(Please excuse my self-promotion.)

Increasingly I have come to believe that managers learned to represent their tech companies as “startups” in order to justify disorganization and less than stellar salaries.

“If it were not so frightening it would be amusing to observe the pride and complacency with which we, like children, take apart the watch, pull out the spring and make a toy of it, and are then surprised when the watch stops working.”

Having a well written commit history is in the spirit of the tool and is the more professional approach.

At the end of undergrad finance/economics studies I recognized I needed more technical expertise, so I went to a grad program and learned as much as I could about econometrics. I thought this would eventually position me as a consultant/data scientist.

As I studied, I realized programming was my favorite part of the work.

I used these skills in a few different roles. A couple years later a friend/mentor suggested that I just consider becoming a software engineer.

I never pictured myself in a pure tech role. It worked out better than I would have guessed.

My suggestion is that an engineering role is not as far away as you imagine. You have time to make a career in it, so you should reflect on if you’d enjoy it.

The people who would be disqualified from investing by these increased restrictions are shrewd enough to not need such protection.

I suspect that prices could still increase even in spite of public funding decreases due to the point in my original post.

But to me, all of these side effects can be thought of as fruit from a poisonous tree, and thus unjustified.

And the government was perfectly capable of bailing out private companies at the end of Bush Jr’s second term.