What struck me was sitting in a library surfing the web. I'd much rather sit in the library and read books. If his description of the days being so long an boring and lonely for the homeless, does it make sense to start a program to read to them for a couple of hours a day. It won't be boring and it could be educational.
Unlikely.
Have you ever been seriously ill, and nothing that doctors seem to do is working? Have you been in a super shitty situation with massive amounts on uncertainty surrounding it?
The problem is people are so eager, and their energies are so much more spent in worry and anxiousness that stuff like 'book reading project' will be least of their priorities. All the time its like- Will this cure help? Can I get a job here? Can I move to somewhere cheaper?
From his perspective the priorities would have been, finding information or some lead or a job posting that can get him his next meal, a place to live, a long term solution to his problems.
A book reading project? People can't focus on reading a news paper correctly when are tensed and anxious. Such things are for the time of peace.
But I love reading, so there's that :)
Because you see in 2001 software and the internet looked like a "declining industry" as you put it. The dot-com bust made the idea that software would revolutionize the world look like so much idiocy.
Anyone who took Gates' advice is doing VERY well right now. But there was loads of skepticism in that audience, and lots of questions about offshoring.
My point is, it is incredibly hard to tell what will be a "declining industry" even five years forward. There's no way this guy would have known that television writing would get nuked by reality television.
Also, I hope people who read your comment don't make the mistake of thinking they can necessarily avoid this sort of misfortune simply by being smart enough.
So many students reasoned the exact opposite, though, and avoided CS because of the recent bubble.
I'd have pursued CS whatever the economy, though. I'm just lucky my take was right and my timing was lucky.
quite honestly anyone who takes two years off when their career is at peak potential shouldn't be surprised at anything career-wise that happens from that point forward. all bets are off when you just check the f out for 2 years.
how many successful people could take 2 years off from their work and expect things to be fine when they come back? this line of (non-) reasoning is sheer lunacy.
Let alone taking a 2 year break. If you are not having side projects which you work after office hours, late night and weekends.
If you are not learning quickly, adapting or improving your skills fast enough. You are setting yourself up for disaster.
go ahead, give yourself a 2 year break.
In other words, the fact that these once huge industries were rapidly declining is a great argument for an increased social safety net.
We aren't talking about buggy whips here. There are jobs in that industry. Who do you think are getting those jobs? People who are stupid and lazy?
Of course a rising tide floats all boats. And of course it would have been better if he was an in demand programmer in SF. But most people aren't. And this is something they do need to deal with.
People who are young and cheap. It says so right in the article.
It's just that, when you're taking moonshots, you should expect to miss most of the time. When you're tired of failing, you can go back to school, or start in a new career field. The gaps in your resume are there, but they're forgivable. You were hungry and foolish then, but you're ready to eat and learn now.
As others have noted, those gaps hurt a lot more when they appear later on. It's not fair, but it's just the way it is, unfortunately. Even if you were on your way to 20 years of employment at your stable dream job, layoffs can happen. Shit can happen. Count on it.