95th percentile isn't that hard to reach • Hacker News Board

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#241

Post by whatshisface » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 12:22 AM UTC

bradknowles wrote: post #184

SkyBelow wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key is to lie about what is your biggest weakness, while still giving an answer that doesn't come across as a lie nor being dismissive of the interviewer/question. The political tool of answering a related but different question that has a more favorable answer plays well here, such as instead answering "What is one of your weaknesses and how are you overcoming it?"

When asked a "what is your biggest X" kind of question, I almost always wonder aloud if I am the best judge of my own biggest X, whatever X might be. I feel that then gives me freedom to answer the question relative to something that I think is a weakness that would be appropriate to the situation, and how I am addressing it. For example, talking about being somewhat OCD about things can be considered a weakness. But…

"Sometimes I'm too focused on creating shareholder value."

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#242

Post by taurath » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 12:34 AM UTC

hardwaregeek wrote: post #227

Much respect for Dan's minimalist site (can't say I've ever waited for it to load) but this much CSS makes it so much more readable: html { display: flex; flex-direction: column; align-items: center; line-height: 1.2em; font-size: 1.1em; } body { width: 650px } As for the actual content, I agree with it a lot. I suspect most people are quite bad at learning. It's not something that's taught in schools, and when it is…

Any Donald Glover quote is great.

There's something similar with programmers - if you're ever the smartest person in the room, find a new room. If nobody is around thats either better than you or interested enough in order to give you good feedback, then its easy to stagnate. Just being around people who are all pushing hard can lead to a huge increase in skill - I think this is one of the reasons being at a top tier school helps, its the peers you're around who are all doing their best at any point, and the institution that pushes on you as well.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#243

Post by dntbnmpls » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:13 AM UTC

peripitea wrote: post #210

This is a great post, and it's unfortunate that so many people are missing the point. You may not like the writing, or the layout, or the title, and you may be able to pick holes in the argument, but who cares? That's an easy, boring game to play. Take it from a reformed cynic -- you will grow so much more from trying to figure out what's right about someone's argument rather than what's wrong. The key insight in the…

> Take it from a reformed cynic

So one extreme to another?

> you will grow so much more from trying to figure out what's right about someone's argument rather than what's wrong.

Isn't this how we get flat earthers, anti-vaxxers, religious zealots, etc? They focus on "what's right" rather than looking at "what's wrong"? Don't cult leaders or tyrants encourage people to do the same. Look at what's right about my leadership rather than what's wrong?

> The key insight in the article is: For many skills, becoming highly proficient is easier than most people realize.

Maybe I'd agree with "becoming proficient" is easier than most people realize. I'm not so sure about "highly proficient". But then again, that's a subjective rather than an objective characteristic.

> Keep the "ridiculable" posts coming Dan!

The Levine fan club is going to be jealous.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#244

Post by mathgladiator » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:15 AM UTC

peripitea wrote: post #210

This is a great post, and it's unfortunate that so many people are missing the point. You may not like the writing, or the layout, or the title, and you may be able to pick holes in the argument, but who cares? That's an easy, boring game to play. Take it from a reformed cynic -- you will grow so much more from trying to figure out what's right about someone's argument rather than what's wrong. The key insight in the…

Very good point and wise. I find this more applicable as a leader when reviewing designs. It's so easy to poke holes and complain, but it is hard to find the good and value that. It is worth it because I can then focus my comments on what is essential and then drive accountability to get all the details done well enough.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#245

Post by salixrosa » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:15 AM UTC

yurlungur wrote: post #155

Unimpressed with the argument. Different people play competitive games with completely different mindsets and you are also not just competing against your peers, for example, you may be playing someone with much less free time to dedicate to the game. Same goes for some real life hobbies. That's significantly different than getting to the top 5% in your class, where everyone is supposed to be peers and dedicated. I t…

I strongly disagree with your opinions on premed students, but that's based off my experience as a Biochemistry major at a large state school. So much partying, so little reading of assigned materials.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#246

Post by Bitcoin_McPonzi » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:22 AM UTC

j7ake wrote: post #92

The definition of 95th percentile is confusing. I think if you scored top 95th at a National exam in high school you would be competitive to choose the university you want. That is impressive. Being 95 percentile in college sports would probably allow you play the sport professionally. Having a website in the 95th percentile in terms of traffic would probably be extremely impressive. Having a 95 percentile restaurant…

If I were in the "top 95th" I wouldn't brag about it.

You would say "top 5%" or "95th percentile"

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#247

Post by Bitcoin_McPonzi » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:23 AM UTC

hearthstonebad wrote: post #32

empath75 wrote: post #5

Aside from all the other things he said, at least for games — 1 out of 20 people get there, and the vast majority of people who play a game play very casually. So if you put a reasonable amount of effort at all into getting good at a game, you’re likely to make the top 5% of players or close to it. I play hearthstone about, I dunno, an hour a day or so, while I’m on the train. I’ve never made it to the legend rank, b…

this is because improving your rank at hearthstone is a matter of playing as many viable games as possible. the outcome of most matches is mostly dependent on randomness as opposed to player error. The largest source of randomness being the order of card draw, which can turn around a highly favorable or unfavorable matchup between decks. the actions of players have very little impact in hearthstone. in a typical game…

> my point is that while being top 95% in most tasks

The vast majority of people are in the "top 95%" and it's nothing to brag about.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#248

Post by killjoywashere » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:27 AM UTC

There's a stringency to the barrier to participation that's missing here. To be in the 95%-ile of heart surgeons, may still mean that you make seemingly obvious mistakes, but I kind of doubt it. To be in the 95%-ile of machine-learning engineers ... what does it even mean?

In addition to the stringency of the barrier to participation, there's a stringency of the barrier to opportunity for practice. If you take a brilliant heart surgeon out of New York City, and plop them in the middle of Wichita, Kansas, she's going to find a hard upper limit on the number of mitral valve repairs she can do on any given weekend.

Similarly, if you take a machine learning engineer who spent the last 10 years at Google and give him a a few thousand data points from a heart health study, his main challenge will be staying busy and his skills will surely degrade without other work.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#249

Post by mntmoss » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:28 AM UTC

I think the post is both accurate and easily ignored, because it lives from within its own wisdom. Of course you can do better if you work at it - but, why aren't you?

And that's not even a question of personal responsibility and virtue and utilitarian maximization preference. That's - what on Earth is the world doing to discourage you, to make you grind at Overwatch in an ineffective way, then try to compete without appropriate prep? How did your ego get into such a fragile state that asking questions and getting advice feels so difficult?

And with at least some of these questions, the answer is that the intent of the person is different from a genuine competitor in a way that keeps them in a state of self-sabotage. They may be turning to the game as a way of gambling for a dopamine rush, in which case they can't believe in their skill(or anyone else's) - since they want fate to do the work.

But then you probe further and it gets more nuanced. Many people have trauma getting in the way, a whole bunch of stereotypes and expectations beat into them from an early age, which prevent them from reaching out and grasping at the prize. Many are trying not to get too deep into their hobby, because they have a lot of other stuff going on. And so on.

And so the question of why there is a 95% is related to our tendencies around resource allocation as a society and what skills and beliefs go along with that, which creates preferences, which then acts to enable or limit people.

It's never quite as simple as "you could just practice." Finding the way in which practice works for you, lets you set goals you can agree with - that's the trick.

Re: 95th percentile isn't that hard to reach

#250

Post by pavlov » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 1:46 AM UTC

Get better at something if it feels good to you, but gamification of life is poison.

Competitiveness is a mental trap that keeps you in a box where someone else defines the rules. If you’re doing something new, the questions of “winning” and percentiles and whatnot become meaningless.