[mouzogu]

> The real value and security in tech is in the edges, not the mainstream.

disagree. fewer jobs. less turnover. like yourself - 3 decades.

better go for the next big thing. whether AI, VR or something.

long as it has a barrier to entry. even just complexity.

[gogobio]

I heavily disagree. To preface - I have a recent and a successful PhD in Comp Sci. During grad school I've known active grads who jump onto the "next big thing". Well, long story short - almost every "next big thing" eventually dies down, every single one of them ended up being a generic Software Engineer after heavily specializing in the "next big thing" because, unfortunately, the cycle of the next big thing just keeps on rolling and within 3-5 years the current "big thing" may become entirely irrelevant, which ended up being the case for them. I understand this might not be very helpful, but I suggest doing the footwork to figure out the intersection of something you truly have an interest in as well as a tech with a potential and specialize in that.

[metabro]

Well they’re all employed and given they chased hype they probably are in a tech hub and therefore I’d expect them to be earning above median for their cohort and still working on interesting stuff. How many of these assumptions are wrong?

[em-bee]

when i was young, being in a niche area allowed me to get jobs on 3 different continents and travel too. but eventually, that was not enough. i had to leave that niche and accept a python job so that i could work and live in china. it was great while it lasted, but in the long term it proved to limiting because the jobs weren't where i wanted to be (if there were any jobs at all. i stopped looking)

the problem is of course to figure out what has potential, and what it takes to get into that field.

[internetter]

> better go for the next big thing. whether AI, VR or something.

The people on the edge create the next big thing