I am grateful that exceptionally capable people exist in the world. I find them incredibly motivating because their successes keep elevating the lower bound of collective human potential and set a known standard for what’s possible. I find that ignoring the bar for success (at whatever level one strives for) sets you up psychologically to justify mediocre efforts, when in fact most humans have incredible potential. I find that envy is a separate issue that can be managed by thinking carefully about choosing the right role models.
Being OK with not being extraordinary
251–260 of 396 posts
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
But does being in the top of those combined skills command top pay?
Depends what those two or more skills are. You might be a top flight musical basket weaver but that won't pay too well.
You make me music baskets and I’ll find a way to make it pay well.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#253> Climbing to a higher vantage point can also unlock new forms of extraordinary that you might have never noticed before. I read an article once about how the amount of work to get into the top tier in a single area is astronomical, but the amount of work to become top tier in a combination of 2-3 fields is attainable by almost anyone. For example, becoming a top tier statistician is hard. But becoming a top tier sta…
I believe I read that article as well; but haven't been able to find it in a while; it's not pateo11 OR Malcolm Gladwell ;), but does anybody have a link to a blog/article that may have been the original source?
Thx! :)
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#254Earlier 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…
> Essentially the internconnectedness of everything is making it hard to find the niches you speak of. There's always someone who loves his job so much and works at it so much that he defines the meta, so to say. This is a problem in computer science, even. Then, seek out those people and work with them. Computing is collaborative. It's rather difficult (and unnecessary!) to create anything meaningful entirely by you…
This comment really spoke to me
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#255> Climbing to a higher vantage point can also unlock new forms of extraordinary that you might have never noticed before. I read an article once about how the amount of work to get into the top tier in a single area is astronomical, but the amount of work to become top tier in a combination of 2-3 fields is attainable by almost anyone. For example, becoming a top tier statistician is hard. But becoming a top tier sta…
devops
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
What people haven't realized is you dont need to think in terms of Hierarchy anymore. Which is the way people have thought about anything for thousands of years. Fitting into domination or skill based hierarchies was optimal when resources where limited. The Network and its explosion in the last 20-30 (not even one generation old) challenges the reliance on anything Hierarchical. Just one example - I can connect to m…
I can connect to my boss's boss's boss with a tweet or an email or whatsapp message and establish a connection And then your 3boss recommends firing you for insubordination regardless of your value.
For real, the old ways aren’t just disappearing overnight, or over 30 years. Our organization and social structures are in many ways baked in.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since it looks like it's just GatsbyJS client, may I suggest GitHub Pages?
That's a good idea, in the beginning I had no idea how hosting works so I just went with HostPapa, but now I am considering switching.
If you use gh-pages [1], then it's as simple as `gh-pages -d public`.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#258> Climbing to a higher vantage point can also unlock new forms of extraordinary that you might have never noticed before. I read an article once about how the amount of work to get into the top tier in a single area is astronomical, but the amount of work to become top tier in a combination of 2-3 fields is attainable by almost anyone. For example, becoming a top tier statistician is hard. But becoming a top tier sta…
I learned this lesson from Clifford Stoll. He said that astronomers figure he must be an exceptional programmer, since he's clearly a mediocre astronomer. While programmers figure he must be an exceptional astronomer, since his programming is strictly middle-of-the-road! Of course, these days, he's the best dang Klein bottle glass blower in the game. No substitute for finding your niche.
Cliff is an amazing person. Just a joy! Every time I see him on Numberphile, my life is made better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Stoll
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k3mVnRlQLU
P.S. Cliff, we know you're on HN. Please continue being yourself, it seems like a really great person to be!
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that were true, everyone with a very high IQ would be a great poker player, a great negotiator, a great writer, a great leader, a great investor.. etc. IQ is as proxy for problem solving if the problems look like a standardized test. The problems people face in the real world require more specialization and a more complex combination of skills and traits.
IQ is a general measure for pattern recognition. Most modern IQ tests are heavily dependent of things like ravens matrices. Pattern recognition in obviously helpful when problem solving.
Is IQ really legit? I heard form Nassim Nicholas Taleb that the math used by psychologist is weak.
Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean I can probably go on LinkedIn right now and find someone that fits these loose criteria. They’re fairly common!
If your definition of "fairly common" is something like a ~1% chance, then sure.
Certainly more common than Michelangelo-level artists! I think the OP's point was that you don't need to be the absolute best in your field, or even that close, to be rewarded handsomely.