I don't think that's really the case, but I do think it's common for good software engineers to move into other job titles (whether it's "founder" or "management" or "architect" or "software consultant" or a deep specialization in a particular subfield of software like security, deep learning, data science, data mining, compilers, databases, graphics, etc.) where they can avoid the salary cap. There's an adverse selection effect on those that don't; employers are likely to ask to themselves "Why are you still making $150K/year as an employee rather than $500K/year as a consultant, $2M/year as a deep learning specialist, or have retired as a founder? Did you never develop any sort of deep expertise worth paying you for in your 8 years as a software engineer?"
People going into software should plan accordingly. You get great wages to start, but you need to save some of those for a potentially risky mid-career transition where you specialize in a particular subfield.
That is only true in the HN bubble of SV. No one would bat an eye at someone only making $150K in almost any major city in the US outside of the west coast and NYC.
It's not the latter. Additional years don't matter as much past 10 or so... you're kind of doing the same types of things over and over as history repeats itself.
>you're kind of doing the same types of things over and over
Well this would be the root of the problem right here, not "experience doesn't matter after 10 years." That's nonsense. Experienced people with in-depth, cross-functional knowledge obtained from several, 5-8yr "sub careers" in various specialties can be worth their weight in gold.
