IT & CS: dead-end careers

[Conservationist]

"Many programmers find that their employability starts to decline at about age 35. Employers dismiss them as either lacking in up-to-date technical skills — such as the latest programming-language fad — or 'not suitable for entry level.' In other words, either underqualified or overqualified. That doesn’t leave much, does it? Statistics show that most software developers are out of the field by age 40. Employers have admitted this in unguarded moments. Craig Barrett, a former chief executive officer of Intel Corp., famously remarked that 'the half-life of an engineer, software or hardware, is only a few years,' while Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook has blurted out that young programmers are superior."

http://developers.slashdot.org/story/12/04/23/1928202/software-engineering-is-a-dead-end-career-says-bloomberg

Just like college has been devalued, there are now infinite code monkeys. Since the coding itself has been so radically standardized, thanks mostly to platform standardization, it's no longer a space for genius. In fact, it's where the blockhead clerks of yesterday have gone to practice.

This is why every IT person is scrambling for the exit to management...

[Tralfamadorian]

Well this is a tad disheartening.

I suppose I'll just have to find a way to still be valuable 30+ years from now.

To the fellow programmers on this board, what is more valuable in the industry -- breadth or depth of knowledge? As in, is it better to be a jack of all trades, or a master of a single one?

[Conservationist]

Depth of general knowledge, breadth of surface knowledge. You will at some point want to specialize e.g. get very good at a particular toolset. Unless all you want is an above-average cube job.

[Cargést]

Comp-Sci only fails in this way because the ends have changed.  No longer is the human-made computer the object to be improved; now, computers are being used to churning out identical(ly useless) programmes.  The geniuses all move into theoretical computing (or AI or something similar), not your basic IT/programming jobs.

[lafindumonde]

Programmers could hit it big as entrepreneurs. Changing technology always creates opportunity.

[Conservationist]

Can, but rarely do.

[lafindumonde]

Might be worth attempting though for the large percentage of individuals living at home on unemployment.

Could create something more valuable than a level 2000 WoW character.

[crow]

True genius might yet find a way to make some actual use of level 2000 WoW characters.
A video game that trained its players to be real people, equipped to deal in the real world, perhaps?
With ethics and shit

[Von List]

A part of me wants to stop what I'm doing and just learn how to weld.

[crow]

Hah! Welding!
I once began an apprenticeship in welding, when North Sea Gas was happening.
I was praised for my beautifully symmetrical welds.
But I figured that there were better ways of living than being burned, torn, grazed, sprained and gassed, while wearing lenses so dark I was living in a burrow.
All while being paid so little that I starved.
So I starved, instead, without all the negatives. 
Do I know what's what, or what?

[Demian]

This is why every IT person is scrambling for the exit to management...

Maybe another dead end, if you consider how insipid corporate life is in general, independently of being in the IT world or not.  Even if you are in a management position, dealing with mediocrity, above and bellow yourself, will be an everyday duty.

The geniuses all move into theoretical computing (or AI or something similar), not your basic IT/programming jobs.

I agree. If it is even possible to find interesting / important themes in CS, it is in academia, which is a saner environment if compared to corporations.