ability = hours * talent^2 where average talent is 1
Having an ego is just wasted energy, try to be happy with what you can achieve because you cannot control talent, just hours.
Being OK with not being extraordinary
121–130 of 396 posts
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#122It's ok to aspire to mediocrity
I'm not 100% sure you're being literal but I agree with this statement when taken at face value.
Being "extraordinary" often means you're just making somebody else richer. There are some objectively extraordinary folks working at e.g. Facebook, but what does that really gain them? What has that given the world? It's a mixed bag, to put it mildly.
Probably the only real reason to strive for being "extraordinary" at your career so that you can stop working for other people, or if the craft itself brings you more joy than anything else in life.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the problem is that what is defined as top tier keeps rising, and raises the bar just to be average. You also now have to compete with a huge cohort of people due to the net now. Going with the videogame focus, if you ever play competitive games you actually see how brutal it can be. In Overwatch for example you have an absolute mountain to climb in ranked because you can't just improve, you have to improve above…
This is a ridiculously defeatist attitude, and the quicker you can drop it the better off you'll be.
If video games are the subject the attitude should be am I having fun, not am I getting better. Some people can make money at playing games (both video and otherwise), but most people need to be okay with doing it for fun and never being world class.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#124I think it's important to also reframe what extraordinary even means. Many people are comparing themselves to the most privileged of backgrounds - where they were at the top from birth and only had to get a bit higher. I'm considered extraordinary in comparison to the place I grew up - just because of my background and where I am now. On top of this - I am wary of being singly great at something. Living in Silicon Va…
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
Robert A. Heinlein
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it's worth, you may have a heavily skewed view of what's extraordinary "these days." There are lots of tech companies that are mature enough to not flog their people to death. Companies with strong engineering cultures that also highly value seasoned developers tend to be this way. Where I work, the office is (well, was pre-covid) pretty empty by 5:30.
There are two sides to this coin; sometimes some late hours are unavoidable -- I don't blame my employer for it, they're not forcing me to work these hours at all, but I think if you're a professional you can't avoid such circumstances sometimes and that's why we get $megabucks right? The right mix for me is working like a daemon about 9 months a year then having 3 months off, but YMMV..
I find most people working those long hours to save the day could have designed a better solution up front and not needed those late hours at the last minute. Not always, but often they should have known and fixed the problem long before then.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you do leverage these strengths? I have a somewhat similar profile and I simply feel like a fish judged by its ability to climb a tree. Yet, I: - Help with hiring/marketing/leading scrum sessions (when the actual scrum master is ill) - Conduct pentests - Do the frontend and backend (what I was hired to do) If they'd let me, I'd help with the writing efforts as well as my writing ability is better than that of…
>How do you do leverage these strengths? What is your goal? I identify with the parent comment here, (the parent of that too) and feel like I've reached a point where the most obvious answer to your question (on leveraging strengths) is management. If you can code, project manage, and communicate effectively with [non]tech people and don't mind the stress of dealing with other people's issues, then it might be up you…
Say if that were true (as it might be), one doesn't just go into project management. There is no company who'd hire me as that as I have no prior experience in it.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#127I'd like to mention the book "Missing Out: In Praise of the Unlived Life" by Adam Phillips which carries a similar sentiment. It might be worth checking out if anyone regularly feels anxiety or frustration about where they are in life when they could just as easily feel satisfaction instead.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are two sides to this coin; sometimes some late hours are unavoidable -- I don't blame my employer for it, they're not forcing me to work these hours at all, but I think if you're a professional you can't avoid such circumstances sometimes and that's why we get $megabucks right? The right mix for me is working like a daemon about 9 months a year then having 3 months off, but YMMV..
I find most people working those long hours to save the day could have designed a better solution up front and not needed those late hours at the last minute. Not always, but often they should have known and fixed the problem long before then.
I think it sometimes comes down to a matter of choice in working styles. Some people thrive on killing themselves at times. I've been there. I will still occasionally pull a late-nighter because I get in "the zone" and am actually enjoying the productivity and I still get the condescending comments about how if you planned properly, that wouldn't be necessary, but I think that some people just don't get that working like that can actually be very gratifying. I'm getting a bit old for doing it more than about once a quarter, though, whereas I used to do it a couple times a week.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
I first heard that advice referenced from Scott Adams the creator of Dilbert. Where he notes that he is not a very good artist or very funny, but combining the two with his background in business is why he was successful. https://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/07/car...
I respect Scott Adams for his comic, but his blog is (in my opinion) a bunch of mass-produced rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings¹, trading out quality for (a very large) quantity. Scott Adams is definitely not famous because "he is an ok graphic artist and has an ok humor". He's famous because his satire was fairly unique and very sharp. I think he's very talented in the humor department; in addition to his creating…
>I respect Scott Adams for his comic, but his blog is (in my opinion) a bunch of mass-produced rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings¹, trading out quality for (a very large) quantity
Not so sure about the "rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings". He writes his opinions and gives arguments. Nothing "pseudo" about them, though they could still be (and often are) wrong, either factually or as a reasoning.
>It's very unlikely that somebody with "he is an ok graphic artist and has an ok humor" will get his success just because of such qualities.
Well, if they also knew about business workings, and did business-related comic strips at a time when nobody else (or very few) was doing them, then they might. Humor, like drawing, is honed over time anyway.
>A very ridicolous example of whom was when he was proving that Trump will be successful because, based on his observations, leaders who were great in the long term, typically had a rough start.
Well, his prediction did pan out, when all pundits said otherwise. Could be dumb luck, but he has been lucky often enough.
Theirs [the pundits'] arguments then, would be even worse "pseudo-rational arguments" that Scott's: because on top of claiming rationality, facts, legitimacy, and statistics on their side and being presented with fanfare on prime time (unlike a mere personal blog), they were also proven wrong.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like to use the movie Amadeus as an example of this. The movie portrayed Salieri as a man who could barely play. When that was just not true at all. The problem is they were comparing someone who is top of their field to someone who was extraordinary. In fact if you look at the movie semi closely you would see Mozart could not even keep the rest of his life together.
I thought of that movie also. Although half fiction, it's a wonderful flick; I highly recommend it for anybody frustrated with their position in life. Re: "The movie portrayed Salieri as a man who could barely play. When that was just not true at all." That was the King, not Salieri, as I remember it. But Salieri's playing did lack the flair that Mozart's had, as shown. However, the King himself seemed to prefer Sali…
If you play music in modern times, this movie is also informative. I think most musicians who really make innovative tunes are aware of these trade offs, it maps to real life well. There's musicians who make music for other musicians and they're trying to say something they know most people will have a little difficulty hearing.