Live data from Hacker News

The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

pgbovine.net

61–70 of 124 posts

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#61

How about 20 hours? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MgBikgcWnY The 10k hours thing is based on how long it took athletes to become the very top of their field. The very top of their highly specific, highly competitive field. It doesnt even mean becoming an 'expert' (whatever that means), let alone just being good at it. Anyway, check the TED Talk above, 20 hours to proficiency.

Actually, Gladwell has specifically said it does not really apply to sports.

i was referring more to the original 10 000 hour rule proposed by K. Anders Ericsson & co.

I would also say that in Outliers, Gladwell seems to implying that while 10 000 hours of practice is common in such 'outliers', simple luck is an equal if not greater part.

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#62
post #51

Given the 10,000 hour rule as generally true (at least in spirit), what's very difficult and seldom discussed is just how hard it is to get there at anything worthwhile once you're passed a certain point in life. Why? Because job. Having gone through college and taken work terms between years, I saw this first-hand: after you're done 9 to 5 for that paycheck (+food, +commuting, +exercise, +social life), good luck fin…

>>this is the best argument for basic income You only feel the need for a basic income because you are currently strapped for time and you crave for more time to work on something far more creative. Once time comes in abundant supply you will now be faced with a situation where you will have a lot of time and won't really understand the reason why you would want to work hard(Your basic needs are met) or spend time do…

A good point to be sure, but I disagree entirely in my own case. In fact I realized this a while ago and put strict controls so that I actually earn whatever free time I have. My current schedule looks something like: wake up at 7am, apply to jobs during the morning, then I get to work on side projects and read technical texts the rest of the day, usually a good 6+ hrs (with exercise and some people time thrown in). I fear for the day I actually get a job, haha...

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#63

Given the 10,000 hour rule as generally true (at least in spirit), what's very difficult and seldom discussed is just how hard it is to get there at anything worthwhile once you're passed a certain point in life. Why? Because job. Having gone through college and taken work terms between years, I saw this first-hand: after you're done 9 to 5 for that paycheck (+food, +commuting, +exercise, +social life), good luck fin…

Depending on your skill level, you may be able to work a deal with your employer to work reduced hours, or to disappear for a few months of each year -- basically, unpaid leave, but as a regular thing.

I worked reduced hours for quite a while after my second child was born; and we have an developer on the team who disappears for 3 months a year to go be a theater director.

There's basically quite a lot of flexibility that's perfectly possible, and not even costly for the employer, but it's not habitually permitted. I suspect in a lot of companies you might be able to get a lot more leeway just by asking for it, though.

See if you can get away with only working a half-day Friday, in exchange for an extra hour the other 4 days, for example.

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#64
post #44
post #31

This is a pretty solid rule. I've taken a similar approach with my kids, but they're not really old enough to report back any results. I didn't round down to 1k hours or look at 10k seriously. I've been trying to teach them that it's important to take the journey to get actually good at something. You pick up a lot of things on the way to becoming proficient. I let my oldest pick something to get good at this year. S…

I don't know about softball, but I played baseball from the time I was 4 until I was 19 and the biggest change in youth baseball has been monitoring pitch counts for youth pitchers. If I remember correctly, Softball pitchers usually have trouble with their knees while baseball pitchers have arm trouble. I still have arm trouble and I had parents who put my safety first and did the best they could to take care of my a…

Maybe not related to your softball injury point, but women in general are far more at risk for knee injuries than men. It's even more problematic in sports like soccer and basketball.

And I empathize with your arm problems. I'm still feeling the nagging effects of my Little League shoulder injury, which happened in a game where my coach showed up late and I didn't have as much time as normal to warm up before it started...

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#65
post #51

Given the 10,000 hour rule as generally true (at least in spirit), what's very difficult and seldom discussed is just how hard it is to get there at anything worthwhile once you're passed a certain point in life. Why? Because job. Having gone through college and taken work terms between years, I saw this first-hand: after you're done 9 to 5 for that paycheck (+food, +commuting, +exercise, +social life), good luck fin…

>>this is the best argument for basic income You only feel the need for a basic income because you are currently strapped for time and you crave for more time to work on something far more creative. Once time comes in abundant supply you will now be faced with a situation where you will have a lot of time and won't really understand the reason why you would want to work hard(Your basic needs are met) or spend time do…

You have a point and it's definitely true that for many, the big part of the desire to do something creative that is not job comes from being busy and not having time to do this. But I doubt that if you got rid of jobs, people would waste time. I sometimes wondered why I can't seem to be as productive, or learn as much fast enough, as I had been in high school or when I started university. I realized that it's not that I was a fast learner there, it was that I had tons of free time to throw at stuff without having to worry about deadlines, or bullshit like a job.

> most people wake up late, sleep late

Many people don't sleep enough for a healthy and productive life. "Sleeping late" is often "sleeping the amount you should, but don't, because you're too busy".

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#66
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>this is the best argument for basic income You only feel the need for a basic income because you are currently strapped for time and you crave for more time to work on something far more creative. Once time comes in abundant supply you will now be faced with a situation where you will have a lot of time and won't really understand the reason why you would want to work hard(Your basic needs are met) or spend time do…

A good point to be sure, but I disagree entirely in my own case. In fact I realized this a while ago and put strict controls so that I actually earn whatever free time I have. My current schedule looks something like: wake up at 7am, apply to jobs during the morning, then I get to work on side projects and read technical texts the rest of the day, usually a good 6+ hrs (with exercise and some people time thrown in).…

> I fear for the day I actually get a job

The fear is well-founded. When you get a job you'll find yourself with no time for much technical texts and side projects. I wish you find a fulfilling job though, working on what feels like bullcrap to you is terribly frustrating.

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#67

Is the 10,000 hour rule even true? I know this was popularized by Gladwell's book 'Outliers' but I had heard the study referred to in the book might not be accurate. Is it that 10,000 of practice is common to experts or that there are no experts without 10,000 hours of practice?

The original study by K. Anders Ericsson involved how top athletes became the very best in their highly specific field. Since then it has been diluted to say that you need 10000 hours to become an 'expert' (definition required); then that you need 10000 hrs to become proficient.

So no, its not true.

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#68
post #8
post #5

I have my own take on this - if you triple-Pareto the 10k hours rule you end up with 80 hours of work responsible for 51.2% of your skill. I round it up and call 100-hours rule: if you put one hundred hours of actual practice into something it might not make you an expert, but you'll be proficient and/or good enough to impress people around you. I started applying this to random things, and I think one could cut it d…

I like it - sounds very similar to Josh Kaufman's "The First 20 Hours". His thesis is that you won't become an expert in 20 hours, but you can become competent enough at something to turn it into an enjoyable hobby (and after that, sky's the limit). http://www.mdswanson.com/writeup/2013/07/05/the-first-20-hou...

And a mere 20 hours (never mind "only" 1,000 hours) still distinguishes you from the vast majority of people who never put in even that much. Expertise is relative, after all.

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting you didn't mention family at all. Having kids is a huge commitment of time. I think a good take-away from your rant (plus the consideration of family) is that we need to be talking more about making time for things. Too often we talk a great deal about what can be done in a few hours a day, but when it comes to making that time, we just say, "If it's important to you, you'll make the time." We should…

> We should be looking at ways to maximize the use of very small chunks of time. I'm not sure it can be done. The best way to maximize the use of small chuncks of time is to join them into rarer big chuncks of time.

It really depends on what you're learning.

If you're learning to juggle, you can absolutely get value out of 25 2-minute chunks during the day.

Even more complicated skills -- you may not be able to get things set up on a computer, but if you have a notepad you can take 5 minutes and jot down what you remember of whatever you're trying to learn. Next 5 minutes? Fill in the missing bits, or look up one of them.

I have lots of somewhat random skills that I've developed without really dedicating time at all -- like Tuuvan throat singing, or using the NATO phonetic alphabet -- practiced while driving, or in other chunks of time that seem to be already occupied (but are actually just constrained).

Re: The 1,000-hour rule (2009)

#70
I think the order of magnitude scale is a good guide for most things you can learn. Obviously these are rules of thumb. "Practice" can vary in quality, prerequisites and starting points matter. YMMV based on a huge number of factors. That said, the order of magnitude scale is usually a greta way of looking at things.

1,000 hours will get you to entry level "professional" level.

1,000 hours is also 20 hours per week (of deliberate practice) for one year. An hour will get you a definition (different keys play different notes. This is a note. A scale. A chord). 10 will get you an overview of a subject (This is what mean, median, variance and variance mean) and perhaps a usable tidbit. At 100 hours knowledge starts being functional in a limited way (write code that generates a sales report). 1000 hours is entry level professional.

Learning to read

  1 hr: Understand that letters represent sounds
  10 hrs: practice reading and writing all the letters. read simple words like cat
  100 hrs: know all letters, most common words and can sound out most words 
  1000 hrs: functionally fluent
  10000: achieve your potential as a poet or novelist
Judo

  1 hr: Overview of that martial art's approach
  10 hrs: Understand basic vocabulary of the style: stances, throws, etc  
  100 hrs: Can perform a limited number of techniques effectively. 
  Would be advantageous in a self defense situation 
  1000 hrs: You are eying that black belt.
  Consistently overcome most untrained opponents.    
  Very useful in a self defense situation.
  You can ref a match, teach Beginners or invent some moves.
  10000: achieve your maximal potential as a competitor or instructor
10,000 hours in an interesting thinking tool. In my mind it represents the level of practice required to maximize your potential. 1,000 hours is another useful tool. To me, it's a more liberating concept because it's achievable without dedicating your life to a thing. Put in 1,000 hours and you will be able to code that app, play in a band or terrorize your husband with a flying triangle choke.
Post reply on HN