201–210 of 477 posts
Hung out with a brilliant heart surgeon, genius. I asked him about what cartoons he watched growing up. He said "what's a cartoon?" He was dead serious. Parents would never let him not study. Never. 100+ hour weeks. Zero time for anything else. He was happy, rich, had it all. But wondering if he every found time to watch a cartoon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's impossible. Just like you can't force a gay man to be more interested in women and you can't force an asocial nerd to enjoy loud parties, you just can't force most people to enjoy math. EDIT: changed an example to be more specific and precise.
There are a lot of people for whom "math" means just the algorithmic computation drudgery they teach you to vomit out on exams by pouring it down a funnel into you in an ordinary American high school or UK A-levels math course. Doing a similar (or even the same) calculation a bunch of times to get the same result is, in short, boring, no matter how you dress it up. If prior to college everyone learned how to visualiz…
But clearly most homosexual men just don't like women no matter how attractive they are. Is it so hard to believe that some people see math in a similar way?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is everybody so binary about this? Are we really suggesting that some individuals are not capable of intellectual tasks at a greater capacity, or a greater speed than others? If you understand that a human being has a higher cognitive function than a sea slug, a wasp, a mouse, a dog, a dolphin, an ape, by our genetics alone, then you have to accept that there is a degree of genetic variance between individual hum…
"Genetics" is the new God. Apparently people assign whatever they don't know or understand to genetics. Can't play football? That's genetics!! Knows math? More genetics!! Are actually there studies that claim a special ability is due to genetics only?
Of course there are, like tetrachromacy [1]. Or even more mundane: XY chromosomes prevent men from having the ability to give birth.
I also think you're vastly underappreciating the results from genetic studies. Twin studies have repeatedly shown that identical twins separated at birth and growing up in wildly differing conditions, still largely end up with similar temperaments, similar world views, and similar intelligence.
Interesting read, but I have one major qualm about this. There seems to be a confirmatory bias among the academic community that a measure of intellectual success can be found in the percentage of individuals who earn a PhD. Sure, it's true that you need to be reasonably smart to earn a PhD, but I think that someone can have a lot of intellectual success (potentially just as much or maybe more) if they don't earn a P…
a STEM PHD is anything but 'easy' - it requires an original contribution of research, for one , and it must be defended and published
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm 24. My goal is to be one of the most influential video game designers of this century. I may not be considered the absolute greatest (rankings like that are very fickle anyway, and never universally agreed upon, even in the sciences). But I do want my works to be considered necessary for any future survey of the major works of this period.
Well... you talk about video games as if they are a high art. You might be in for more than one wake up call in the near future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm 24. My goal is to be one of the most influential video game designers of this century. I may not be considered the absolute greatest (rankings like that are very fickle anyway, and never universally agreed upon, even in the sciences). But I do want my works to be considered necessary for any future survey of the major works of this period.
Well... you talk about video games as if they are a high art. You might be in for more than one wake up call in the near future.
I just knew these comments would fill up with humblebrags from HNers who wish to casually and inoffensively proclaim their genius.
Also, you might do well to assume that a large majority of the people here that you are trying to put down also tested in top percentages in school tests. The audience of YC and HN is self-selected nerds.
Interesting read, but I have one major qualm about this. There seems to be a confirmatory bias among the academic community that a measure of intellectual success can be found in the percentage of individuals who earn a PhD. Sure, it's true that you need to be reasonably smart to earn a PhD, but I think that someone can have a lot of intellectual success (potentially just as much or maybe more) if they don't earn a P…
Knowing a few friends and other acquaintances with PhDs, all they have common is endurance and focus. They were not exceptionally creative, or apparently breathtakingly genius. And I guess that's why Google et al. likes to hire PhDs. They can take all kinds of shit, and endure. Get to the bottom of those problems even in the face of internal politics/bureaucracy.
> Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert performance is built mainly through practice—that anyone can get to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. Actually the claim is the other way around - that the people at the top got there through focused effort of the right kind. Finding "gifted" children does not contradict this. Nobody pops out of the womb a math genius. Gifted…
in reality, inherent talent clearly plays a very strong role. As a crude illustration, suppose
math_skill = hours_worked * beta, and assume the "quality" of hours_worked is standardized. While beta is positive for most people, beta could vary a lot based on talent (obviously the function is not linear and may also peak / approach an asymptote. or for some people the function increases more slowly but reaches a higher peak. point is that it's complex).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Knowing a few friends and other acquaintances with PhDs, all they have common is endurance and focus. They were not exceptionally creative, or apparently breathtakingly genius. And I guess that's why Google et al. likes to hire PhDs. They can take all kinds of shit, and endure. Get to the bottom of those problems even in the face of internal politics/bureaucracy.
This reminds me of the old joke that PhD stands for "Pile it on Higher and Deeper".