I don't think it is quite Ageism exactly. I think it is the nature of the interview. Most interviews consist of coding exercises and if you can do them fast and accurately in your head, you look like a genius. Younger guys can blaze through this stuff and make it look like a piece of cake. Older guys just take longer and they look like they don't know what they're doing. I could swear that I answered all these questions in interviews correctly before. But now as I am seeing them again, it is taking me longer to solve them as I am getting older.

I also wonder about crystallized vs fluid intelligence. I think older guys have a harder time thinking outside the box than younger people. Lots of interview questions tend toward this kind of thinking.

I agree. Salary.com has some breakdowns by degree by job title
http://swz.salary.com/salarywi...
http://swz.salary.com/salarywi...

Indeed.com resume section tells a different story for new york city and silicon valley if you look at the filters on the left.
http://www.indeed.com/resumes/...
http://www.indeed.com/resumes/...
He based the statistic from a self-reported stackoverflow survey. The survey itself says 38% of the people self-identified as professional programmers, 46% as other, and 16% as unknown. So it looks like most non-professionals on the survey don't have a degree.

Why did the original incorrect post get score 5, but the corrections only get 2?

As was stated, the CLT states that the average of many tests will be approximately normally distributed. Imagine someone producing a positive result in a paper. Then imagine we have 99 other people replicate exactly the same experiment. Each experiment will give us an average result, for a total of 100 averages from 100 experiments. It is this set of averages that is normally distributed.

This makes no assumption on the distribution of the sample itself. Sampling distribution does not need to be normally distributed. It only requires that the samples be independent and identically distributed.

Now, in reality, we only perform experiment and make our conclusions from that. In frequentist statistics (the type that you most likely learned), we use our single experiment to infer the other 99 experiments. Here, it is important that we pick the correct statistical test since different tests make different assumptions. The basic t-test does have a normality, homoskedasitic, and independence assumption and are usually correct because of the Law of Large numbers. But these assumptions are be tested for and, if not met, the scientist/statistician will choose different statistical test instead.

Just to finish the review: Now that we inferred the entire universe of possible results, we assume the Null Hypothesis: Our treatment in the experiment did nothing (treatment group vs control), or the two groups are identical (blacks/whites or rich/poor). Due to sampling, the average of each group will vary every time we perform the experiment. The statistical test measures how often will we see our particular result in relation to the entire universe of possible results, again assuming that there no treatment effect. If (assuming no effect) we rarely see our result or results more extreme/larger/further apart, then we have evidence that the treatment was the cause for the difference, and not random chance.

To explain the paper: The authors used a different type of statistics called Bayesian Statistics to derive their results. This branch of statistics is philosophically different, though they have developed analogs of all the popular frequentist statistical tests. New results in Bayesian Statistics allow for direct comparison of the two branches of statistics and the authors have concluded a p=0.05 in frequentist statistics results in a 3.47 Bayes Factor in Bayesian Statistics. Bayes Factor is the ratio of the probability of seeing the data in this experiment assuming that the treatment DID have an effect vs. the probability of seeing the data assuming the treatment DID NOT have an effect. (Note: we are not looking at the entire universe of possible results, using only our single result) In other words, given the chances of seeing two heads in a row, we are saying that there is a treatment effect vs no treatment effect.

The strange terms look to be consistent and repeated over all the questions. I'm guessing they follow a text book that was used for the class. The test seems to be taken out of context. However, I'd like to know the distribution of grades and how these questions performed across more students. Until then, I'll start trusting a test created by dozen of professional educators than trust a single parent with a child that scored poorly.

Everyone else has already commented about writing clean code and that everyone always has lots of bugs, good developer or not. Bug free code is a team effort.

However, I'm wondering about the 100k price range. In general, as in life, you usually get what you pay for. But, if you happen to find someone good in your price range, they will likely change jobs as soon as they find something better.

But I see a few ways to save money. Your best bet is to move away from SF, NYC, Boston, Seattle, or any other major city. You can also consider recent college grads. Though they may not have lots of experience, you can possibly find a true hack0r that spends all their free time doing coding for fun and has learned lots of languages and tools. Also consider H-1B workers. They usually have lower salaries. (You can also go for the trifecta, recently graduated international student in a small college town)

However, given that you keep hiring poor contractors, you should carefully examine your interview process before hiring a full time employee.

Having an isolationalist policy of keeping people out is a bad idea and a great way to end up on the losing end of foreign policy. All the instances of unfortunate foreign students are not the norm and the good students far outnumber the bad. There are certainly instances of local students taking advantage of foreign students as well. As we all know, the US has never been an isolationist country and has become awesome because of it.

On a different note: I think having too many smart people in this country is a good problem to have. They'll figure out something smart to do. And it causes a real Brain drain in many foreign countries.

In addition to asking here, try searching the job boards for your ideal job and see what most jobs are asking for. When it comes to technologies, the job requirements are usually high reaching and encompass more than they actually require, but I think it is more accurate when it comes to the degree. My general feeling is that sysadmins don't need a B.S. Software Engineers usually need one.

Obviously, you might get a job without a degree or be unemployed with a degree. However, what maximizes your opportunities? I would say a degree. However, also consider what school you are going to. You might want to look at job placement rates for the schools you are looking at and how much it will cost.

And while working and getting a degree seems the best of both worlds (either working or school full time), it is a lot of work if you want to excel at both at the same time.

Did you guys READ the article? It's important to remember what the article points out very clearly. Correlation doesn't imply causation. Without a controlled randomized test, it is very difficult to determine causation. While intriguing, this survey doesn't say _anything_ about whether P2P is good or bad for the industry.

Secondly, it is likely that some people surveyed lied about their answer. However, it is also possible that the survey was constructed to minimize lying with standard survey techniques. Unfortunately, the article doesn't go into detail about how the survey was performed.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Within a research group (academic or industry) the researcher positions are very competitive. A PhD doesn't guarantee a job. A PhD is required for a job.

However, without the PhD, there are still staff engineering roles. Engineering-wise, it'll be mostly the same stuff you are working on now, maybe even simpler. But the domain will be more difficult, fun, and interesting. Of course an MS will help make your resume stand out over BS candidates. But, it is more valuable here than in the business world since PhDs value education more.

However, an MS generally not required for a staff engineering role. I don't see a reason not to apply for both jobs and schools at the same time. The applications are due in November/December and you still have plenty of time research schools and to get recommendations (get started early). Schools recognize that you don't know your professors anymore and recommendations for MS programs from your boss work fine. After going back to school or working as a staff engineer for a few years (or both), you'll be able to make a more informed decision about a PhD. Hopefully you will get your name on some papers and better recommendations from PhD boss or professors. Then, you'll have a more competitive PhD application, get accepted into a better school, and have a better chance to beat the PhD rat race.

BTW, just like business applications, research applications can get boring after a while too. You probably don't get paid as well either.