Slashdot Mirror
Gen Y Tech Savvy, But Not Interested in a Career
jcatcw writes "Young people aren't choosing computer science majors because they take technology for granted — it's something to use not something to make a career. "By and large, this generation is very fluent with technology and with a networked world," according to James Ware, executive producer at The Work Design Collaborative LLC, a Berkeley, Calif., consortium exploring workplace values and the future of the workforce. That future may be in managing technology, which requires skills today's college students don't have: writing, critical thinking, hard work and just plain showing up. One of their primary concerns is a flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance."
good. If this bears out then those of us out of college can charge more and more to keep everything running.
If it's too difficult, I can't understand it !
Is plainly not taught anymore. Most people don't even remember how logic was taught for the past 2000 years.... geometry.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
...skills today's college students don't have: writing, critical thinking, hard work and just plain showing up...
Here's a writing tip: as soon as you start calling me a lazy idiot, I stop caring what you think.
Yep, seems like pretty much every "new" generation gets the slam from the ones who came before. Us Gen X'ers were cast off as a bunch of slackers IIRC. In ten years we'll have some snotty Gen Y writer blasting the lazy post-college Gen Z's and ranting how the greedy Gen X'ers will consume the last remaining Social Security resources. Definitely nothing new to see here.
I work with Generation Y'ers and they aren't so "fluent with technology" that they don't need to get a CS education. Most of them still don't know the difference between RAM and a HD. They don't even know the units used to calculate the amount of RAM or the speed of a computer. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it's been my experience in a middle-class community of Gen Y kids that they don't know jack about a computer. Can they use an IPod? sure... but so can my 60 year old mom, big deal. That's like saying my Grandma used to be "fluent with technology" because she could use a typewriter back in the day. Having the ability to use it and having the ability to make it are two totally different things.
You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
Remember when people would go around saying "I work with computers" when asked what their job was?
Now that would sound like "I work with paper."
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Most of you will be too young to remember "computer literacy" classes which strove to teach students how to use computers. The idea was that if you could use a word processor, spreadsheet, and touch type, then you'd be prepared for the careers of tomorrow.
It's all bullshit. God help us if "data processor" and "data entry clerk" are careers of the future. The ability to use a computer is about as important to "jobs of the future!" as knowing how to husk coconuts is to a Pacific Islander. If you haven't learned those skills in your everyday life, then you're screwed anyway.
The fact of the matter is that someone still needs to build all those cool things like Twitter and Facebook and Myspace and all the rest of the crap out there that these "technology fluent" kids are so good at using. As long as we consider them to be fluent, though, we are putting emphasis on the wrong thing.
I was technologicaly fluent at using a pencil. It wasn't my ability to use a pencil that made me the right guy for my job.
These stories simply reflect the fact that, for any value of N, people in generation N-1 generally do not understand technology that became available during the childhood of generation N. This does not make generation N more technically savvy than generation N-1; by the time generation N+1 comes around, generation N will not understand the stuff they have. This was just as true for the baby boomers using remote controls and VCRs that their parents couldn't understand as it is for me using computers that the boomers have trouble with. It didn't mean that the boomers were geniuses because they could use a VCR.
Probably sort of like how my mom can't figure out the internet really well, which I think is rather simple; on the other hand, I can't understand the compulsion 'them darned kids' have for constantly text messaging each other.
Just because you can use mass-market electronic goods does not make one 'technically savvy'.
"One of their primary concerns is a flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance."
Apparently Generation Taco lacks basic counting skills.
Of course, this idea is nothing new. Every generation goes through a very similar idealistic phase. Generation Y is now entering its early 20's, and it's likely that this is the phase they're beginning to go through right now. So it's hardly surprising that they're rejecting formal instruction in a field that they already feel very comfortable in (as self-taught learners). Just part of them "finding their way."
Just a thought.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
that makes all the more jobs for us, correct? Everyone wants a DVD player but they don't have to learn how to build one. Anyway its probably just the ones after a quick VC sponsored buck that have dropped out.
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
I was on the bus the other day and there were some high school bimbos (let's not waste words here) and they were all a twitter about the goings on of their MySpace accounts. On and on they yammered about which boys they liked and who's on what list and then they started talking about CSS, that is to say Cascading Style Sheets.
There is a point in your life when you realize that the world has changed, that "nerdy" topics aren't so nerdy anymore, especially now that they are in the mainstream.
Generation Y (ugh!) is undeniably using the tools around them to get things done, just as my generation did a decade ago with more primitive technology. But suffice to say, the reason to get a job in the tech industry is not because you want to play with what you're already using but because you want to create something new. This is not for everyone and I think regardless of the "tech level" society seems to achieve there will always be a minority of tech-career oriented people.
crazy dynamite monkey
that "we need a big recession to teach these kids some discipline". Same ole stuff for the last few generations at least. Bottom line Mr. Businessman, yes, you may have to offer good wages and training the build good workers. Sorry.
Unlike how we grew up....many of today's kids don't play outside much. They don't get out and meet and interact with the kids in the neighborhood, which teaches some good people skills. It also starts engendering a sense of independence. Parents cart the around to planned, and rigidly structured events...soccer practice, lessons of some kind, etc.
We've also sapped out the competitive spirit that kids once had. We played games...there were winners and losers. You had to learn both sides of the coin. Now...we give everyone a trophy because the just participated. We lower the standards in classrooms, 'cause we don't want to hurt little Billy/Susie's self esteem. We teach the wrong things here...the real world is NOT like that, it is not one big happy area where everyone is equal, and treated equal. That has to be quite a shock. We've let kids slide too far with respect to discipline. While I'm not talking specifically about corporal punishment (I don't think throwing that out the door was good either), but, personal discipline...responsibility for actions. If kids screw up, Mom and Dad cover for them....I've heard teachers saying when they had a child acting up, and could actually get a parent in for a conference, the teacher gets berrated over accusing little Johnny of wrongdoing, rather than trying to work together to correct his behavior. Of course later little Johnny expects he'll be covered/forgiven if he's late for work, or just doesn't show up a day for some reason.
Do kids even work these days in high school? As soon as I was 16...I got my first job washing dishes in a medium end restaurant...I worked my way up to head bus boy (even back then in my state you had to be 21 to serve alcohol)...I worked Fri-Sat. evenings....and usually 2 week nights. I saved my money, and when I was a senior, my folks added a little money to mine, and I bought my first car (datsun 280Z). I don't know of any of my friends whose kids actually work jobs....everything is given.
I'd say a lot of this is the past gen. or so's fault....and these kids are in for a shock when they hit the real world.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
There is a video professor ad where a woman laughs that her four year old is often more comfortable with a computer than she is. A lot of older people just don't realize that **comfort** is not a particularly big deal. Yes, most middle and upper class people in Gen Y are "comfortable with a computer" and other gadgets. So what? When I was in college two years ago, it didn't stop many of them from making many of the same mistakes that their equally **computer illiterate** parents made like not updating their software and trusting everything that came into their inbox that didn't look automatically like spam.
So you can plug your iPod in and sync up your media collection with it. How is that a practical use of your computer, the sort of thing that drives the economy?
I have to wonder... were there ever articles like this talking about basic skills like driving? "Younger generation more comfortable with horseless carriage?" Being able to use a computer? BFD. Who cares. Being able to write software, integrate components and mess with hardware are the skills that stand out.
Or maybe, today's college students are wising up to the fact that most businesses work their tech staff to the bone dumbing down reports so their managers could understand them, following step-by-step instructions for an hour when they could fix it in 5 minutes if given the chance and if managers didn't call their IT staff on their vacations/weekends to help fix the e-mail server cause someone decided to change the settings without IT approval.
I've heard of far, far too many IT stories from my friends and on /. to even consider going into IT as a career. IT is not the dream job many people believe it to be. Anyone who runs a simply network for a friend(s)/family knows how annoying it can be to get a random phone call from someone asking for help to access their e-mail.
We can farm all the work Americans are too lazy to do out to foreign workers who maintain their life/work balance by showing up on time, working long hours regularly, and accepting a nice low salary.
If the lazy kids manage to pass some law preventing this, we can just relocate out there.
That is one of my primary concerns, and I am a Gen-X'r. I think more and more companies that are heavy into software development are starting to recognize that people want a flexible, comfortable workplace and an employer that realizes that adding perks, like flex-hours, casual dress code, telecommuting, more vacation, etc. can balance a crappy/mediocre salary and make up for other short-comings. In many instances adding perks can be a cheap way to attract(and keep existing) talent to your company without having to pony up huge salaries.
Familiarity with Facebook and Bittorrent is different than choosing a career as a programmer or network administrator. Familiarity is not maintenance and/or development. The number of people familiar with using automobiles is a little larger than the number who choose a career as a mechanic.
No kids. No mortgage. Few bills.
When these things change, you get more serious.
Gen Y will have to grow up like the rest of us. Putting career in the proper place is a good thing. Your job shouldn't take up the entirety of your life. But most kids in college are lazier than they will be with more commitments.
As a sysop, it was immensely frustrating to work with users who have no idea how computers work. They wanted somebody else to figure out what they had to do and if something unexpected happened they wouldn't think through it. As a mathematician, it's immensely frustrating to teach non-majors who strongly object to having to think (or understand) anything -- they want to be given algorithms they can apply (and don't realize that these algorithms only work for exam problems specifically engineered for their benefit). In ordinary life, it amazing to meet people who drive everyday but have no idea how their car works. My girlfriend just showed my an advert for a product lined with Gore-Tex which explains that the membrane is permeable to "water vapour" molecules (hence is breathable), but blocks the much larger "moisture" molecules (and thus waterproof).
The truth is that people simply don't care to think about anything around them. They don't stop to think "why does this work?" "what does it mean?" and similar questions. Since most people seem to do fine without being universally curious, I try to accept it even if it galls me every time. You can see this when people complain "gadget X doens't do what I want it to do". You rarely see people try to make the gadget behave to their desires. If offered a product that suits them, they're happy, but very few people feel the need to force the world to fit them rather than the other way around.
As a Generation Y kid working in the real world, I got my undergrad from the University of Illinois in Computer Science. It was great to learn, but overall, I retained nothing. I was burnt out as a developer after two years. I found my true calling after getting my MBA, and now I work in IT Management. The burn-out level of just being a code-monkey was just too much for me.
Good. I hate to sound elitist, and god knows that I'm hardly the hottest stuff on the block (I work with a ton of people smarter than I am), but am I the only one who remembers when the CS field was flooded by people whose chief qualifications were Microsoft Word and HTML?
Get off my Second Life lawn!
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Look, kids, I'm what they call a "boomer". They call us that because fireworks and guns were legal when we were kids. What? Speak up, I can't hear you! We were also known as "goddamned potsmoking hippies".
The next generation was called "generation X" or alternately "Goddamned cocaine-soaked Yuppies".
The next generation was Generation Y. They're also known as "Goddamn punks", "Sales Clerks", "fry cooks", "outsourced and unemployed" and "crackheads".
So your nomenclature is a bit off. These kids would be known as "Generation Z" IINM. Also known as "GODDAMNED KIDS GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!"
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
It's not like there's an abundance of CS jobs available (unless you're willing to work for peanuts and you're in a third world country). Consider this job "security".
They seem to be using fluent in the "so far behind they think they're head" mode of thinking. I can drive a car, wash it, change the oil, and fill the tires; does that mean I'm fluent in automobiles? These kids aren't fluent in technology, they're fluent in using technology. I must be fluent in pastry because I get to eat a lot of donuts, cakes, and croissants where I work. Personally, I'd say it's the opposite. Generation Y lacks a fascination for technology and science because they don't know much about it.
New! Device Legs: These legs will help your poor OEM installed product escape any hamfistedness it may encounter. Ava
I reverse engineer everthing. I've dissambled TVs, radios, computers, ICs (designed them too), cellphones, computer programs, file formats, whatever. Being superficially familar with technology for any age group doesnt cut it. That is the nature of true technical nerdness.
it's not because someone knows how to use technology that they understand everything about it and particularly those savvy users
I have people using Iphones and Blackberry and Instant messaging but they dont know jack shit about the rest and how it works in the background so i'm not too afraid of losing my job to those people.
i have seen people boasting about their understanding of the internet and all those nifty gadget they speak about ya know,,,E-mule, Kazzaa, Bit torrent, Messenger and they are the same that usually get hacked and or get loaded with viruses.
technology users do not rhyme with safe usage of it.
And that girl they talk about well, you cant turn your geek switch off when you like computers, you either like it or you dont, learning out of necessity does not make you the hottest tech around and will not assure you a nice place but again that depends on where you want to be, most of the Bosses i had, had half the knowledge i possess but that did not prevent them from making decision for IT but in some case it can be a hindrance when the person over you does not know the implication of what she or he is talking about.
...who got yelled at for being lazy hippies are yelling at their own kids for being lazy techno-hippies.
Sounds like The Curse (When you have kids, they'll be just like you were) is continuing to work just fine.
* benbean trembles in fear
It's a Unix system - I know this.
this articles tags are the win.
sigs... don't talk to me about sigs....
This group of people is the same that think that they don't need us in IT because they know how to turn on the computer, use Word and browse the net. They don't realize that software needs to be written and hardware needs to be designed, and that it is a hard job.
Most people i met in college went to study computer science "because they liked using computers" and when they found out about coding, moved out instantly.
Nothing new to see here, move along.
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
Wow! What do I get?! More money! Please... If companies can't hire enough techies, it is hard for me to feel bad.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
...of the human machine interface.
With this in mind, Computer Science is just as much about understanding people as it is about understanding technology.
Sometimes we seem to forget that Computer Science is actually a blend of the humanities and the sciences.
Hedghog
From my perspective as a mid-twentysomething, I agree with this entirely. I went away to college and quickly lost interest in pursuing CS or CE, Math, Physics, or any of the hard sciences, really. The kicker for me was the lack of a solid career path, and the way the folks that studied these subjects were treated in terms of on-campus recruiting, job fairs, etc. Meanwhile, business majors had no problems finding work, especially those who had some technical skills on the side. So I joined them, sort of, and ended up with a business degree in economics.
Coming out and looking for work, I was basically doing applied statistics, writing code for models and such, but would not even have been interviewed without the business degree. The bottom line is that someone with a stats degree could've done the work as specified, but they wanted to hire people who could write the models based on the business problem at hand (interpret it into a regression model basically, find out how to source the data to run it, write it, interpret the findings for management, etc). And I've done this for two different companies, so there's a chance it's not a unique hiring thing.
So I wonder, are people of my generation rejecting the idea of CS and other sciences, but using the concepts they learned from a few courses they took in that department in a business setting? If that's the case, like myself, I'd argue that the change is an emphasis on the application of these skills to business, not an abandonment in their education.
I'm really happy doing what I do, and while I probably lack the theoretical knowledge that a PhD in Statistics would have, my analysis in the business context is what's really being sought -- and I'm strong in that. I'm finishing up a law degree at night now, so I really can't wait to see how the technical skills apply in that profession. Lawyers are largely so tech/scientifically averse that they don't even consider the application of those skills in hiring, I've found. But the lawyers I've worked with here who have the tech or science background are tons better at their job. So what's it gonna be?
When I think of technology and peoples' understanding of it, I have two schools of thought:
A) The Star Trek school -
In this world, technology is embraced and understood. It is studied and has zero mysticism about it. It works and we know how it works, and we use that knowledge to build greater machines.
B) The Star Wars school -
Sure, Star Wars was very high tech, but throughout the whole series, the understanding of how characters of the technology seems cursory at best. "It works when I do this" kind of mentality, instead of "It works because of this."
Let me finish this post with this, those are similes, so be creative with your interpretation.
I didn't RTFA but from the resume a can see myself... I wanted to go into Physics (last year) to do research in physics because I thought CS was a tool... Turned out I didn't like Physics that much to go up to a PhD but my CS+PHYS class we're a blast (at least for me)... So now I'm in CS and hopefully that's the right career path for me!
Also...I thought Gen Y was the one before this one? Oh, I give up...However, you know you are a "real Gen Xer" if the two generations after yours also call themselves GenXers and the generations before you calls itself the Baby Boomers. All 5523 of us: we're a true dead spot on the generation spectum. Can't even keep name the recognition.
i\hbar\dot{\psi}=\hat{H}\psi
If the above is true of today's students, they are smarter than most of Slashdot.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Just as with any maturing technology, focus eventually turns to usage, rather than development of the core technology. Is it any surprise that more people are interested in how best to use a wheel, rather than reinventing it?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
I know somebody is going to say that he has a great job, and they can never get rid of him, yada yada. But, that doesn't mean anyting.
What about people just entering the field? What about 5 years from now, or 10 years from now?
Who want's to spend $80K on a college education, and work their ass off. Then, toil for entry level wages for another 5 years, only to train their $5/hour replacements in the Ukraine, or whatever? Great "career" right?
Most IT work is tedious, and unimporant. The pay, at best, is nothing special. And employers seem to have an never-ending list of requirements, even for an "entry level" job.
I think it's safe to say that there are better career choices.
Fjear my four-digit UID.
;)
Fear my two digit IQ!
-mcgrew
PS- how'd you get it back? I'd love to post as simply "mcgrew" again!
(oh hell, I'm logged in and I'm still getting cowboyed! Whoda thunk that bein' able to read fast would be penalized at a nerd site?)
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Who can blame today's college students for shunning Computer Science? When you hear all about the offshoring, it makes sense for them to avoid the whole field. I know of no companies that hire non-Indian entry level programmers.
The greatest problem--speaking as someone who has had ten years in the business--is that the quality of the code produced by Indians is terrible. Granted, you may have a few smart enough guys around, but my wide experience has convinced me that Indians in general are uncreative, lazy and sloppy coders. So, I am delighted to hear that students are shunning Computer Science. I was brought into my current company--Fortune 500--at $75/hr to clean up the crap that was left behind by sloppy Indians. My manager said that point blank. And the guy whose mess I'm cleaning up? He still works in my company but he spends his day playing online cricket at his desk.
Right at the moment, people that work in IT aren't exactly a majority of the populous. As a percentage of the whole workforce, I'd be willing to bet that people keeping these systems running and designing new ones are a small fraction of the population. People that now, and have always been interested in the 'nuts and bolts' side of technology are always going to be around in the same relative quantities as they were before.
After the dotcom implosion, a flood of 'highly-trained' prima-donnas entered the workforce, many of them with A+ Certification or an MCSE and an expectation that they should be running the joint within 5 years. On top of that, wages dropped. Why would I want to slave for 12 hours a day in a data centre when I can leverage the skills I learned as a techie to improve the job I do in other departments? Computers ARE just tools, and the idea that a career in computers should be something to aspire to, is like saying a career in waste management is something to aspire to. People should aspire to a career that they will enjoy, not necessarily a career that someone expects you to be interested in.
Me? I dropped IT given my first opportunity and have yet to look back.
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
people these days are fluent in pushing buttons and understanding the interfaces that were designed to be easy to understand in the first place. Lets not give people 'extra' credit for being able to install software on their notebook.
Call me a troll or this post flamebait, but it will be true.
Look at IT objectively - it's infrastructure. You do the jobs that make the background stuff work. Mechanics, machinists, equipment opertors, assemblers, all do this stuff. They diagnose problems and fix them. They assemble components built and designed primarily by others into a useful working product, often based on the experience of others.
Of course gen Y doesn't want any part of that. It takes effort and requires getting your hands dirty. Most kids out of school (in any generation, I might add) are looking for which CEO position will give them the best golden parachute. Nevermind that that's not how the real world works - their perceptions are based on seeing smart people (like them) on TV shows get to the top without effort. Some will eventually realize they have to make money, and they'll be IT ditchdiggers. Others will find their niche in retail sales, or construction, or some white collar paper-pushing position.
Nobody aspires to grow up and be a plumber, but the world still needs them. And, in case you haven't looked lately, plumbers can make decent money.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Being able to open a web browser or download songs from itunes doesn't make one "fluent with technology". Being able to do some basic productivity tasks just doesn't count either. There's nothing wrong with having that level of ability but it's not going to keep anyone at the forefront of the technology curve.
Kids aren't going into technology fields because:
A) There is a (wrong) perception that all the jobs are going to China/India
B) There has always been a finite talent pool of people genuinely interested in technology
C) Schools (in the US) do a piss poor job in general of educating students about technology
D) There are easier ways to get through school.
I support a gaggle of Gen-Y'ers and would like to point out that using technology is not the same thing as understanding technology. Even the graphic designers who use Photoshop at the expert level five days a week don't know simple things like how to burn a data CD. It's possible for someone to own a Smartphone, digital video camera, home network, etc. and have not the slightest idea how they work or how to solve even the most minor of problems.
This is not a slam, just a clarification. I don't see ANY generation having more tech skills than any other, and that includes the current teenagers who were born surrounded by technology.
P.S. I am an X'er
...Only serve to prove your point, IMO. I just read through quite a few people that disagreed with your post, but the essence of what you were saying is intact. Regardless of whether it's the 60s,70s,80s,90s, it's clear that people often have a bias towards past music. It is nigh-impossible to say what bands of today will be revered in the future as trendsetters for music that's not yet written. But it is undeniable that history will eventually decide.
And by the same token, people forget that although there is good music in ever decade, there was an awful lot of crap that came out back in the 60s or whenever too. Confirmation bias and all that. I thought of several counter-examples to the bands others in this thread listed that were contemporaries to several of the "crap" music that was offered as an example.
Why worry about what decade has the best music? Just listen to what you like and don't worry about other people. Good music will always be around. And everyone has a different definition of what's good.
Between knowing how to use a blog or search for stuff with Google (or creating crap with Microsoft ShitPoint), and knowing how to install, configure, or manage a blog system, a search engine, webserver farm, or a corporate network/server platform.
'Knowing how to use blogs' and how to IM people to find information does not equate to 'up to the minute' technology skills
Compare:
Knowing how to use a dishwasher or a microwave oven doesnt qualify you to design and build either of those appliances, let alone even open the cover of one.
Knowing how to turn on the lights or plug in a TV or VCR doesnt qualify you to install electrical wiring in a house or build or repair AV equipment (or even program the clock in a VCR, usually)
Basically, this generation is adept at being users, but (in general) has neither the qualifications or desire to be the sysadmin-behind-the-scenes.
"One of their primary concerns is a flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance."
I wonder if this will change once they start getting their real jobs. "Flexible schedule" is being able to come in whenever they tell you to come in, and "healthy work/life balance" means never taking a sick day.
Yes, they are tech savvy but they don't have a clue how the hell is the damn thing working. I expect that very soon people will talk about "ghosts inside the cell phone", although they won't call then ghosts. The only good thing is that they won't be afraid of those 'ghosts'.
No sig today.
There are three kinds of "technology "fluent": To use the old car analogy
1) Can drive a car, knows all about car companies and which models have leather seats and what "anti-skid brakes" do
2) can fix a car. Can figure out what part is broken and do a "remove and replace" repair
3) Can design a car. Knows how to design body sheet metal so that it absorbs energy in an impact. Can model flame propagation inside a combustion chamber,
With cars e have drivers, mechanics and engineers. With computers it is users, service techs and engineers. So what the article says is that even though many kids are computer users few want to become engineers. Well "good" the ratio of users to engineers should be about 100,000 to one or maybe 500K to 1. It only take 10 guys to set up a cool web site that a million people can use.
I attended a lecture with a very good thought experiment with this very idea as a key concept. Basically, what would happen if only a very small percentage of a population understands a technology enough to reproduce it. Now imagine a massive catastrophe that kills 75% of the population, but leaves most of the world intact. How much technology would we lose? How much technology would continue to be used, but no longer produced. It's an interesting thought experiment on how we could fall back into the Dark Ages because of how specified jobs have become. I mean, think about how many people drive cars, but how many of those people could build a car from scratch if they had to.
I read the first sentence of the summary and thought to myself "I hope my dad doesen't read this..."
How is this different from every generation before it? The technology sector has always been relatively small. Now we have people who are more adept at technology. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're going to want to make that their life.
*pulls out a car analogy*
There was a time when cars were new, fun, and accessible (or so I hear). There were a lot of 'gearheads' or 'grease monkeys' who thought this was great and would make their own, or rebuild ones they bought back to original quality (or better). And yet the world is not covered with car factories.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
"Children today are lazy, lack respect and have no faith" - Rough translation of Mesopotamian saying.
What really goads me lately is this massive latching on by the current mainstream press that Work/Life balance is some evil concept. It's as though striving to have a life outside your work simply isn't tolerable. Don't these tools who feed this party line when writing the articles want a life as well?
We are entering a time of extreme excess for the bulk of humanity in 1st world nations, it's okay if we all want to slow down some and enjoy this new world we have. Frankly if we all really worked as hard as people did thirty or fourty years ago we'd either run out of work or resources quickly. This is why we need to continue to push an information economy because its central resource is people something we still have plenty of (for now).
I'm amazed when talking to people on the East Coast and they mock West Coast things like Work/Life balance with derision and a wave of the hand. Unless you *really* enjoy your job above all else, what's wrong with wanting it to have less importance in your life? For most of us, work, is a means to an end. This is your only life, enjoy it! Take a vacation! Get drunk/high! Have sex! Do whatever makes you happy as long as it doesn't directly impede the joy of others.
--- I do not moderate.
As a home-schooled senior (I dropped out of pubic) I plan on becoming a nurse, where I can put my critical thinking skills and person skills to use in an instant gratification sort of style.
I DID spend 3 hours debugging a company website yesterday and while I have the necessary skills, I'll leave the tedious background work to the Indians if they prefer.
Gen Y might not 'grow up' in the manner you expect. Not owning a home allows one to be more moble and less dependent on an employer. Fewer kids (or none) means more free time.
Times they are a changin', I'll get off your lawn now.
Blar.
I don't think you guys really mean critical thinking in the way you think of critical thinking. Its not really the ability to construct bullet proof logic, but the ability to reasonably question ideas. Granted logic is a big part of that. This is a common academic understanding of critical thinking articulated by 46 experts from fields of philosophy and education: "We understand critical thinking to be a purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one's personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this idea. It combines developing CT skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society" (Walvoord, 19).
Roflcopter....The thought that scares me is that these so called "tech-savie" kids often jam their PCs with so much junk like Windows, Microsoft Office Products, and useless programs like Kodak Gallery and their ISP's browser. At the end of the day the experienced IT guy has to be called because they're parents are complaining that their computers are running slaggishly slow. The poor IT guy then arrives and partially "fixes" the problem. He installs Open Office, Mozilla Firefox, Thunder Bird, 7-zip, AVG Antispyware, VLC Player, and of course the latest version of Linux(one of the distros that will fit the family's needs). Then these "tech-savy" kids start complaining that their IT messed up their computer. When are these kids going to learn that just because they downloaded a file from kazaa or bearshare it doesn't mean that their computers are safe from the damn spyware. The solution is simple, it's a user error, simply replace the user. When are they ever going to learn. Oh, and about kids not choosing a career in the tech business; the reason why they don't want to be computer scientists is because it requires hard work and brains. Plus, why would they want to go into a career that is now being shifted to the middle east?
Here, here.
A large part of the problem of the school system is that the supply of cheap labor dried up some point in the 70's or 80's, once we reached the point where intelligent, college-educated women had career opportunities other than being a teacher.
I'll tell you another problem with teachers (speaking as someone who was engaged to one) - the staggering uniformity of professional opinions amongst graduates of education programs since the 70's or so.
Amongst any other educated professionals, there are usually controversial issues in the field. Some IT people are fans of Microsoft, some think that MS is the devil incarnate.
There doesn't appear to be that sort of ongoing, unresolved debate amongst grads of education programs. Everybody agrees about everything. Is social promotion a good idea? Of course it is, and everybody agrees. Same groupthink applies to other issues that you might think should be controversial, but aren't.
The plural form of "anecdote" is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
Indeed, children these days are clearly lacking in theology and geometry. Their lack of logic and materialistic endeavors casts doubt upon their very souls! I would regale you with some astute philosophical musings from Boethius, however Lady Fortuna's wheel has spun me downwards and my closed valve is causing me to bloat. To the lavatory I go to seek respite!
You're right. Much better to piss away more money on rent than buying a house, and of course, having kids is a bad idea. That way when you're too old to work, your landlord can toss your behind in the street and you won't have any annoying progeny to help you out. I see generation Y excels in long term planning.
IDIOCRACY
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Considering what a pain it is these days just to get your foot in the door in this industry, who'd blame them? The new fad is to work for a company, located in India, that is accepting contracts from countries in the US. By the time the cash gets down to the actual developer, it's not even enough to skate by on. You literally have to latch on as an indentured slave, and there's only so many deferments one can take on student loans before you HAVE to start paying them back.
When I got into this field, half of the kids getting jobs were geeky high school grads that were getting their college degrees paid for by dot coms. Nowadays, most adequate paying contracts, let alone salaried positions, require a lot of experience doing very specialized things. And by and large, they don't count "playing around with a few things" at home "experience".
For me to achieve a degree of success in this industry, I had to take a salary that caused me to go into debt out of college, then I had to go through some pretty demeaning stuff...plenty of trips to the employment department...early on during the dot com bust. I didn't start making a good salary until I was almost 30. Contrast that with the legal or medical professions, and it's not a tough decision to make for a kid getting out of high school. You can do all the technical stuff you want as a hobby, but as a career, it's just not what it used to be.
Maybe Generation Y just isn't interested in 'career' as defined by a bunch of asshole babyboomers that pay young people shit wages and demand high hours with zero compensation while keeping the best jobs and promotions available for themselves. Hell.. that could explain why Google doesn't seem to have a problem hiring while IBM has to suck an egg.
As part of the Y generation.. I work my ass off. I have a career.. and after my 8 hours, I come home and work to better myself. I analyze stocks, I study the latest trends, I take on new ideas and pursue them..
I am just not near as interested in conforming to the 70's and 80's way of business when the people running businesses now will be obsolete soon. Is my job my only career now? NO.
--- We need more Ron Paul!
I forgot to mention what the hard drive has; obviously the user in question was comparing decibel measurements as if they used a linear scale. My bad.
By the way, after hearing what +7 dB actually means he decided to go with a different hard drive instead.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
US tech jobs of many stripes have already seen heavy offshoring. Kids aren't dumb, they won't bother with a difficult career path that may be yanked from under them and sent to the other side of the globe at any time.
A doctor can't be offshored, a lawyer can't be offshored. An MBA can't spin marketing bullshit in IndiEnglish from a phone halfway around the world.
US tech jobs are a dying breed, following in machine-tool operators' footsteps. The subject is as interesting as it ever was, but the career is simply not that attractive anymore.
~
The Bureau of Labor Statistics says there are only about 26,000 "computer science" jobs in the United States. Not "information technology", not system administration, not tech support, but the jobs where people actually research and develop new technology.
If you're really good, there are openings in the operating systems groups for the iPhone and the Palm. There's good technical work to be done there, the pay is OK but not spectacular, you will have no life, you get no respect, and few will ever understand what you did. (If you take the iPhone job, you get to meet Steve Jobs and have him scream at you.)
The trouble is, if you're smart enough to do those jobs, you can probably do better doing something else. Two smart young people I know, with Stanford CS degrees, are running hedge funds.
And that's the top of the field. Further down, it's much worse, endlessly fixing systems that could have been designed not to fail, but for which the costs to do that would have been higher than fixing them.
I'm not complaining personally; I've done very well in computer science. But I can't recommend it as a career choice today.
1) Change the Oil
Get under the car, find the oil drain plug. (Make sure it's not the transmission drain plug) Your manual can help here if it was written well. Find a ratchet and match the right sized socket. Place an Oil Drain Catch under the drain plug. Loosen the drain plug. If the catch is designed right you can take the plug all the way out and let it drop and it will catch it. Let the oil drain out. Note that even when the oil stops draining up to 20% of the old oil may still be in the engiine but that is fine. Find the drain plug and if it had a washer find that too. Place both back in the plug hole and tighten it down. Don't tighten it so much that next time you can't get it off. Next Look for your Oil Filter. I buy K&N filters with a nut on them so I don't need a special wrench. You might be able to use your hand but watch out for the hot engine parts around the filter. Remove the filter and drain it. Take some of the oil from the old one to lube the seal on the new filter. Place the new filter on and tighten it down. Hand tighten it and then give it at least another quarter turn with a wrench. Lastly, find the amount of Oil that your car take and open the oil cap on the top of the engine. Also check the weight reccomended. Most new cars use 5W30. I like to use synthetic as it lasts longer and is not much more expensive. Pour the oil in. You can use a funnel if that helps. Grab the dip stick and wipe it off. Then place it back in and pull it out to check the oil level. It will be higher then it actually is so if it's on the high side that is fine. If it's low put more oil in. Make sure not to put in too much oil as that can cause problems as well. Most dipsticks have an acceptable range. Next place the cap back on the engine. Close the hood and drive your car around the block. Check the oil level again when you get back and look for any leaks. If they oil level is good and no leaks then you did a good job
2)Change or Clean the Air Filter
This one is easy. Your air filter is located usually in a box but sometimes in a round housing sitting on top of the engine. With the engine off, open the housing, take out the old filter. Place in a new filter and close the housing making sure to close it correctly. If you have a reusable filter like a K&N then follow the instructions on the cleaning kit.
3)Change the Spark Plugs
For this you need to visit your Auto Supply store and ask for the correct spark plugs for your car in the correct quantity. Almost all engines have one per cylinder with the obvious exception being rotary engines that have two or even three per whatever. Haha, I don't know much about Rotary engines. Anyways, you also need to pick up a spark plug socket and one or two extensions for your ratchet to reach the spark plugs. Now lift the hood on your car and look for an area with either rubber plugs or just a solid plastic cover. If you have the plastic cover then remove it. Now look for the place where the spark plug wires go into the engine. Now, change the spark plugs one at a time. This helps you to not mix up the order of the spark plug wires which is a big NO-NO. Remove the plug over the spark plug. Loosen and remove the spark plug. This is an art sometimes as it's pretty deep in there and your hands can't help you grab it. Now look at the spark plug and wonder how your car even worked before. Next put the new spark plug in. A trick I use not to cross thread it is to detatch the extension from the ratchet and hand start it. Then tighten it down with the ratchet. Place the wire plug back on and move on to the next one. After 4 or 6 or 8 or even 16 of these depending on the engine you are done. Now close the hood and start the car. If it starts then good job. Enjoy the improved gas mileage.
4)Put on a spare Tire
Find your jack. Place is under your car near the tire to be replaced along the metal ridge running front to back on your car. Jack up the car but make sure you are not on a slope and the handbrake is pulled. Loosen the Lug Nuts. You might h
Ah, a graduate of the Sarcasm Academy.
Think what you like -- that's the beauty of the system. But perhaps it is conceivable that we've let the finer liberal arts and sciences lose ground in school. I won't touch theology -- your religion is your own business. Does this mean teaching every child formal courses in Latin, Logic, and Elocution? No. However, what harm is there in trying to raise the standard a little bit at a time as opposed to watching slide into a morass of standardized test and canned answers. I think we owe it to kids to arm them with the tools they can use to succeed in life, and the better the tools, the more confidence they will gain and the greater strides they will make. If we continue to sink toward the lowest common denominator, there may come a time when we can no longer cope with even minor changes in our environment.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I think that part of what happened is that much of IT went "Blue Collar." Its not so glamorous, and it doesn't seem to pay outrageously well (think lawyer, doctor, marketing exec, sales exec) unless you want to work insane hours. I have a BS in Computer Science, and I work in IT infrastructure (networks, systems integration, systems architecture) and I can't say that I command any more respect than a plumber or an electrician (two of my brothers are electricians).
... zoologists - too much work, too much thinking, not enough $$.
Real Computer Science is "hard" and doesn't appear to have the payoff that people used to think that it did. Sure, you can still have a career in Computer Science, but many college kids don't want that any more than they want to be astrophysicists, anthropologists,
Interestingly, a lot of the tech folks I see now have "IT" degrees - one step removed from Computer Science. The more ambitious/less capable have "IT Management" degrees - at least two steps removed from Computer Science. It used to be Mathematics PhDs running the show with computers, now folks don't have to be "scientists" to use or even program computers.
You learned the difference between valid and invalid arguments, the classical logical fallacies, etc. In that sense, it can certainly be taught.
Like I said, you can teach logic but it may not be applied. People can be taught all the patterns, but application still comes from within. It's one thing to recognize a fallacy in a test full of them and another to pick out a fallacy from a stream of otherwise honest material.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
All it takes is an environment where the student is challenged. This is gonna piss said student off, but it's ok. Once they get through it, they will come back and be rational about it, realizing the gift they have been given.
... 400, then finally grok the idea that they are dealing with somebody wanting to keep it real. From there, it's all good.
(had a HS teacher do exactly that --a mentor at that time, do the same. I will never forget it.)
The problem we've got with building more critical thinkers comes down to preserving the status quo. If we pump out a bunch of free thinkers, they are gonna go off and do what free thinkers do; namely, change stuff!
This is good, but the current powers that be, don't want too many people to realize that.
Also, putting false choices in front of students, while at the same time limiting their understanding of their real choices, does a lot toward making semi-critical thinkers. They solve problems, largely within the current framework, and as such thinkers, are highly desired.
I can't tell you how many times I've been to the local school (and I like my local school), to deal with these false choices head on. They look at somebody, that actually asks ugly questions, like a complete freak. They employ control and co-opt 101, 102
Largely this problem is one of inhibition. Manage that properly, and that means lots of work on boundaries, and you will get a nice critical thinker, nearly every time. Fail to manage that properly, as in too many artificial inhibitions, and you get a problem solver. They are two different things, often confused.
Blogging because I can...
"writing, critical thinking, hard work and just plain showing up."
What college doesn't require writing emphasis courses, some kind of critical reasoning course, classes that demand more or less hard work, and don't have *some* kind of attendance policy??? I'd love to see the author of this article get into my school, let alone out of it, for *any* major, without all those things he says aren't required, and much more.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
I emailed passwords@slashdot.org and convinced them I was me.
Young people are idiots, old people are idiots. They just tend to be idiots in different ways.
Young people tend to be "neverwillbes" basically, they look forward to an amazing future... That never will exist. They lack the knowledge and experience to understand that human nature really doesn't change. That's why you'll find many young people that support economic and political systems that more or less require everyone to be nice and share. They believe that can actually happen, they believe people as a whole can and will change in their lifetime to be different form how they've been for thousands of years. As such, they are neverwillbe idiots, looking forward to a future that can't exist.
Well most old people are way too learned to fall for that crap. They understand that humanity isn't going to magically get better. In fact they are damn sure it is getting, and will continue to get worse. They are idiots in the opposite direction, they are "neverwases". They look back on a past where everyone was smart and hard working, respected their elders, marriages lasted to death, and there was no crime. Of course, alas, this past never was. We have a tendency to remember the good more than the bad in life, just how we are wired. This is the same reason why you can look back with longing on a relationship years later that you were desperate to get out of at the time. As such they hearken back to glory days that didn't actually exist. Today's youth look like crap to them because they are comparing them with an idealized version.
These conditions, unfortunately, seem to be one of those things about people that just aren't going to change. They aren't universal, of course, you meet plenty of people of all ages that have a healthy amount of perspective, but you meet far more who don't and are neverwillbes when they are young, and neverwases when they are old.
So it is something that will probably continue for all time or at least for a very long time. To the extent fundamental human nature changes, it does not do so quickly. People will continue to see their past through rose coloured glasses and find that the present doesn't match that hazy, idealized memory and thus bemoan the present.
I posited that Americans can't AFFORD to work for 3rd world wages and that's flamebait? And linked a 1st hand account of a third world country as an explanation of what it's like in one and it's 50% flamebait and 50% troll? Who's moderating today, PHBs and Indian call center workers? Or just people who hate Americans?
Pretty weak bait, nobody flamed me. Oh wait, I get it, it was the "burn in hell" and the link to the Bible that was flamebait. If so, then THANK YOU for your insightful, interesting moderation. You athiests are the most fanatical of all religious people. You should also know that the Bible says you athiests are NOT going to burn in hell! I'd link the chapter and verse but as I don't want to get into a religious war. Hell, maybe it wasn''t athiests but Capitalist mammon worshipers who pretend to be Christians who moderated?
I don't care, mod this one too. =P
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
...and I find it interesting how none of the posters have mentioned that. Look if its true that Generation Y wants a better work/life balance and flexible hours, this is a good thing. It also says nothing about their ability to compete or not. One of the things slashdotters complain about all the time are bad working evironments, and being a slave to servers and or pagers. Do you think after almost twenty years of this Generation Yers don't see this? A lack of critical thinking has been a problem in North American education systems for a long time now. It appears to me to be better in Europe, but thats just from what I hear. That said, I've noticed that many, many people I work with that are in IT would have come to where they were by themselves anyways. They had curiosity, then read stuff, they hacked and BBSed and whatever else, and then they made themselves the way they were. In most cases this is not going to change. Smart kids will continue to be smart *inspite* of the education system. As for the rest, they will probably fall along their appropriate place on the bell curve. And there is nothing wrong with that.
With this in mind, how many people, especially after 35 in IT start thinking of ways of getting our or changing careers. This might actually make a good slashdot post. How many 55 year old C++ programmers do you know working in your shops? Even if you argue that C++ wasn't around when a 50 year old programmer started, he should have been able to just gone from cobol or fortran to C++. But are there really that many? A few? How many lawyers do you see that are still in their 50s and working. Or doctors?
The point being if we give the message that IT is first of all not a sustainable career, and also that other careers are more fun and rewarding, it should be no surprise to us that those looking forward to us from a younger age would not be swayed by what they see. I don't think we should lay all the blame on the "generation".
Seems very smart to me.
Why get into an easy to outsource job? Programming can be done any where in the world and the US is not a cheap place to live.
They didn't like that answer and while they continue to promote technical careers at the high school level, they also lobby heavily for expanded H1-B visa quotas and press the State Department and DoD to relax restrictions on sending work overseas.
Kids are too smart these days. Whatever they do, they are increasingly interested in maintaining control of the market for their skills, rather than selling themselves off to a large corporation. Scott Adams had a Dilbert strip where he coined the term 'technological savant'. This is an individual who can solve the most sophisticated technical problems in his/her field, but is too stupid to compare paychecks between professions.
Have gnu, will travel.
I haven't had the same email address in years, how do I convince them I'm me?
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Convert C9 hex to decimal and or it with E2. 5 seconds. What?
Can you at least explain what does that mean?
oookay,
Describe a connectionless protocol, any protocol.
Your are not into math and CS?
You know, owning a blackberry and downloading videos doesn't
make you "fluent" with IT technology.
Sorry. Thanks for your time.
- these are not the droids you are looking for -
Well, a few issues this article touches on, but most posters here in Slashdot has not:
How many careers in IT are there? Many companies seem to feel free to outsource their IT staff, either to a company that pays it's staff much lower within the states, or out of country entirely. Then, when the dollar is weak (such as now), bring them back into the company. A career implies staying with the company and moving up some kind of corporate ladder. What I described is not a career, it's a job. Why should people put in long hours, "take one for the team", and put in 110% for the company, when the company will feel free to lay them off to save 5 or 10% on payroll?
As for hours -- the article covers this as well. If I could make $75,000 a year full-time, but not have time to enjoy it, or $50,000 2/3rds time and have time to enjoy it, I would go for the $50,000. A lot of younger people would. Straight up, rolling in cash wouldn't be fun if there's no time to enjoy it; and staying in debt by spending the cash I haven't made yet on a huge house and bloated SUV would be even less fun. The article is absolutely right about this.
As for entitlement to tech toys -- well, yes and no. I wouldn't expect to get a laptop and phone as soon as I join a company. But, I can see why people would expect them, if the business is expecting you to use YOUR cell phone as a 24/7 on-call line (and calling a lot on it), and YOUR computer to do company business more than occasionally.
As for people saying the youngsters just don't have reasoning skills -- well, I graduated in 2000, and the U of Iowa had quite rigorous logical training. I think most people are confusing some kind of community college computer training for CS. As far as I know, CS training is still quite rigorous. Interestingly, the one glaring hole in my CS training was, I don't think we ever gutted a REAL computer -- we learned all about how the parts operated together right down to the gate level based on information on the great historical computers (CDC 6600 etc.), and built a CPU up from the raw gates to full CPU, but a graduate could theoretically be unable to tell apart a DIMM from a hard disk. However, I built computers at home during that time and have worked on about 10,000 since so I certanly can find my way around the case 8-).
As someone who's spent a bit more than a decade dumbing down user interfaces(among other things) I can attest that being tech savvy doesn't imply any talents at all
Yes, Gen Y are greedy, selfish bastards who want their fun now, don't care about tomorrow and are the true "no future" generation. Why? Because they're told to be!
Government and ads tell them to be greedy, sefish and irresponsible. You're only valuable if you have the latest tech gadgets, buy whatever crap they advertise and spend, spend, spend. When should they put kids into this world? Into this world, while we're at it? With terrorists blowing you up any second now and ecological armageddon right 'round the corner? Where you don't have a job, and if you do it gets you barely enough money to pay your bills? Not to mention that you simply NEED that new cellphone and this ringtone. And you have to have them, or your friends won't be your friends anymore.
You are what you have. Not necessarily own, buy it now, pay later! Of course, this gets you so deeply into debt that you simply can't pay anymore, then you need to slave away in that dead end job 'til death finally comes as your escape from it all.
Of course those kids don't want a career. Yes, they know a lot about technology. Mostly how to mod XBoxes and how to use computers to get stuff for free (because they have to have it, according to every ad that blitzes them, but can't afford due to their jobs being somewhere in China or Taiwan). Not to mention that some of them already start into their life with a few thousand bucks short because, well, they had to spend, spend, spend. Why bother with a career if you're working for someone else 'til you're 50?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
All humans suck shit. There - that was easy eh? I should do this for a fucking living.
How many people here have had similar discussions with friends, neighbours (English), FOAFs etc:
"My little Jimmy wants to work in computers when he's older. He loves his. Always on it"
A little digging turns out that his "computer" is actually a PlayStation or Xbox or some other games console. How someone who spends all day, everyday on a games console thinks that is working in computers simply defies logic. I don't know what they think happens in the real world.
stuff goes here
Everyone wants to own, but the real estate issues are making it harder and harder for people to get into houses. Prices are up, and lenders are being much more picky. If you can't buy healthcare for yourself, how will you afford the children?
I'm Gen-X and I own my house outright so suck it you angry little bitch.
Blar.
Actually more a of graduate of the Satire Academy, drawing from the works of John Kennedy Toole.
We need to remove these criminals from power and we the people need to take back the creation of our own money. The worst thing we could possibly do is go back on the gold standard. The US simply has no gold to back it up. Fort Knox was emptied decades ago. The same criminals that own the Fed own most of the gold and can just as easily manipulate the gold supply.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Why is this a surprise? It seems kinda obvious that there is a lack of interest in a "career", as envisioned by the average corporate office, that involves pressuring you to work 60 hours a week for the price of 40 in the form of a salary just so you can be a "professional with a career". Companies have *NO* loyalty to their employess and will sell them out and work them to the bone for an extra quarter of a percent on their stock price. Things are reciprocal, if you don't respect me and treat me like a human instead of a number, why the fuck should I care about you or your bottom line?
The saying: "I'm not a slave to a world that doesn't give a shit", applies here.
Closest I can find to your 26,000 figure is "Computer and Information Scientists, Research" (27,650). The iPhone and Palm jobs you mention wouldn't fall under that, they'd most likely fall under "Computer Software Engineers, Systems Software" (employment of 329,060). Then there's the 472,520 jobs in "Computer Software Engineers, Applications". And the 396,020 "Computer Programmers". There's also 446,460 "Computer Systems Analysts".
Running hedge funds takes an entirely different skillset. There's probably a lot of people with both, I've known a few programmers who went into finance also. But I think the part of the iPhone job most closely related to that is the "getting yelled at by Jobs", not the technical problems.
Does that 26,000 include software development type jobs? Those aren't "computer science" jobs in the strict sense, but in practice lots of people with Computer Science educational backgrounds work in software, do develop new technology and they're not all academics or working in fundamental research units of large companies.
... Awww fuck it.
Few people here can get 4+ weeks of vacation, long and flexible lunch hours, etc., even if they want them, without taking a disproportionately large drop in pay and giving up promotions to the go-getter with no life outside of work, so for many it's just not a real option.
Which of those types of employees do you think is more valuable to the employer?
Duh.
He who has the gold, makes the rules. And, as you would expect, the employers ALSO have certain goals in mind that they want to incent. (ie: higher level of productivity, better quality, etc.)
They pay him more and give him more promotions because of one simple reason: he's more valuable to them. He'll take 1 week vacation and be happy. You need 4 to be happy. If you want to understand things better, then look at the world through the eyes of owners. Because they are the ones making the rules. Quite simply, you work for them. And if you don't like that, then please step aside because there are 10 more people, right behind you, who will take it in an instant.
A different perspective changes things a bit, don't you think?
There are no careers in computer science anymore.
There are only jobs.
The only people with careers are those who were trained in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
You can give any company your time and effort. They will turn around and fire you to hire the young new talent for the next project.
There is no loyalty from companies. There is no guarantee of a career for those who enter the computer science field.
They're using their grammar skills there.
120 grand a year for a divorce lawyer? What, did he only take 5 cases? ;)
You had posted saying that expecting a business to cater to you reflects a sense of entitlement and that the only way to get what you want is to run your own business. That simply isn't true - employees often seek perks (contractual and not) and if they deliver a desired value to the company, they get them. There are plenty of benefits to negotiating such things rather than being a contractor. My friends at Google get some quite nice benefits, for example, but it they approached Google as an S-Corp of one they would not get the job.
If you're good enough (and can demonstrate and prove your worth), you can get almost any benefit/perk as either an employee or contractor. If your demands are greater than your benefit to the company or there is someone of similar capability but less cost, you can't get them, no matter how you approach it. The problem with the sense of entitlement is not that employees want flex hours (or whatever) but when they don't have the capabilities to make themselves worth it to the company
Look at the US auto and airline industries to get a view into the consequences of implementing a union.
Yea let's look at airlines. A union agrees to cuts in benefit so the airline won't do bankrupt but then the airline executives give themselves hugh bonuses. While pilots for American Airlines took a 23.5 percent cut in pay in 2003 the executives gave themselves bonuses of about $250 million.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Just reading the crude generalizations, myopic thinking and lazy analysis in this article made my skin crawl. As has been pointed out in many responses previous, someone who has a blog does not necessarily know anything about assembly programming or page tables. IT was appealing in the past because no one knew much about it and now everyone is a computer expert? Give me a break. When journalists usually say 'computer savvy' they're implying that the person in question can use a keyboard. Yeah, the newest generation is so incompetent/lazy/spoiled/unappreciative/whatever. Just like the one before it... and the one before that... and...
And for the record, I don't think anyone gets a technical degree to become a "Tech support jockey." And everything is the fault of text-messaging, right? I graduated from the same program as Mr. Dodge, and his response pretty much disproves everything the article has to say about that point.
I read an article in a business magazine a few months back that said something similar to this article's 'The new generation is also far bolder in asking for entitlements.' This is just a disgusting statement. First, it presumes that there is something novel about moving up in the world and second, presumes that previous generations were content to be overworked and underpaid. Please, no one of any generation has appreciated that, ever.
What an awful piece of journalism.
"Flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance" is something all companies should be able to provide.
For some positions flexible tyme, and telecommuting, is possible but not for many others. Now, if more people who can do so were able to schedule flexible work tymes or to telecommute it would affect things like rush hour traffic. so even if a person couldn't have flexible work hours they would still benefit.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Really, if you want to work your own hours, you should work for yourself -- be a consultant, make a ton of money on projects you self-select, take vacations when you want them, or just start your own company.
This is easier said than done. Anyone who consults, freelances, or starts their own business has to wear more than one hat. The person also has to manage a business, do the accounting including billings and accounts payable, customer relations, and finding contracts. Unless the person either partners with someone else, or hires someone to do it for them, they have to wear 4 or 5 hats. I'd rather work for myself, being on disability I don't work at all now, but most people can't juggle the different responsibilities. My sister started her business with some friends of hers and I bet she puts in 70 plus hours a week, some of that she can do from home, but it seems she lives to work not work to live.
FalconShould there be a Law?
They aren't "gen Y" (how fucking original) but millenials
Right. You can count to one - good job!
I wanted to voice my concern over this research, though it may be too late after posting for most here to read it. I recently graduated from university and I'm a Gen X'er. But at the end of the curve - so I'm almost a Gen Y.
The problem is in North America and Europe at least that with baby boomers retiring, there is a huge need for people to continue working permanent employment to sustain the economy and keep "the system" working.
If the idea is sent of this research is that Gen X or Y don't want to work - its not true. Employers in some ways have been limiting factors. There is less permanent employment, less opportunities for advancement from starting jobs and less on-the job training. There are more temp agencies being used. If the demand for future employment needs to be met in the private sector, employers really need to get working on filling the gaps with younger, driven workers that are willing to train, educate and work hard on the job. Much like previous generation.
Seriously. I hope if an HR person or executive is reading this, they take this seriously. Give us new grad Gen X's and Y's a chance. I'm willing to bet most of us are willing to work hard. I don't consider my employer to be Club Med.
>>With age and work experience...and years of accomplishments, comes increased position and pay.
In IT, "age and work experience...and years of accomplishments" often mean that you can expect to be the next to laid off. A lot of people consider a developer to be washed up at 35. Besides, why should a company "increased position and pay" when they can just hire somebody offshore for 1/10th the cost?
I'm sorry, but I think you have IT confused with a real career field.
treat workers. burn them out young, work them to the bone, then fire them when they get a little older and more expensive for a younger fresh model. sounds great right? during the bubble people hoped to get rich on options and such so they tolerated the drudgery. now? why would you choose to suffer as a disposable worker. all the work, no glory. sure there are exceptions like google but google skims the cream of the crop of the work force, so it can afford to do this. the rest? not so much.
I didn't say you said it was easy.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Their minds work in fundamentally different ways than rational humans. A lawyer will easily argue both a) you were never at the crime scene and b) the damage you caused at the crime scene was purely accidental, therefore you should receive both an acquittal and a reduced sentence!
This cognitive dissonance is clearly not a problem for them. The entire mechanism for detecting dissonance is either turned off or missing in most legal professionals. This is why justice is no longer about facts but who you know, how much you have, and well, if chewbacca lives on endor.
You've got to have a bit of sympathy. How hard must it be to train your mind into this particular mode of failure just to have a career? How hard is it to live in a naturally rational world if you think gravity operates the way it does because of precedent!?
To boldly use to and too two times and get it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!
action
That might be Neo-liberalism but it is NOT Liberalism, Classical Liberalism!
FalconShould there be a Law?
Historically speaking, common law is rooted in traditional practices and procedures - and statutory law scarcely exists.
The Revolutionary generation believed that judge-made law was easily manipulated and dangerously whimsical.
That is why in the American system there is this extraordinary insistence on written constitutions, legislation, administrative rules, and so on. Laws may have common law roots, but that is not how they are presented to a court.
An American judge does not think in terms of natural law, he is not a judge in the common law tradition as a Brit would understand it.
He does not think like a European academic who builds abstract theories of what the law is or should be, rather, he tries to give a contemporary meaning to the law as it is written.
Actually, as you go back you see the model was completely different. Think Little house on the prairie. A teacher taught a small community of children from 5 to ~16 years of age. The teacher would basically teach the older children more advanced topics and those teens would teach the next younger group slightly less advanced topics that they had learned from the last group of teens. The teaching "trickled" down to the youngest children. So not only did you learn the material you also got to learn how to teach the material. It also had the side effect of promoting communication and a sense of community.
That's how my Second grade teacher was in a way, and she had just graduated from college. What she did was that in some subjects such as math, reading, and vocabulary she had a lot of learning aids, flash cards and such. She let us use them and learn on our own, then she encouraged the students who were ahead of the class to help those who were behind. By the end of the year two friends and I were at the 6th grade level on those subject that were self-paced. Unfortunately the following year we were stuck back in regular classes with regular teachers.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Dilbert's killed more IT careerists than outsourcing ever will!
At least one AC understood your reference :-)
It's not the *customers* who don't want to know how a computer works--its the manufacturers themselves who have a vested interest in keeping them ignorant of the details. Want to replace your HD? Bring it over to our "specialized professional" and we'll fix it for you. Oh, and if you open that new laptop of yours, you'll void the warranty; we all know you're too stupid to replace the fan yourself. Bring it to our professional. Oh, and we'll install Windows Vista too--it's the new best thing. Paradoxically, it's the large amount of purposefully ignorant people that offer hope for IT as a non-suck career (at least, IT in India)
There is, of course, Ron Paul who has Jefferson's insight and yet pounds it with Hemingway's simple clarity.
Ron Paul is the first, and only, person who came to my mind.
FalconShould there be a Law?
However, like great music of other eras, its greatness won't be recognized until the creator is long dead.
Some great music now is being recognized. I don't listen to music much anymore but one performer I love is Norah Jones, who has performed with Willie Nelson and others. She released her debut album in 2002. In 2007 she released her third album, "Not Too Late" "which debuted at number one on the world charts."
FalconShould there be a Law?
Umm... dunno. Ask passwords@slashdot.org, though, they'll know how :-)
I'm the youngest guy by far in my ham radio club and I'm 34. Many of the radio guys I know aren't all that into the nuts and bolts of computing. In fact many hams resist change and that includes the introduction of digital transmission modes and the integration of RF and the Internet when it comes to ham digital networks and repeaters. You hams know what I'm talking about.
On the other hand many older hams know electronics theory cold and I'm a dabbler there at best. I'm much more adept at the digital stuff, being a programmer I'm much more comfortable playing around with packet, Winlink, Echolink, etc. Integrating software and RF hardware is fun. I still blow Joe Average away in terms of RF and electronics know-how.
I also enjoy working on my car, seems like automotive tech is another area where people look at it as a black box. That goes for many IT people, no one I work with bothers with their own car maintenance. I picked up auto repair from my father-in-law, that generation seems to be the last that really took the time to deal with fixing their own cars. Of course cars used to be easier for the driveway mechanic to deal with.
8 bit computing - It may be 2007 out there, but it's 1983 in here!!
It makes you wonder if we are all teletype operators. In the distant past there used to be a profession all about just operating teletype machines.
In the really distant past (like ancient Egypt past) reading and writing with a pen all day was high tech and you could make a living on just being able to write. They called it a scribe. Today that's just not a viable way to make a living.
So maybe many of the jobs professional IT geeks work at now are going the way of the scribe and the teletype operator. Maybe that's a good thing. Today there are still people who make a living from writing. So maybe there will still be people who make a living from technology. But the living you make from writing today is very different from the living you made from writing for the Pharaoh. The IT of tomorrow will probably be likewise different.
[signature]
I'm going to start using them, because frankly I find that the law interferes with the direction I want to take with my life. I will definitely give serious thought to each of them, because you don't lightly set aside the recommendations of the legislature, but sometimes the unitary executive (in this case, me) has implied powers that frankly supercede other concerns. As laudable as I consider the law, both in letter and intent, sometimes it imposes inefficiencies and limitations that would place an undue burden on my planning and execution.
100% agree that the people (who are, in reality, the same as the govt) can change the rules to their liking and make things more balanced. Corporations only exist because we (the people/govt) allow them to exist.
France, for example, required it's businesses to make a 35 hr work week instead of the standard 40 hour. Why? Because they wanted to employ more people. So businesses had to comply.
Having said that, however, here in the states, workers are currently at a major disadvantage. OUR people and govt has shown very little interest in restricting what companies can and can't do with respect to employees. It's pretty much hire and fire at will.
The whole arrangement reminds me of a saying, "the upper class owns things, the middle class are the workers, and the poor are there to keep the middle class working". Harsh....but true to a certain extent.
Since when is writing an important skill for an IT person?