blogs in their original form (not as posts on tumblr). Zite let my discover so much aggregate information from sources that only someone with a pre-existing niche interest would know about. A mudslide in a small Italian village where no one was harmed, but a boulder rolled itself into a villa's sitting room. A tiny Lutheran blog explaining the latin origins of St. Patrick with cited footnotes. A modern explorer's article on the greatest used bookstores they have found around the world (it was not a listicle). The intellectual stimulus was greatly missed once Zite was purchased by Flipboard and all of those nuggets from the vastness of the internet were overruled by the loudest and largest news publications.
I think he's more referring to the fact that we were already at a point where it was normal to do server side rendering. Now it's an add-on that the JS framework may support (https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/ssr.html).
> when I look at some of the people's linkedin profile and the actual attitude and proficiency they demonstrate in their jobs makes linkedin look like a ridiculous circus.
>Their success is 100% contingent upon how valuable they make themselves to their employer, and how much crap they accumulate. Boomers see success as zero-sum. Your title comes at the expense of someone else. They believe that young people should be queuing up for these soul crushing admin positions, because they WANT people beneath them. People at the top of the system requires new entrants to prop it up.
This article is really enlightening in that it puts to words what is wrong with the loudest baby-boomers, but what about the others? HN has an older userbase and why do they dislike Millennials (if for reason different than the article)?
Well first off I'd say stereotypes are bullcrap. They exist for a reason, but those reasons are almost always such an oversimplification that they draw the wrong conclusions. But I'll play along...
There's always a certain amount of crap handed down from one generation to the next. It's cheap, and self rewarding. Boomers have been given crap continuously since the beginning, by the previous generation, their own ranks (it's a highly varied generation), and generation X. Now that their biggest critics are dying off, they're feeling encouraged to dole this criticism out themselves. They know better than to do it to generation X, because Xers (I'm an Xer) are nearly tone deaf due to the incessant whining by boomers. Plus, boomers are actually starting to go deaf so they yell a lot more than they used to. So they're skipping us over and going straight for the millenials.
My advice is to take it like simple teasing rather than taking it seriously. The boomers' bark is worse than the bite.
I like millenials. They've got a relatively decent balance of idealism and reality check. My only complaints are they spend way too goddamn much of their income, as a percentage, on housing and foo foo bar drinks.
"HN has an older userbase and why do they dislike Millennials (if for reason different than the article)?" - Disagree with the premise that HN dislikes millennials.
As for claims in the article:
1. "Millennials want to be a part of something they find meaningful. Their work needs to matter, both to them and to the world."
- Hence the spate in "meaningful" startups, like "Yo" and the anonymous gossip and social shaming apps (is it called whisper our secret?)
2. "Millennials want to build deep, authentic connections with people. They want real relationships."
- this is merely the author's opinion. Divorce rates among millennials are Just as high, if not higher, than boomers. Empirically, dating millennials didn't really increase the seriousness of the relationship.
Millennials face a shrinking job market from the outset - unlike the boomers. Robots will make many careers obsolete, and no amount of "against the grain" attitude for the sake of it will hide this fact. Then there's outsourcing, which you cannot run from.
I actually don't mind being a human machine. Not that I've had the chance yet. I'm still in college to get my CS degree and would fall into one of those people where "coding is a Craft". I genuinely love programming. I don't have a family, or really desire one. My weekend plans always consist of building another project of my own. A place that will let me code all day, give me a nap room, a shower, some salary, and food sounds like a dream. It's unfortunate that it costs so much money to get to the cities that promote this.
I think the author is just realizing that this field isn't for them. Tech moves fast and to stay on top of it you have to move fast too. At least for modern tech. Maybe that author would be more comfortable being a COBOL programmer, or an embedded systems one.
Lol try having the CTO say when the billing system you look after hits its first 5 mil a month "this had better be right other wise we are both out of a job"
> For a field that doesn't cater to people with families and other life obligations too well
There's no reason that the field (of computer science/software engineering/etc) _can't_ cater to people with families and other life obligations.
Jobs that don't cater to people with families include being a surgeon, a pilot, a firefighter, etc.
I've worked at several software companies (including a company worth hundreds of billions[0]) and it totally comes down to (1) employer (2) team.
There's nothing about being a developer that is at odds with people with families. Some employers have awful work life balances (due to company culture) and others don't. Some employers have teams with awful work life balances and others with great ones.
If a company has an awful work life balance, the solution isn't to remove people with families and other life obligations, it's to fix the company culture.
I agree that there is no reason that it can't, however the loudest narrative (and in the cultures of the flagship companies) is that it does not. If the author doesn't gel with that for whatever legitimate reasons, then they are looking at the wrong companies. The company culture is like this because it is apparently working (so far). People who don't like it should go to better companies for them, or push for a collective change like a union I guess (just look at HN's love of 'old geeks'), or start their own. Nothing is stopping them from doing that.
There's a middle-ground to be found, for sure, between OP and parent. I do think it's a little odd to have years of experience in software development and not one "if only ... I'm going to make it."-project.
> Tech moves fast and to stay on top of it you have to move fast too.
This is a myth that comes out of drinking too much VC kool aid and watching too many TED talks. Most successful tech is built using 20-40 year old programming languages, operating systems, and data stores. Depth is far more important than breadth.
> My weekend plans always consist of building another project of my own. A place that will let me code all day, give me a nap room, a shower, some salary, and food sounds like a dream.
Of course I do. I like painting, and photography, and history, and sketching. But most of the time (since I'm in school) I'm working on projects on the weekend. It boosts my portfolio and hones my skills.
