[isoskeles]

What is the point of this conversation? We're sanitizing language to protect the egos of everyone, at the expense of derailing a conversation that actually could relate to a lot of people here.

My parents are NOT AT ALL technically savvy. My mother's web browser has a ton of bullshit addons all over it, or at least it did last time I looked at her computer in 2014-ish. I can't imagine she's gotten much better about this stuff. But we can't talk about this pattern because it could hurt the identity of older HN readers who are technically savvy, it's offensive.

Ageism is bad when it's preventing people from getting work or engaging in society in a meaningful way. I simply do not care if it's used to make casual remarks with the specific intent of getting people to relate to an idea, e.g. people who don't know any better about privacy are actually people you know, most likely your parents or grandparents or some of their friends. And taking part in shutting down that conversation because of "ageism" is, IMO, worse than the ageism itself.

[cgriswald]

It’s a flawed mental model that doesn’t even communicate what the poster intended without assumptions that aren’t justified.

How do you think you get the sort of ageism that prevents older people from getting the job?

[isoskeles]

> How do you think you get the sort of ageism that prevents older people from getting the job?

I think you get it from a multitude of reasons, including allowing interviewers to come up with bad faith assessments on culture fit and other un-quantifiable employment parameters that amount to nothing more than, "I liked or disliked the candidate." I'd even extend that logic to a larger cause, allowing coworkers (i.e. same level individual contributors) to interview candidates, as I don't think coworkers necessarily have the proper skills or incentives to neutrally evaluate future coworkers, especially not beyond, "I like this person because I can relate to them because we look the same, have the same interests, etc." This isn't strictly ageism either, it can affect people by class or race or other things that set them apart.

[throwaway2245]

> it's offensive.

I'd rather say: it's wrong.

HN readers' parents are likely far more technically inclined than an average person.

(The commenter did not invoke their own parents, which might be a slightly more reasonable position)

Making a claim that HN's parents must be technically incompetent adds nothing to the thread, is likely to cause momentary confusion, and only contributes to the "bad" ageism that you are concerned about.