[kelnos]

> Nobody argues that tech is a meritocracy.

That's not true even in the trivial "well I mean that most people don't argue that". I think people in tech are a lot more self-aware then they were 10-15 years ago (when most people in tech I knew would assert that tech is a meritocracy), but I still hear plenty of aspirational rhetoric that either assumes or explicitly asserts this "fact".

[eternalban]

late 80s and early 90s were very meritocratic, in my experience. In fact, I left architecture and switched to software precisely because of this fact. Don't forget, this is the time period when you did not tell people in parties you were a programmer. It was decidedly the un-sexy un-cool profession. Check out 80s hollywood products and their portrayal of programmers.

The turning point in this industry was recorded in popular culture in 1995:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113243/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_49

Look at all those beautiful people! /g

The influx of "new blood" into the field -- people who would otherwise never ever would have considered living the geek life -- in the new gold rush of post-WWW software world fundamentally changed the character of the field. Far more politically and socially savvy personality types were now competing for position.

And oh yes. One of my esteemed coworkers when I was all of 25 was this wizzard looking man. I mean he had the beard, the hair, and a program of his hanging on the wall (hardwired, you see), and hailed from Bell Labs.

I wonder how he would do these days in the market. Obviously, (software) tech can not possibly be a meritocracy when the most experienced workers are routinely discriminated against.

[peatmoss]

I think I’m a little younger than you, but I too remember when being “into computers” was the sort of thing that got you bullied and made your family question whether you’d amount to anything in life.