This kid must be so young so as not to have learned about diminishing marginal returns. The average cost curve of computer skill acquisition is decreasing once you get on the back end of it (the "expert" range) so of course your average cost per skill is higher than someone who has less skill.
There is no talent
141–144 of 144 posts
Re: There is no talent
#142I've long thought talent was akin to "potential energy", some people do seem to have an aptitude for math, or music, or art, but it really doesn't go anywhere unless they work through and develop it. Talent is a yardstick for saying "you could go far doing this", but certainly has nothing to do with what people actually do.
In a sense, its just a measure of peoples future disappointment with your "gift".
What people usually mean, when they talk "talent" is technical ability, and that is only achieved through practice. If someone has the discipline and patience to work through the painful parts of developing that skill.
Often, someone with "talent" will be called that because the early and introductory steps will seem easier for them than most people just being introduced to the subject, but that causes the paradox of being lazy by resting on their laurels. The difficult and advanced parts are still difficult, but the average person working through them will find it closer to a linear increase difficulty, whereas the one with "talent" for it will suddenly be at a steep curve, even if it is the same curve as for everyone, just because they have only been exposed to the easy parts so far.
Natually, this is a generalization, and some things (especially physical feats) really have a lot to do with genes and environment, but nothing in the end beats plain old practice.
I think the real talent is being able to find joy and fun in what you are doing so that the painful and tedious parts don't seem daunting at all. Or, at least surmountable.
Re: There is no talent
#143I'm sure most of the people hanging out on HN have had experience with the word "computer genius". It's one of those terms I love to hate. People who make that assessment typically have no skill in the area so really have no basis for comparison. When someone calls someone else a computer genius I typically roll my eyes mentally, because those of us in the field understand it's mostly hard work and interest. However…
re: "computer genius"
"Sometimes men come by the name of genius in the same way that certain insects come by the name of centipede; not because they have a hundred feet, but because most people cannot count above fourteen"
Re: There is no talent
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people can learn to be OK at most things, with enough time or a "breakthrough". A significantly smaller number can be great at them.
So are you saying that talent is when a person has passion for a subject and works hard at it?
I'm interpreting it as genius being a subset of those who work hard enough to be good at something.