Then the comment above was ambiguous at best. The tone of the parent's post was definitely criticizing the trend of people going into farming.
"Farming is no way to make a living... I come from a farming community and family and for decades farming has only been affordable if you also had another full-time job."
Here's another way of thinking of it.
"Tech is no way to make a living. I'm glad that these people are finding success, but I come from a sysadmin community and family and for decades tech has only been affordable if you also had another full-time job. Although software dev for trendy websites might not be so bad."
Tech is broad. Even though tech support and sysadmins are doing poorly, other facets of tech are doing fine, making the phrase "Tech is no way to make a living" inaccurate. Just like saying "Farming is no way to make a living" can be inaccurate if there are still parts of the market largely profitable.
"Farming is no way to make a living... I come from a farming community and family and for decades farming has only been affordable if you also had another full-time job."
Here's another way of thinking of it.
"Tech is no way to make a living. I'm glad that these people are finding success, but I come from a sysadmin community and family and for decades tech has only been affordable if you also had another full-time job. Although software dev for trendy websites might not be so bad."
Tech is broad. Even though tech support and sysadmins are doing poorly, other facets of tech are doing fine, making the phrase "Tech is no way to make a living" inaccurate. Just like saying "Farming is no way to make a living" can be inaccurate if there are still parts of the market largely profitable.