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

The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 500 posts

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#121

Post by dr_kiszonka »

tompccs wrote: post #16

I think this is correct. The bad news is we are creating systems which minimise the number of geniuses entering each field. In the past, science was an eccentric hobby, not particularly valued and certainly not a viable career option. Today it's all of these things - like becoming a doctor. Telling your mother you want to be a scientist is far better than saying you want to be a musician. A hundred years ago that wou…

> filled up with careerists

I agree but I think it is driven by academia's incentive structure which promotes and rewards such behavior.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#122

Post by malnourish »

rhlsthrm wrote: post #108
georgespencer wrote: post #102

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.

I think even that point is debatable depending on how you define success.

If the definition of success is wealth or notoriety, there are certainly people who achieve it without those traits.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#123

Post by Jamwinner »

hahla wrote: post #25
tompccs wrote: post #16

I think this is correct. The bad news is we are creating systems which minimise the number of geniuses entering each field. In the past, science was an eccentric hobby, not particularly valued and certainly not a viable career option. Today it's all of these things - like becoming a doctor. Telling your mother you want to be a scientist is far better than saying you want to be a musician. A hundred years ago that wou…

The people driven by curiosity will still be in those unfashionable backwaters of any field. I would think true progress is made by those individuals, not ones that chase ‘hot’ fields.

Bingo. I would add that the movers tend to define their own fields, and by action and driven by need/practicality, not marketing. Those seeking to enter a career, generally have a different set of goals and priorities, reguardless of overlap.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#124

Post by analog31 »

nobodyandproud wrote: post #100
DrAwdeOccarim wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experiences in the life sciences going through the academic credentialing process (PhD to postdoc), there was room for the unusual but the way it worked was a little convoluted. Basically the grant funding agencies give you money for a project that they can understand and follow your logic on why it will succeed. Then when they fund you, you cut back on the resources required to get to that success and spend…

So what happens if you get caught? Or someone calls you out?

Nobody's checking. The focus is on what you're going to spend next year's money on, not how you spent last year's money. And if you're savvy, you can use tools that were already bought for some other purpose, or that don't cost much.

Working a day job in industry isn't categorically different, except that someone is probably watching your spending more closely. You have to figure out a way to set aside some time to work on your own interest, whether you do it at work or at home.

As for money, you can get technology made for 1/10 of what it costs your employer, by choosing your battles, cutting out all of the overhead, and using free stuff.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#125

Post by rapsey »

soneca wrote: post #107
sgentle wrote: 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…

> "pursue rationally unjustifiable interests" I disagree of how you define rationality here. If someone feels it serves them fine to play 14 hours of a game, it seems perfectly rational for me. Especially in the case that you mentioned, where they were playing before any big money was on the table. It means they liked, despite a lot of people judging them with an air of superiority.

It is objectively irrational. The ones who made a lot of money are 1%. The rest wasted their youth pursuing an impossible dream. They sacrificed their social development and their future job prospects.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#126

Post by Jamwinner »

CarVac wrote: post #111
SubuSS wrote: post #64

Paul seems to write about obsession as something that can be cultivated. In my personal experience, this has been either a personality trait or extreme focus and hard work because of some expected reward. For me this article feels more like a motivational speech rather than an actual theory. Anyway - my question is this: Is that an elitist thought or is obsession also one of those things anyone can do if only...?

I think a tendency to become obsessed is simply a personality trait. Some people just aren't that way. Depression, for example, can sap the motivation to do anything.

Depression can also lead to a singlar focus. I am pretty sure I have finished a few projects out of despair I would have never otherwise. Perhaps at the expense of other more 'practical' ones, but I have come to value them more.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#127

Post by dsaavy »

_Microft wrote: post #3

What's the topic that just doesn't leave you alone? For me it's an interest in animal consciousness and communication, even though I am a physicist by training.

If you use Instagram I would encourage you to look at this profile: https://instagram.com/hunger4words

It’s a lady who is a speech therapist who has taught her dog to communicate with pre-programmed push buttons.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#128

Post by usrusr »

amursft wrote: post #116

Paul became incredibly successful. I wonder what he thinks his own bus ticket was? Going deep on a topic seems like great advice with kids, and I wish schools allowed for more of it.

But can a school be the right place for that? In my mental model of schools they are mainly for filling the gaps: make sure that the artsy types have at least some understanding of numbers, give numbers persons some command of language, make those with an aptitude for business understand the elementary principles of chemistry, give the sedentary the without they would otherwise never have. Some fostering of interests is fine, but even that is more important for managing morale in support of the gap-filling than the primary goal. I'd consider it hubris to assume that true excellence could ever be reached intracurricularly. That gap-filling is unglamorous, but incredibly important.

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#129

Post by trenning »

soneca wrote: post #107
sgentle wrote: 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…

> "pursue rationally unjustifiable interests" I disagree of how you define rationality here. If someone feels it serves them fine to play 14 hours of a game, it seems perfectly rational for me. Especially in the case that you mentioned, where they were playing before any big money was on the table. It means they liked, despite a lot of people judging them with an air of superiority.

If you work 8 hours a day and sleep 8 hours a day play a video games 14 hours a day, well the math doesn't work to being rational for an adult

Re: The Bus Ticket Theory of Genius

#130

Post by vsareto »

sgentle wrote: 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…

>And the thing that I couldn't help thinking is: was it? I'm not sure that any rational person would make that decision.

You have to weigh your current abilities and their earning potential vs. the costs of venturing into a new field.

Being at the top of Dota is easier than being at the top of Math or Chess or Go, since Dota is a newer field. They aren't really comparable, but you still compare them if you are trying to figure out what you want to put your time into.

Some people just get lucky and find the thing they are good at on the first try. Then they can maximize their hours available for that thing.

Other people (probably the majority) have to try different fields and start later, and ultimately have less time overall to spend.

So it actually seems rational (if maximizing hours-spent is your goal) to go all-in on the first thing that grabs your interest, which could be Dota.

Post reply on HN