The blog post "Do you want to be doing this when you're 50? (2012)" argues that the demanding lifestyle often associated with software development—long hours, constant learning, and project-based work—might not be sustainable or desirable for everyone in the long term. It suggests that while passion can fuel a career in the beginning, developers should consider whether the inherent pressures and uncertainties of the field align with their long-term goals and desired lifestyle as they age. The author encourages introspection about alternative career paths or strategies to mitigate burnout and create a more balanced and fulfilling life beyond coding.
The original poster is deciding between Physics PhD programs at Stanford and UC Berkeley, having been accepted to both. They're leaning towards Stanford due to perceived stronger faculty in their specific research interest (quantum computing/AMO physics) and the potential for better industry connections post-graduation. However, they acknowledge Berkeley's prestigious physics department and are seeking further input from the Hacker News community to solidify their decision. Essentially, they are asking for perspectives on the relative strengths and weaknesses of each program, particularly regarding career prospects in quantum computing.
The Hacker News comments on the "Ask HN: Physics PhD at Stanford or Berkeley" post largely revolve around the nuances of choosing between the two prestigious programs. Commenters emphasize that both are excellent choices, and the decision should be based on individual factors like specific research interests, advisor fit, and departmental culture. Several commenters suggest visiting both departments and talking to current students to gauge the environment. Some highlight Stanford's stronger connections to industry and Silicon Valley, while others point to Berkeley's arguably stronger reputation in certain subfields of physics. The overall sentiment is that the OP can't go wrong with either choice, and the decision should be based on personal preference and research goals rather than perceived prestige. A few commenters also caution against overemphasizing the "prestige" factor in general, encouraging the OP to prioritize a supportive and stimulating research environment.
Summary of Comments ( 108 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43138190
Hacker News users discuss the blog post's focus on the demanding and often unsustainable lifestyle associated with certain types of programming jobs, particularly those involving startups or intense "rockstar" developer roles. Many agree with the author's sentiment, sharing personal anecdotes about burnout and the desire for a more balanced work life as they get older. Some counter that the described lifestyle isn't representative of all programming careers, highlighting the existence of less demanding roles with better work-life balance. Others debate the importance of passion versus stability, and whether the intense early career grind is a necessary stepping stone to a more comfortable future. Several commenters offer advice for younger programmers on navigating career choices and prioritizing long-term well-being. The prevailing theme is a thoughtful consideration of the trade-offs between intense career focus and a sustainable, fulfilling life.
The Hacker News post "Do you want to be doing this when you're 50? (2012)" links to a blog post by James Hague about career longevity in programming. The comments section features a robust discussion on the topic, with various perspectives on aging, career satisfaction, and the nature of software development work.
Several commenters reflect on their own experiences, with some older programmers sharing their positive experiences in the field. They emphasize the importance of continuous learning, adapting to new technologies, and finding niches that align with their interests and skills. One commenter, seemingly over 50 and still coding, mentions finding fulfillment in their work and not experiencing the burnout or ageism suggested in the original blog post. Another points out the changing nature of programming over time, highlighting that what might be considered grueling low-level work in one era can evolve into more abstract and potentially less demanding tasks in another. They also touch upon the importance of personal projects and side hustles to keep skills sharp and explore new areas.
Some commenters disagree with the premise of the original blog post, arguing that programming can be a sustainable career path with proper care for one's physical and mental well-being. They suggest that maintaining a healthy work-life balance, focusing on problem-solving rather than specific technologies, and finding a supportive work environment are key to long-term success. One commenter draws an analogy to other professions, arguing that many jobs require continued effort and learning throughout a career and that programming is no different.
A thread of discussion emerges around the importance of specializing versus becoming a generalist. Some commenters argue that specializing in a niche area can lead to greater job security and higher earning potential, while others advocate for a broader skillset to adapt to the ever-changing landscape of technology. The discussion also touches upon the potential for older programmers to transition into management or mentoring roles, leveraging their experience to guide younger generations.
A few commenters express concerns about ageism in the tech industry, citing examples of older programmers being overlooked for opportunities or feeling pressured to stay relevant. They emphasize the importance of advocating for age diversity and challenging stereotypes about older workers.
Overall, the comments section offers a nuanced perspective on the challenges and opportunities of a long-term career in programming. While acknowledging the potential downsides, many commenters highlight the potential for a rewarding and sustainable career path through continuous learning, adaptation, and a focus on personal well-being.