You still have to motivate a do-er. They have to want to work on your specific thing.
It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
41–50 of 229 posts
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#42> It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
I really like the current HN title.
It has nothing to do with the tweet which I don't understand at all.
The comment the tweet is based on is also really good -
> "Read what you love until you love to read"
It's why we need to get internet porn, shopping, Netflix and video games to the poor. And burn to the ground the idealists who want to get them Wikipedia.
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#43I like that.
Carmack is a pretty sensible chap. I find his viewpoints to be practical.
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#44Alternative take: in the hiring process education is often used as a proxy for motivation, when actually it only proves that once upon a time someone was motivated long enough to get educated, but it doesn't actually say anything about their present state in terms of motivation. A 'Do-er' is at least at present motivated, and educating them will get them to the desired combination of education+motivation in the prese…
>but it doesn't actually say anything about their present state in terms of motivation If you take the set of all applicants with education and the set of all applicants without, would you claim there is no difference in the distributions of 'do-er'-ness?
This question is somewhat irrelevant, considering you have more information to work from. Given the other constraints you can apply, is level of education still a useful proxy?
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#45Is this really useful, or another rationalization for choosing the less educated option, believing they are easier motivated? It is a grand generalization. As an accomplished do-er with multiple degrees, would I be filtered out via this thinking?
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#46The educated knows that the thing that the CTO asks for is infeasible. Hence the lack of motivation. The Doer in his ignorance, will embark on a trip of endlessly trying satisfy his boss, thinking that they are making progress, but they are not.
Hey, hey, hey! You're stepping on my turf, there!
Everyone knows that it's our (old people) job to say "It can't be done!"
Younger folks are supposed to be "boundary pushers," because they don't know that it can't be done. They keep trying, until they give birth to beautiful unicorns.
Has nothing to do with education, and everything to do with age and [lack of] experience.
Disrupt! FTW!
At least, that's what they tell me, while dissing my experience.
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#47[deleted]
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#48Alternative take: in the hiring process education is often used as a proxy for motivation, when actually it only proves that once upon a time someone was motivated long enough to get educated, but it doesn't actually say anything about their present state in terms of motivation. A 'Do-er' is at least at present motivated, and educating them will get them to the desired combination of education+motivation in the prese…
>but it doesn't actually say anything about their present state in terms of motivation If you take the set of all applicants with education and the set of all applicants without, would you claim there is no difference in the distributions of 'do-er'-ness?
Yes, there definitely is - in my experience - but it actually isn't in the direction that you would probably expect it to be in. I don't know how relevant my sample is and of course the sample size is going to be somewhat reduced but in my experience the people without fall into two groups: those that are not motivated at all and those that are highly motivated but in a direction orthogonal to what the education system would expect. Everybody else gets educated normally and ends up somewhere in the middle.
So the really smart people are the high end of the educated ones and the high end of the non-educated people (and with educated I mean university degree and onwards), and between those the gap isn't all that large, it's just that there are many more of those than that there are university educated ones (at least, around me).
Now, obviously if your circle is exclusively composed of well educated people then you will come to a different conclusion, and once you go outside of tech/IT the distribution will likely be a completely different one again.
So that 'set' has many subsets with very different distributions between the subsets.
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#49As a mediocre frontend dev, this hits hard. I bought a bunch of texts to up my DS&A and college level math skills as I'd like to eventually be able to excecute on 3D animation in the browser, but the books end up sitting on my desk as I consider I'm too old/there're too many people who _do_ have these skills already, etc.
What sort of 3D animation do you want to do? If you're talking about shaders, you might be doing yourself a disservice with the bottom-up approach. In my opinion, learning to use math functions as tools rather than having a deep understanding of how they work is an equally valid approach. I know several great WebGL developers who really aren't very good at math. Consider the following definitions of the dot product:…
(The second definition is also wrong – it's true only for unit vectors.)
Re: It is easier to educate a Do-er than to motivate the educated
#50Aside from the fact that the two are not mutually exclusive but rather fit a DE,D!E,!DE,!D!E pairing resulting in a higher number of non-doer (!D) educated (E) people in industry, the statement is quite on point. Being a doer implies that you will by definition get more out of an education.