[cgshaw]

Much of this has to do with the systemic aging of our elected officials.

Look at the federal level, where the average age of a Rep is 59 and Sen is 63. These are folks who not only don't empathize with modern technology, they've got established connections to big industries that are threatened by innovation.

I'm not meaning to come off like a ideologue, it's just economics and incentives. Until younger folks get more involved, it likely won't improve much. (like SOPA/PIPA, but more consistent in advocacy and running for office).

Clinton ran for congress in his 20's, lost, but was elected Governor in his early 30's. Joe Biden was a U.S. Senator at the age of 30. People in their late 20's and early 30's just aren't positioned to run for office in our generation. Debt, schooling, careers, etc prevent many from being able to do it, even if they wanted to.

[tptacek]

It's interesting how ageism is repellent when we're discussing development jobs, but natural when we talk about politics. There are in fact many 60 year old developers. They were in the primes of their careers in the 80s. They're probably better than you at assembly language.

Perhaps a better line to draw is between lawyers and other kinds of professionals, lawyers being overrepresented in Congress. But the track record of nonlawyers (doctors, for instance) in Congress isn't all that great either.

[mratzloff]

A 60-year-old software developer is still a software developer. In the general population, older people are less technically savvy than younger people (on average). Most politicians are not software developers, therefore it stands to reason that politicians tend not to be technically savvy.

[mechanical_fish]

In the general population, older people are less technically savvy than younger people (on average).

[Citation needed.]

[mratzloff]

Hacker News at its most pedantic.

http://readwrite.com/2011/08/02/older_people_not_using_smart...

[nostromo]

Sounds like a good theory, but I'm not sure the data backs you up. Obama is the 5th youngest president at 47. Clinton was the 3rd at 46.

Take a look at the average age of...

Republican congressmen in 1949: 54.9

Republican congressmen in 2011: 54.9

Democratic congressmen in 1949: 50.4

Democratic congressmen in 2011: 60.2

The democrats have gotten older, but not by much more than the general population. The senate has gotten older, but not dramatically so.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-CONGRE...

[cgshaw]

Great data, thanks for sharing.

I think one of the "problems" is that innovation is actually picking up speed dramatically. So even if the politicians aren't older, they are more likely to be removed from relevant business and innovation cycles and also more beholden to entrenched businesses.

Average term length has continued to rise as well. (see http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41545.pdf page 6)

In 1949, a Senator on average served just 1 term (6 years), and a Representative served 3 terms (6 years).

Now, in 2013, a Senator serves nearly two terms (12 years), and a Representative serves nearly 5 terms (10 years).

[saraid216]

I am honestly a little shocked that the two numbers for Republicans are identical to 3 significant digits.

Also, your numbers are for House Representatives, not congressmen.

[nostromo]

I'm not trying to be overly pedantic, but I was curious if I was misusing the term. Wikipedia says that in the US, "the term Member of Congress applies to members of both houses, the terms Congressman and Congresswoman usually refer only to members of the House of Representatives."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_of_Congress

[saraid216]

I have heard that, but I've never really noticed it. Your usage is probably more correct.

[VladRussian2]

>I am honestly a little shocked that the two numbers for Republicans are identical to 3 significant digits.

drives home meaning of "conservatism" :)

[cgshaw]

Put another way, people like Zuckerberg, Chesky, Houston, etc. are having an amazing impact in business, but there isn't anyone close in the political world.

Sadly, even if "veterans" like Dorsey, Page, Brin were to run for federal office, they would be amongst the youngest to serve.

[_delirium]

There is no world in which someone who first started a web company in the late 1990s is a "veteran", though, not even in tech. JWZ is more of a veteran than Sergey Brin is.

Even if you arbitrarily want to restrict your scope to Googlers: Peter Norvig, Rob Pike, and Ken Thompson are decent examples of veteran technologists who've seen a few changes of both technical and business environments, and have some basis for comparison. Brin, Zuckerberg, and Page don't really have that kind of experience.

[temphn]

This is a bit comical. Brin, Zuckerberg, and Page don't have the "experience" that JWZ does? I think your statement can only hold if you define "veteran" on the basis of sheer age. I think JWZ would be the first to tell you that he has less experience with different "technical and business environments" than Larry Page, who has run Google Search, Mail, Maps, Android, Chrome, etc. since founding the company 15 years ago...

[cgshaw]

That's why I used the quotes.

I was more or less trying to draw the distinction that in some fields, sports, entertainment, and at least some technology enterprises youth wins out. Recently it was determined that by industry, technology is one of the "youngest" industries with an average ago of 30. That puts tech close to retail and food service.

I think it was Forbes, I can't find the link though.