[electrolusty]

I don’t mean to discount your personal experience, but I’m 100% self taught, and I’ve worked at some bougie megacorps, unicorns and startups of varying degrees of maturity.

I’ve never felt like doors have been closed or that others doubt me because of my lack of education. I’ve interviewed at Google and Citadel, had an offer from Meta, etc. It doesn’t feel like anyone has denied me opportunities outright.

I make north of $200k/year cash plus the equity and perks at an early stage startup. I’ve been through two exits so far. Nothing outrageous but I’m rich by most peoples standards. It doesn’t feel like lack of schooling has impacted me financially.

I did start programming and doing the startup thing at 19, so maybe the early start was an advantage. I could just be mind numbing lucky. But, from my point of view, warning the up and coming youngin’s off the self taught path is a disservice.

[libraryofbabel]

> from my point of view, warning the up and coming youngin’s off the self taught path is a disservice.

Hard disagree on this. It’s true there are a lot of successful people in the industry with no degree, or (like myself) with a non-CS degree. And I agree with you that the OP’s claim that there’s a ceiling for those people is overstated. But just because it was possible to have a successful start in the industry 10 or 20 years ago that way doesn’t mean it’s good advice now to tell 18 year olds that skipping the degree and self studying is a good idea. The job market is exceptionally tough currently for entry level engineers and not likely to get better, due to the end of ZIRP and AI productivity gains. Companies who have that rare entry-level position open can take their pick from a large pool of candidates. They will naturally prioritize people with a CS degree from a top school because without previous work experience that is the best signal they have to sort the deluge of resumes.

I still think software engineering is a good career choice for a smart kid, but it’s not the magic ride to prosperity it was 10 years ago. I would hesitate now to recommend any path into it except the top-school CS degree route. Sure, there will be exceptions, but you will have a vastly easier time if you follow that path.

[mekoka]

> I would hesitate now to recommend any path into it except the top-school CS degree route. Sure, there will be exceptions, but you will have a vastly easier time if you follow that path.

And how is this useful to someone who can't get into these top schools because life is happening? Also, your outlook seems very unrealistic to me.

This is software development we're talking about, not medicine, not mechanical engineering. To be a top tier software developer, you need access to a decent computer and good resources to learn. The two boxes have never been easier to check. Add to that the excellent guidance of curricula like OSSU, TeachYourselfCS, and others like them, if you have the mind for it and a bit of discipline, your skills will be as sharp as any top school graduate's. "Self-taught" today isn't the same game as what it was 20 years ago. You can make yourself incredibly valuable on your own.

Now, getting a degree in CS and teaching yourself CS are different goals. The first is a pursuit of recognition for a skill that you may or may not have, and along the way, perhaps you've obtained a truly valuable education for which you're also grateful. The latter is a self-directed pure pursuit of knowledge, understanding, and skill. Regardless of your path, these are the real gems companies are after, and if you truly have them, you will NOT be invisible in this domain. They're rare commodities in the real world, regardless of how you get there.

Getting hired in software has always been about showing that you can build software. There's no danger of this changing. Sure, it may mean different things to different companies, but that's always what it's been about. Some want people that can crack algo problems, some want hackers, some want makers with a portfolio, some want tech wizards that understand the stack up and down. No matter, you can opt in to any of the above outside of academia and make a space for yourself.

[romec]

> And how is this useful to someone who can't get into these top schools because life is happening? Also, your outlook seems very unrealistic to me.

If you can't go to school because of life, chances are you can't self-study because of life as self-studying is harder.

> This is software development we're talking about, not medicine, not mechanical engineering.

Software development in many ways has more competition than those fields that have entry level positions in more rural areas.

> To be a top tier software developer, you need access to a decent computer and good resources to learn.

No, not to be a top tier software developer.

> Add to that the excellent guidance of curricula like OSSU, TeachYourselfCS, and others like them,

Someone who want to become a software developer shouldn't prioritize studying CS.

> if you have the mind for it and a bit of discipline, your skills will be as sharp as any top school graduate's

It will be many times as hard reaching that level yourself.

> Regardless of your path, these are the real gems companies are after, and if you truly have them, you will NOT be invisible in this domain.

Little to no indication that this is true. More like companies might still hire someone they need if they pass all the recruiters and tests favouring the traditional path.

> Getting hired in software has always been about showing that you can build software.

Always has been a academic, military and business field. That is why hackers happened in the first place.

Since we are at HN, you can look at YC.

https://www.ycombinator.com/people

Almost every partner and the founders have an elite or close to elite education. Something only around 1% of the population have, yet they make up all of the people. That is in an untraditional firm which literally runs Hacker News.

But let's say I'm wrong. No harm, no foul. Just go self-study then. Should be easy with that $432 lifestyle. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44074340

[zer00eyz]

> due to the end of ZIRP and AI productivity gains.

I think you're missing the mark with this analysis.

If you go back to the original dot com bubble it was as much of a hardware bubble as a software one. Same thing with the mobile bubble. The AI bubble we are in has NOTHING to do with productivity and everything to do with hardware. I, as a software engineer am not going to come up with a product that can compete with any of the major players without a massive capital investment.

Meanwhile, the price to play as a software engineer is also driven by high costs. AWS, for better or worse is the model and the go to, and it is NOT cheap by any measure. Its pricing model looks more like the iPhone and less like an efficient market. AWS is MOST of amazons profit margins. It makes tech companies more like franchisee renting the location for their fast food joint and less like independent entities.

The thing is there are TONS of gaps in the software marketplace that need filled. These are companies that are going to be in the 2-3 million a year range and capable of being run by a small team (think ~5 people). Nothing that would appeal to the ycombinator set. You don't need Kubernetes, Kafka, or high performance bleeding edge Rust or massive Autoscaling to run these services. They are never going to get huge, and in fact they offer enough room to start another company of the same scale if one is ambitious and wants to diversify.

Does your average 18 year old know this? No, because most people who write code for a living don't seem to know where these gaps are. Do the math on what it takes to make 100k a year at 10 bucks a month... add a zero for a million, multiply by 3 for "small team"... The number is shockingly small.

Does your average 19 year old have the chops to figure this out? No, because 20 and 30 something laid off software engineers can't seem to figure it out either, even ones with "top degrees".

That doesn't mean that there isn't a path for the sharp young kid to "skip school" and go directly into industry. That path is open source. A history of strong contributions and being smart is going to build a better network than any CS degree ever would/will... However if you can do both, open source and a degree (from anyplace) you're even better off! The same could be said for working at Fedex, Walmart or Costco while you get a cs degree from anyplace and seeking a job in a corporate office after. You have a set of experiences that make you invaluable as a contributor.

Lastly, no one talks about the bad guys. There are plenty of scammers and thieves abusing technical skills who lack formal education and do well for themselves. If we're going to remove all the options and only have a narrow path, will we end up with more criminals and fewer contributors? This is sort of why "Russian hackers" is one of the givens in the industry (crime did/does pay well).

I still think software engineering is a good career choice for a smart kid, but you have to bring more to the table than just code if you want to prosper!

[reactordev]

>It makes tech companies more like franchisee renting the location for their fast food joint and less like independent entities.

AWS, the strip mall of the internet. I’ve been saying this for a while. AWS is nice and all but don’t bet your innovation on a service they provide, rather provide a service on their infrastructure that solves your business needs and if AWS retires the service you were using, you can still continue operating.

Unfortunately this means all roads lead to kubernetes - sorry.

[SaltyBackendGuy]

As a somewhat accomplished self taught outlier as well, my perspective is slightly different.

While it's absolutely possible to no have a degree and succeed in megacorp, don't discount the randomness (luck) involved in getting the right experience and meeting the right people at the right time of your career (and aligning with market demands).

Please don't hear this as "you didn't work hard to get to where you are". I certainly believe that folks like us, self taught, are able to work hard and teach ourselves what's needed to get to the next level because we cannot rely on credentials to carry us. A lot of things still need to go right for us to be successful, more so than folks with formal education, especially in the early stages of our careers.

[harrall]

I know friends in a similar boat.

Ultimately you can get very far if you are naturally talented technically and socially.

But if you are normal like most of us, you are lacking in one or more areas and going to school (or attending conferences or maintaining a popular resource) can be one of those ways to shore up one of your “less natural” skills, but no step is strictly required and not everything works for everyone.

[RHSeeger]

Indeed, going to school for a degree in a programming related field (Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Software Development; whatever) is also much more likely to leave you with a broad knowledge about topics in the field (different algorithms, things worth considering when developing code/architecture, etc). Yes, you can achieve that same level of knowledge with self-study, but a lot of (most) people won't; because it requires going above and beyond for most self-study "curriculum".

"But if you are normal like most of us", you'll wind up a more well rounded developer with a college education.

[coderatlarge]

“The Federal Reserve Bank of New York released data on unemployment rates for recent college graduates (ages 22 to 27). The bank found that philosophy had an unemployment rate of 3.2%, less than computer science’s 6.1%, though computer science was more highly compensated.”

https://www.entrepreneur.com/business-news/college-majors-wi...

[shagie]

Unemployment vs underemployment I believe is the missing item here.

https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:... - this is the source, and has both unemployment and underemployment.

CS has a 6.1% unemployment rate and a 16.5% underemployment rate.

Philosophy has is at 3.2% unemployment and a 41.2% underemployment rate.

The philosophy major doesn't have their sights set on a $150k new grad salary at a big tech company out of college. They're flipping burgers or working as a business person somewhere.

This can be seen on various reddit computer science related career advice spots where people are holding out for the perfect software development job for years rather than getting a job somewhere. They're sending out (poorly crafted) resumes by the hundreds to jobs that their resume gives no indication that they're qualified for (or even read the posting) and ignoring the "we want to hire someone with some work ethic - bagging groceries and having a supervisor who can say that 'yes, Pat shows up on time each day sober'" is something is useful.

They're refusing to consider help desk roles - and when they do apply for those roles, its with a resume that points out how they're skilled at JavaScript and have published a module to npm.

They're refusing to apply to the job at state government that lists $650,000 - $80,000 for entry level position because that's not the job they saw themselves getting.

The CS majors are holding out and not getting jobs that are "beneath" them. The philosophy majors are getting any job that pays the bills.

[ghaff]

I generally agree with your comment though I'm not sure what underemployment in philosophy even looks like. (And I could probably say the same of a lot of liberal arts.) Yes, it's not working at McDonald's But it could mean not making a whole lot more working at a publishing house.

[shagie]

Underemployment is working at a job that doesn't require that degree.

https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:...

> What is your definition of underemployment?

> The definition of underemployment is based on the kinds of jobs held by college graduates. A college graduate working in a job that typically does not require a college degree is considered underemployed. This analysis uses survey data from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Education and Training Questionnaire to help determine whether a bachelor’s degree is required to perform a job. The articles cited above describe the approach in detail.

> Some additional research that utilizes these data include “Working as a Barista After College Is Not as Common as You Might Think” (Liberty Street Economics).

https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2016/01/workin...

[ghaff]

I read it as a little more general than that.

>A college graduate working in a job that typically does not require a college degree is considered underemployed.

So, it's not just about philosophy majors working in a job that doesn't require a philosophy degree but about any college grad working in a job that doesn't require a degree--which according to this thread presumably includes developer jobs but that's a bit of a stretch :-) given that it often requires a degree.

[whoopdedo]

I expect there's some selection bias at play. If you're taking a philosophy major in college it's likely you already feel confident in your post-graduation career, so can study things that you like. Whereas if you're in a CS track it's because whether you get a job depends on getting a degree. The student studying philosophy is in school as an alternative to work. The STEM major is in school as a prerequisite to work.

[brewdad]

Or Philosophy is usually a path to Law School on the professional path or a PhD on the research/academia path. In both cases, many/most of those 22-27 year olds are still in school and thus not counted as unemployed.

[ghaff]

I don't know how true it still is with law being, to a fair degree, perhaps primarily a good career path for those who can land at white-shoe firms and federal court clerkships. But I've known a lot of people who drifted into law school from liberal arts and related because they just didn't have great job prospects. And quite a few didn't even end up practicing law.

[callamdelaney]

Perhaps in the US 20 years ago it was more attainable. Self taught in the UK is pretty tough, I lucked out getting a real engineering job at 19 in London, then I went into contracting which was great money. Now I’m working at a startup which I think has a solid team, but even with a decade+ of experience I’ve never even gotten a call back for roles at Google, Meta or the like.

Did interview with apple once for a low rate contracting role, pretty sure I gave them a superior architecture for their solution in the interview and they took it and ran with it, didn’t hear back.

I’ve had a heavy interest in finance since a young teenager but haven’t really be able to land an interview there either.

I’m genuinely considering getting a degree, I guess at 28 it’s not too late, though I feel I’ve wasted a lot of time.

[sayamqazi]

I have been told by many interviewers of the companies that I have worked for, they would never hire someone without a degree. When I was assigned interview slots, I was instructed to filter out no CS degree people as their fundamentals cant possibly be strong. What they didnt know was I am self-taught and I lied on my resume about CS degree.

[throwaway31131]

In what year did you get your first job as a programmer? I think it was not all that rare in the 80s and 90s for self taught programmers to get decent roles. And once you had more than, say five years, paid experience you were considered equivalent. But I haven’t heard of anyone getting an entry level job as a programmer without a degree recently.

[johnQdeveloper]

Well, the basic issue (in my experience) is that self-taught tends to be written off and ends at the individual contributor senior role level.

> I make north of $200k/year cash plus the equity and perks at an early stage startup. I’ve been through two exits so far. Nothing outrageous but I’m rich by most peoples standards. It doesn’t feel like lack of schooling has impacted me financially.

I know people who have 8 figures and a large part of the reason they went the route they did was their education. These things are just not a one size fits all prescription but I've literally gotten "You have no degree, why are you applying?" e-mails that clearly was them thinking they were chastizing me for wasting their time.

Keep in mind I've been employed this whole time but I don't make north of $200k/year but that is more of a health thing than anything else. I have to be careful and manage my interactions with people because in the US you are 100% unprotected and I learned that the hard way if its not blindingly obvious to everyone you are disabled but rather something you and your doctor discussed if its worth disclosing and the answer was "eh, probably not" despite the fact my European colleagues that I know on a personal level are amazed I have to work at all, let alone without any disability protections.

[dahart]

Your story is an argument that it’s possible (as is the parent comment btw), but it doesn’t demonstrate that it’s likely. We have pretty hard evidence that it’s more difficult to get good jobs without the degree. Not impossible, just more difficult. The number of people without formal degrees occupying good jobs is a minority. Companies often screen for degrees, before you can ever get an interview; credentialism is real. And to parent’s point, some of the best jobs require advanced degrees. Do a little searching for the average pay with and without a degree (the answer shocked me!). Do a little searching for the number of patents filed by people with varying levels of formal education. Poke around for how many senior engineers, managers, and executives get there without formal higher education. There are some, it is possible! But not that likely.

While it might be true that warning someone away from college might be a disservice, it’s also a disservice to not talk about reality and avoid looking at who’s getting the jobs, right? If 90% of the 200k/yr jobs are people with degrees, then what is the practical choice for someone young who wants that and is weighing their options? Instead of telling someone not to go the self-taught route, would you feel more comfortable with telling them you’re roughly ten times more likely to get to $200k/yr mark with a degree than without, but make your own choice?

Personally I suspect the people like you who do best without a degree are often the ones who are going to ignore our advice anyway, and it doesn’t matter if you warn them. People who are super motivated and figure out what to learn and know what they want in life when they’re 18 years old are going to go get it. Most kids aren’t like that, they don’t know what they want yet, and aren’t motivated enough to learn everything they’d get from a 4 years degree on their own. For that majority, it’d be a disservice to recommend anything other than education, no?

[1oooqooq]

> north of $200k/year

and working at startups. you're at the top of the bottom.

that's the beauty of the faith on meritocracy and not sharing salaries.

your privileged, ivy league clone, would have had lazy jobs and made that on the first couple years out of college, while learning the job core skills on company time. honestly can't understand why you chose to minimize your effort.

[rxtexit]

It probably takes the smallest amount of interaction with you to tell you are absolutely brilliant.

I am self taught and wouldn't hire myself to write anything software wise.

For the average person, a degree is to signal a person is at least not me.

At least smart enough to get through 4 years of CS.

If someone is upper level brilliant it is hard to not come out on top no matter what path they take.

That doesn't scale though for the average person and many are self deluded in their abilities.