Live data from Hacker News

The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

paulgraham.com

271–280 of 500 posts

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#271
post #72

Competitive gaming is a particularly good example of this. I followed most of the rise of Dota from trashy Warcraft 3 mod to Valve's multi-million-dollar-prize-pool juggernaut. The first few crops of Dota millionaires all had the same backstory: "I played this game 14 hours a day. If there were tournaments at all they didn't really pay anything. My parents said I was wasting my life. I never had a girlfriend. Everyon…

> Competitive gaming is a particularly good example of this. Anything competitive is emphatically not a good example of this. If you're in a competition, then by definition you're doing the exact same thing as everyone else. That's a guaranteed recipe for not accomplishing anything meaningful in life. Competition can be great for cultivating positive character traits and developing certain skills, but at some point y…

Trying to prove the Riemann hypothesis is doing the same thing like everyone else. Competition might actually force you to come up with a different approach.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#272

This is very close to some of my own observations about talent. Whenever I've had the info to compare, I tend to find a different degree of skill among coders who started as teens compared to those who came to it later. I put it down to interest. Obsessive teens end up spending huge amounts of time learning things. Teenagers know very little about what makes money, at least when I was a kid. The cat may well be out o…

>On a related note, the disinterested interest thing is why I've never met a talented professional. By that, I mean the classic suit-and-tie professionals. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, bankers. I've met plenty of competent ones, but never that special one who seems to be especially knowledgeable or passionate.

Alternative theory: the geniuses that go into those professions tend to be extremely successful, and so you don't end up meeting them.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#273
post #72

Competitive gaming is a particularly good example of this. I followed most of the rise of Dota from trashy Warcraft 3 mod to Valve's multi-million-dollar-prize-pool juggernaut. The first few crops of Dota millionaires all had the same backstory: "I played this game 14 hours a day. If there were tournaments at all they didn't really pay anything. My parents said I was wasting my life. I never had a girlfriend. Everyon…

> Competitive gaming is a particularly good example of this. Anything competitive is emphatically not a good example of this. If you're in a competition, then by definition you're doing the exact same thing as everyone else. That's a guaranteed recipe for not accomplishing anything meaningful in life. Competition can be great for cultivating positive character traits and developing certain skills, but at some point y…

What in life is not a competition?

What the above comment is about applies to so much in life, from education to careers because at their core, they are competitions.

> If you're in a competition, the. By definition you're doing the exact same thing as everyone else.

Not true.

There are people who play competitive, ranked, games 3 hrs a week and are happy with being in the top 50% of players

And there are people who spend 30hrs a week in a game and are profoundly unhappy they're only in the top 5% of players.

Those wind up being two very different paths, and it applies to way more than just gaming, like education, which I can speak from experience to that

From a young age I would spend hours upon hours on computers working on my games and random ideas. Even in school I would skip classes to work on my own projects in a computer lab.

My parents felt it was a complete waste of time (especially since it became a huge drain on my performance at school). I didn't have nearly as many close friends as I should have, didn't form a lot of the bonds people growing up do, it ruined my relationship with my parents.

At the end of the day through luck or something I scraped through high school with a .1 above failing GPA, dropped out of community college after failing 2 semesters and started a career in tech by freelancing.

Now 5 years later and the positions I've taken are consistently higher seniority than my friends who did CS in college, so it worked out, but at what cost?

Those years I lost, not even talking to one of my parents for over a year despite living in the same house, wasn't really worth it.

But it was an obsession, I didn't obsess over programming because I wanted to have a great career one day, it was because I couldn't help it. It was almost like an addiction that I got lucky enough to have double as a marketable skill.

It's crazy how much article really resonates with my experience, almost annoyingly so since I feel like a bus ticket collector sometimes, sure tech is a marketable skill, but you sure build a lot of unimportant stuff

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#274
post #72

Competitive gaming is a particularly good example of this. I followed most of the rise of Dota from trashy Warcraft 3 mod to Valve's multi-million-dollar-prize-pool juggernaut. The first few crops of Dota millionaires all had the same backstory: "I played this game 14 hours a day. If there were tournaments at all they didn't really pay anything. My parents said I was wasting my life. I never had a girlfriend. Everyon…

Society deify successful people when in reality they are nothing more than serial lottery winners. For every "Ronaldo" there are a myriad of people trying to get there that will end their life as losers because they made an high-stakes bet and lost. The truth in unconfortable and nobody wants to listen about it.

That reminds me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCsPz0GYGJM "What streaming on Twitch has done to my life" - I remember crying while watching, it's heartbreaking.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#275

My take on genius is that it's akin to insanity, and for some of us, insanity doesn't seem to be so insane (which itself is an insane thing to say). Nikola Tesla ended his life alone, with a box of scrap parts as collateral for his rent ( https://www.history.com/news/9-things-you-may-not-know-about... ). Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "The Parable of the Madman" ( http://historyguide.org/europe/madman.html ), and apocryph…

I am convinced that this idea of people who are just too smart for society is way overblown and quite damaging.

I see it so often in tech — the “10x” engineer who is just too smart for social norms like polite communication or hygiene. They are not held to them same social standards as others because they are “just different.” In reality, these folks just use the fact that no one else knows how their code works as an excuse for antisocial behavior.

Here’s the thing. If you’re so brilliant, you should be able to learn basic social skills, manners, and hygiene. It’s not that hard. And if you do find it hard, maybe it’s not because you’re a savant who is above these things, but because you have simply neglected to develop that skill set.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't relate to people. Nobody understands you. Your value structure is messed up. Parents point to you and tell their children to not be like you. Given that this is not an experience which is at all unique to intelligent people, why should the assumption be that, when this happens to someone intelligent, somehow it was caused by intelligence?

I once worked at a place where one interview question was, "Imagine you were digging a hole x by y by z and it look q minutes. How much dirt was in the hole at time r"? I instantly answered, "There's no dirt in the hole, because a hole is defined by there not being any dirt". They were like, "Wow, that was fast. Most people we interview take five to ten minutes to come to that conclusion". Me: "I have a really bad fe…

This reminds me of how Piaget's theories of childhood development were discredited. The researchers would spread out three pencils, and ask the kid if there were now more pencils. The kid knew there weren't, but generously tried to understand what the adult might want? Perhaps there's a new meaning to the word here?

And also a recent Facebook puzzle, apparently outside the problem statement were instructions to return answers by Facebook Messenger, then the puzzle question was "to respond, what do you open first?" Trick question, except a bogus answer as my Facebook Messenger was already open.

As a research mathematician, one comes across as a complete jerk if one is too literal about a question one is actually smart enough to reformulate properly. We give others the benefit of the doubt all the time, math or life. Here, the only sensible interpretation is the volume of dirt remaining in what will soon become hole.

If they seriously meant "no the hole is empty" then yes cut the interview short, and run don't walk out of there.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, Ronaldo is known for exceptional work ethic.

That's kinda the point. Work ethic and obsession are not enough: you have to also win a series of lotteries -- genetic and environmental -- to succeed in his field.

> That's kinda the point. Work ethic and obsession are not enough: you have to also win a series of lotteries -- genetic and environmental -- to succeed in his field.

Ok, you've heard of Cristiano Ronaldo. Yet, have you heard of Dani?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dani_(footballer,_born_1976)

Like Ronaldo he was launched int Sporting Clube de Portugal's first team when he played for the club's U17 team. Unlike Ronaldo, Dani didn't had a heart condition. Unlike Ronaldo, Dani had more appearances in his first year in the first team, and was quickly picked by WestHam and Ajax.

Unlike Ronaldo, Dani had a notoriously poor work ethics. Unlike Ronaldo, Dani's impressive start was squandered and he went nowhere, he achieved nothing and has since been forgotten.

Work ethics is the deciding factor. You may have won the genetic lottery and be a bonafide ubermensch but if your work ethics suck then you'll quickly be surpassed by those lesser talented but more hard working than you.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kinda the point. Work ethic and obsession are not enough: you have to also win a series of lotteries -- genetic and environmental -- to succeed in his field.

Yes, but work ethic and obsession are the absolute baseline you need.

Most professional athletes aren’t obsessive just because they have a weirdly specific passion for their sport. They’re obsessive because they’re pathologically competitive. There’s stories about eg Michael Jordan buying a ping pong table and obsessively practicing at ping pong because he had a teammate who beat him at ping pong once and he wasn’t able to let it go until he beat the guy in a rematch. Obsession can come from many sources.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#280
Interesting take on intelligence. It also explains why people who have such passion frequently end up "bad cultural fits(tm)" among those who don't.

Edit: I'm always surprised by which of my posts get the downvotes. Wonder whom I'm offending this time.

Post reply on HN