
Brain Functions That Improve with Age - rmah
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/02/brain_functions_that_improve_w.html
======
kiba
As a 20-something programmer today, I believe that my prime as a programmer
will be when I am in my 50s, because programmers seem to get better as they
solve more problems, becomes more experienced, as well as more knowledgeable.
That will only happen when you're constantly pushing yourself toward new
horizon, though.

Today, silicon valley seems to age discriminate in favor of the young, just
out of college. I think they're missing out.

~~~
swalsh
I get the reasoning, I just don't think it works. By the time you're 50 only a
fraction of your knowledge is still relevant. Sure the fundamentals are the
same, but the tech you're working with is probably fairly new. I've worked
with a few 50+ guys who have been in the business for almost as long as i've
been alive. One of the common traits i've seen is they've learned to not trust
certain levels of abstraction, or techniques. Which is fine, but tech has
progressed, and now many of the original reasons are no longer valid yet
they're still resistant to using them.

The good guys are up to date in the state, they've learned the new features,
they trust them, and they use them.. but staying up to date for 20 years is an
exhausting race.

Personally I hope i'm only writing code as a hobby at 50.

~~~
delinka
I solve problems. My experience in problem solving will never become
irrelevant. It happens that I solve problems with code. With my experience in
problem solving, I can pick up "new tech" quickly-- primarily because there's
really nothing new. Things get smaller and faster; the real technological
advancements are in the physics of storage and processing. The "advances" in
software seem to follow what The Graybeards Of Antiquity dreamed up in the
1960s, now with a slicker, graphically enhanced user interface.

I see so many less experienced software creators going nuts over something
"new" when it's just repackaged from a decade (or three decades) ago. It's
interesting to see reactions when asked "how's that different from Q?" or "but
what about problem J?" and even "ah, that's over here in TAOCP ... you know
Knuth, right?"

EDIT: relevant quote from another headline on HN-- 'Calling a hierarchical
directory a "folder" doesn't change its nature any more than calling a prison
guard a "counselor".'

------
tokenadult
This is a typical blog post, lots of factual assertions with no back-up in
actual cited research studies. As an earlier top-level comment put it,

 _The article doesn't give much information_

so maybe some readers here will appreciate more information. A recent book
that goes into great detail about what the subtest scores of IQ tests show
about what happens to people as they age is Are We Getting Smarter?: Rising IQ
in the Twenty-First Century by James R. Flynn,

<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1107609178/learninfreed>

a scholar who has been researching IQ test raw score trends and what they mean
for more than thirty years. Flynn has discovered that people who were the
brightest (highest in IQ) at younger ages grow old with a pattern of decline
that is more steep for their strongest abilities than people who are nearer
the average in IQ, a phenomenon he calls the "bright tax." Commentary on that
observation

[http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/sep/28/are-we-
getting-s...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/sep/28/are-we-getting-
smarter-review)

<http://www.jasoncollins.org/2012/12/the-bright-tax/>

will get you started in thinking about the issue, but I think any Hacker News
reader interested in research on human intelligence really owes it to himself
or herself to read Flynn's latest book in full, as I finished doing last
weekend.

All of James R. Flynn's books are readable and thought-provoking, full of
information you can't find anywhere else. Here is what the late Arthur Jensen
said about Flynn back in the 1980s: "Now and then I am asked . . . who, in my
opinion, are the most respectable critics of my position on the race-IQ issue?
The name James R. Flynn is by far the first that comes to mind." Modgil, Sohan
& Modgil, Celia (Eds.) (1987) Arthur Jensen: Concensus and Controversy New
York: Falmer. Here's what Charles Murray says in his back cover blurb for
Flynn's book What Is Intelligence?: "This book is a gold mine of pointers to
interesting work, much of which was new to me. All of us who wrestle with the
extraordinarily difficult questions about intelligence that Flynn discusses
are in his debt." As N. J. Mackintosh (IQ and Human Intelligence 1998, p. 104)
writes about the data Flynn found: "the data are surprising, demolish some
long-cherished beliefs, and raise a number of other interesting issues along
the way." Flynn has earned the respect and praise of any honest researcher who
takes time to read the scholarly literature on human intelligence. Robert
Sternberg, Ian Deary, Stephen Pinker, Stephen Ceci, Sir Michael Rutter, and
plenty of other eminent psychologists recommend Flynn's research.

Another comment I can make about this blog post is that right now the Baby
Boom has aged fully into middle age, and is beginning to age into old age, so
the largest population cohort in American history until recently will
increasingly demand attention to the issues of aging. The Baby Boom, because
it is a numerous population cohort, has much influence on United States
society, and that's why "classic rock" has never ceased to have radio airplay
since that genre of music was first released as top 40 hits. Since millions of
Americans are aging, but still think of themselves as young people belonging
to a generation of young people, we can expect more blog posts and other
popular writings on the topic of changes in individual intelligence in the
aging process, and we may as well read sound research on the topic. Another
good popular book with a lot of information on human intelligence over the
course of the lifespan is IQ Testing 101 by Alan S. Kaufman.

[http://www.amazon.com/IQ-
Testing-101-Psych/dp/0826106293/lea...](http://www.amazon.com/IQ-
Testing-101-Psych/dp/0826106293/learninfreed)

~~~
epo
And your post reads like a by-the-numbers homework answer or someone who is
plugging Flynn's book. Merely citing references doesn't give you a coherent
argument.

IQ is meaningless as a predictor of effectiveness in life. Practical
intelligence relates to all sorts of attributes, of which I think the most
important is experience (or possibly the ability to just get down and work).
IQ is an abstract measure of problem solving ability, valued only by people
who think they have a high number to brag about. Experience and age confers
judgement, this helps you know which are the right problems to solve and how
to solve those problems effectively.

~~~
sesqu
While I get where you're coming from, I don't think you've come very far. IQ
is not meaningless as a predictor at all - it correlates with income, and
income correlates with some measures of impact.

Stating that the rate of IQ change is associated with the measured IQ is very
relevant to the topic of brain functions and age, though not directly to
improvement with age. That said, I too found the aside on Flynn's reputation
to be distracting.

------
adventured
I always think of it a bit like the arc of Michael Jordan's career. At 23 he
could fly and was very fast, but he couldn't shoot very well, and his game was
unpolished. At 33 he was far wiser, understood the game a lot better, needed
to exert less energy to accomplish as much or more, and he could shoot far
better and had developed a lot of useful moves to get off a shot.

I feel like our mental capabilities follow an arc of that sorts.

~~~
anon1685
I believe it's the same in every field of work. Even working in the garden or
doing some fixing around the house. I'm now approaching 40 and find myself
much more physically able than I was 10 years ago, mainly because I'm more
patient and know better how to use my body.

------
wslh
The article doesn't give much information although I believe (believe, not
know) that our brain deals with middle age in a smart way.

What is interesting to me is that one factor of brain ageing is the way our
society is organized: we can't spend a lot of time learning after the
university or when we don't have a lot of time to write code obsessively.

------
AndrewKemendo
As with all heuristic building there are benefits and drawbacks, but my main
criterion for judgement is: Are these heuristics going to help you get better
in the future?

In general I find the answer is no, for the same reasons the author points
out: Slower to adapt to a new environment. With faster rates of technology
adoption older brains will be left in the dust as we start to capture their
long term heuristics into models of social behavior that we can integrate into
our decision models through our new technologies.

------
thelogos
I have to agree that self-control does dramatically improve with age for most
people.

From what I've seen, my own father and grandfather is still sharp as a razor,
easily faster than most guys my age and far wiser.

For now, eat a few kg of blueberries everyday and take some alpha lipoic acid.
Also, donate to anti-aging research if you have the money.

~~~
huggah
A few _kg_ of blueberries a day? All my food for one day together weighs less
than that. Did you mean grams? That seems low, but kg/week is still way too
high.

~~~
zxcdw
Blueberries consist mostly of water(proteins, carbs and fat make total of 7.5
grams per 100 grams, more or less rest is water), so they aren't very rich in
calories(44 kcal per 100 grams). Of course all sorts of berries would rather
be an supplement than a primary energy source in the first place.

But indeed, kilograms per day? Sounds too much to be optimal, and relevancy
for aging or combating it from perspective of brain development is totally
left out, which makes the whole claim even more astounding. Sources or gtfo!
:)

~~~
to3m
It's quite easy to eat a lot of berries in one go - I can manage 454g of
strawberries in a sitting, no problem - but I still think more than kilo or
two of blueberries would be a tall order.

Besides, think of the cost! Here are some US prices, as best I can tell.
Anywhere from $20/72oz - i.e., $9.80/kg!

[http://marketnews.usda.gov/portal/fv;jsessionid=PU352BENXFFU...](http://marketnews.usda.gov/portal/fv;jsessionid=PU352BENXFFUSCQKAFOSFEQ?paf_dm=full&paf_gear_id=1200002&startIndex=1&dr=1&rowDisplayMax=25&repType=termPriceDaily&dr=1&locName=&commAbr=BLUBY&commName=BLUEBERRIES)

------
NoodleIncident
I was particularly struck by this line:

"Younger brains, predictably, are set up to focus on the negative and
potential trouble."

Could this have some relevance on the excessive negativity HN comments have
been accused of recently? What are the age demographics of this site's most
active users?

------
hsshah
In one word: Experience

I see some correlation with what Malcolm Gladwell talked about in his book
'Blink'.

The article is weak in citing facts/research though. (May be I should read the
author's book which I imagine was the intent for the post!).

------
Toshio
That's interesting, but does the software industry agree or disagree?

~~~
kiba
Does it matter if the software industry agree or not? Reality decides if older
people are better programmers.

------
insulin8
Lol... Whatever makes you sleep better at night, you old farts.

~~~
rasur
Better an old fart than a young shit, eh? ;)

