Or they're at some hardware company or one of the larger places like Oracle, HP etc. that have been around for a long time. There are most places like this than people realize b/c young grads usually don't apply to these old places.

Lastly there's another category you'll largely see them in - which is either some kind of consulting or large institution which maintains a huge legacy codebase of some older languages that aren't being taught much anymore but are crucial to some legacy systems at large institutions like goverment, education etc.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34492317)

The bigger problem is GC's retarded hiring processes where some chick is doing the phone screens and HR filters for X years of experience in random overly specific technologies. This disqualifies otherwise highly qualified people and results in D-players getting hired into MegaCorps.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34490640)

obviously people who are smart don't have an issue either, as a sharp dude with experience who can still keep tabs on new developments has solid value.

that said, I would definitely not want to be an aging "always on the whizbang cutting edge!" webdev type. younger people can learn new shit faster (and hear of it first to begin with), and it's easy to end up hopping from Thing to Thing without getting deep experience in any one particular niche (and more importantly, always being on the cutting edge means you're far more likely to work with tech that never sees mass long-term adoption)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34491831)

The problem is that the median 45 year-old F-player type individual contributors introduce serious flaws and anti-patterns into the code that the superior younger guys hesitate to challenge. So ultimately the age rule of thumb works; just don't hire old guys.

Sure, if the gen-x er you just hired is DHH, congratulations. But it is much more likely that you hired a turd that will hold your current employees back.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34491923)

of course there are 60 year old guys now that are ultra elite but we're talking averages

i don't think what we're saying is inconsistent with each other, jus tnot sure if my point came across

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34491955)

But ultimately, again, it comes down to why you decided to hire every employee. If you can't tell if they are valuable or not, you should probably fire them.

Just today I told my boss that I was likely over 100 times more productive than the median US employee and he actually disagreed and said at least 500x. Terrible geezers are worse than 1x (break even).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34492180)

programmer is not a senior role anywhere, no?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3770011&forum_id=2#34492073)