Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 146 posts

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#41

Post by seanmcdirmid »

EpicEng wrote: post #11

> > The truth is that programming isn't a passion or a talent, it is just a bunch of skills that can be learned. This may be true if your definition of programming is the literal act of writing code / recalling syntax, and learning new tools. Of course, that's not really what programming is. That's the easy part. Programming is about problem solving, code is simply the tool. Critical thinking/problem solving ability,…

There are two meanings of learn that are at odds here. One is to be taught something, which I think many of us agree isn’t sufficient for programming. The other is to acquire the skill via lots of practice, which is much more appropriate in the context of programming.

Ones ability to program is directly related to ones tenacity to practice programming.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#42

Post by jasode »

The 2 sides debating "talent" are always talking about 2 different things.

(#1) "talent" doesn't exist: knowledge and skills can be learned. No infant comes out of the womb knowing 5 languages or physics equations or the syntax of "printf("hello world")". Every single human who knows how to do something well at one point in their life did not know how to do it well. If one can improve by learning, it means talent doesn't exist. This aligns with Carol Dweck's "growth mindset", the 10000 hours meme, self-improvement, etc. This internal perspective compares oneself at time_before vs time_after.

(#2) "talent" is a subjective ranking of people's abilities: there are people who are noticeably better at expressing their skills. E.g. NBA basketball player Shaq O'Neal has spent more than 10,000 hours practicing free throws with a dozen different coaches to achieve 52% success, but there's a high school kid that can sink them at 80%. We can say the kid is "more talented" at free throws. To say that "free throws" is a "learnable skill" doesn't change anything about noticing the obvious difference in abilities. If Person A learns faster than Person B, that in itself is a talent. This external perspective compares people against other people.

People who hold meaning #1 vs people thinking of meaning #2 are having 2 different conversations. E.g. when companies say "they are looking to hire the most talented" (meaning #2), they are not talking about people who can self-improve (meaning #1).

In this essay, Jacob Kaplan-Moss is talking about meaning #1. Yes, you can read it and take all his advice to heart. However, you still have to understand meaning #2 to properly decode what others are talking about when sports teams, music record labels, Hollywood, venture capitalists, and startups all say they are "looking for the best talent".

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#43

Post by galieos_ghost »

EpicEng wrote: post #11

> > The truth is that programming isn't a passion or a talent, it is just a bunch of skills that can be learned. This may be true if your definition of programming is the literal act of writing code / recalling syntax, and learning new tools. Of course, that's not really what programming is. That's the easy part. Programming is about problem solving, code is simply the tool. Critical thinking/problem solving ability,…

Saying there isn't talent involved in programming is like saying talent is involved in sports or guitar or painting. Sure anyone can improve but some people just have a natural aptitude.

When I was an athlete in high school and college there were people who barely trained and ate whatever they wanted and were far better than people who worked their ass off and counted every calorie.

Programming is much the same. I've had lots of people want me to help them learn, some people are naturals and will make more progress in a few days than most people do in weeks or months.

I'm not sure why people get so defensive about it, nobody cares if you say someone short can't make it in the NBA, but say it about programming or some other mental endeavor people get upset.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#44

Post by toasterlovin »

adam-a wrote: post #25

I think this is absolutely spot on. So many people put their programming expertise or productivity down to some innate quality (that is apparently overabundant in white men). To me it seems nearly every one of those rockstar ninjas has also spent an enormous amount of time learning their trade - usually a lot of time outside of formal school or a 9-5 job. I think if there's one skill that might be innate and that hel…

Yeah, but people also tend to spend time on things they're good at. Is programming solely about innate skill? No, of course not. There's a reason why the distinction between senior and junior developers exists. But are you going to put the time in necessary to develop into a senior developer if programming feels like mental torture?

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#45

Post by s73v3r_ »

vinceguidry wrote: post #6
itamarst wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, employers will start taking the long view and actually start investing in their employees.

That's not an investment, that's giving your money away. Would you spend $X0,000 on something that can walk out the door at any moment?

Considering the main reason most people walk out the door is because of a lack of investment, maybe they should.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#46

Post by HillaryBriss »

vinceguidry wrote: post #22
sidlls wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you ever consider that the employee might be a smidge less likely to walk out the door if the employer invested in him or her, recognized his or her achievements in a timely manner with responsibility and authority (promotion) and compensated him or her fairly? Seems to me employees "are likely to walk out the door" mainly because employers view them as expendible expenses and not humans trading labor for somethi…

Sure, but that still doesn't make it an investment, it just makes it a less risky bet. And betting on people being high-minded over being selfish has always been a bad one.

all investments carry risks.

e.g. if a company invests in a building for their office, there's always a risk that building will incur excessive maintenance expenses, become unusable because of some calamity, or that the location around the building will become a bad neighborhood and make that building a lot less useful.

i think a company can invest in, say, teaching their employees a valuable skill and then make money off that investment, even if the employee leaves eventually.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#47

Post by neogodless »

vinceguidry wrote: post #2

While on the surface of it, sure, programming is a skill and not an innate talent, it would be foolish to compare it to other career fields in that way. You can go to school to learn how to be an architect, then go and get a job as an architect and be immediately productive. You can go to school to learn how to lay bricks, then go to a job site and immediately start building something. You cannot go to school to lear…

Being able to switch from a table saw to a miter saw isn't talent.

It's learning how to separate alike from different, using what you know to use something different. It's also realizing that languages vary, but you can learn the underlying concepts and apply them.

Being able to take general programming knowledge and apply it to multiple languages and projects is something you learn.

Talent may help you to learn the concepts and be more versatile, but that doesn't take away from the article's message of the typical distribution curve. This focus on "general programming skills" is fine, but lets not pretend it's "talent", because that's the whole myth!

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#49

Post by d0lph »

I don't want to be mean but it looks like programming is both:

Talent:

1. natural aptitude or skill.

Passion:

2. strong and barely controllable emotion.

...

* an intense desire or enthusiasm for something.

...

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#50

Post by neogodless »

adam-a wrote: post #25

I think this is absolutely spot on. So many people put their programming expertise or productivity down to some innate quality (that is apparently overabundant in white men). To me it seems nearly every one of those rockstar ninjas has also spent an enormous amount of time learning their trade - usually a lot of time outside of formal school or a 9-5 job. I think if there's one skill that might be innate and that hel…

I agree with you, but even patience can be learned! (You can train it, practice it yourself, and improve your ability to persevere.)
Post reply on HN