Live data from Hacker News

How to Do Great Work

paulgraham.com

271–280 of 464 posts

Re: How to Do Great Work

#271

> When you're young you don't know what you're good at or what different kinds of work are like. Some kinds of work you end up doing may not even exist yet. So while some people know what they want to do at 14, most have to figure it out. That just gave me an idea for a phone app: Something that helps teenagers explore their interests and aptitudes (but not skills of course) Thoughts?

I had a thought a while back about how education systems are somewhat bad proxies for the type of work you want to do. There are many factors aside from just pure method that determine good fit, such as degrees of freedom, number of collaborators, market saturation and maturity, and feedback cycle lengths, etc.

These vary greatly in “real life” but are almost always restricted in education systems. For instance, simple things like “there is a right answer to this question”, “you can finish this task in less than a week” and of course “an older more experienced person will judge your work” are true in school but vary greatly in the wild.

I’ve found that people’s true passion axes mostly aren’t aligned with specific sub-fields (like say theoretical astrophysics, improv jazz saxophone), but tend to orient themselves towards higher level features. As someone who used to think that narrow specialization is paramount, this realization is incredibly liberating (also kinda missing from PGs post – I think he’s missing or glossing over an important aspect here).

Re: How to Do Great Work

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in tech at least even if you fail, you are developing valuable skills that can be used elsewhere. Rather: Currently in tech in the USA ...

I'm not really sure that their statement is temporal or regional. With failure in general comes lessons that can be applied to other situations, regardless of anything else.

This assumes we can come back from the failure without major consequences, and we'll still be in a position to leverage the learnings from that failure. I think the OP is pointing to one of those scenarios where that's less likely.

Re: How to Do Great Work

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory. In practice, depends what judge you pull, and you'd better have deep pockets for legal fights. My friends made a Tetris-like game (under a different name, with unrelated art, just broadly similar rules) and were sued out of existence by The Tetris Company. Even though they were legally in the clear according to theoretical analysis, the judge took a brief look and decided "this seems like it should be a vi…

An interesting discussion from 2019: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19533219 Tetris Holdings, LLC v. Xio Interactive, Inc. held that the tetrominoes are "expression; they are not part of the ideas, rules, or functions of the game," which certainly seems open to dispute, but I could just as easily imagine the same standard being applied to letter tiles with a score value in the corner. So yeah, unless you have a…

Wait what? That’s not expression. Without the blocks being the shapes they are there wouldn’t be a (viable) game, so it’s clearly part of the rules.

Whether the blocks look like jelly or concrete is expression. Or even the exact graphics they use in Tetris.

But the fact there’s blocks in preconfigured shapes (and what those shapes are) is game rules. There’s only so many ways you can stick four blocks together…

Re: How to Do Great Work

#274
post #257

As I've gotten older, I believe more and more that having a desire for great work has more negatives than it does positives. This post really demonstrates why I believe this – mainly because PG doesn't touch at all on why someone would want to do great work while romanticizing how great it is to have that desire. I don't think the question that ambitious people should be asking themselves is "what is work that I can…

Completely agreed. Media excessively romanticizes compulsive workers.

Not to mention to the 5am hustle. Only people who get up at 5am and smash out their book for the first three hours of the day, before starting work, are winners... /s

Re: How to Do Great Work

#275

It feels like this takes a very narrow definition of greatness which is more aligned to innovation and "What will make you famous" or "What will be commercially successful". From plant life and human health all the way up to nation states, there are lots of people doing great work just making sure that things keep running smoothly.

> It feels like this takes a very narrow definition of greatness which is more aligned to innovation and "What will make you famous" or "What will be commercially successful".

The guy invests money in and profits from other people doing "great work". So it shouldn't be too shocking his primary focus is on the commercial or the innovative.

Re: How to Do Great Work

#276
post #13

Just stumbled upon this thread and wanted to share Richard Hamming's classic talk from '86, "You and Your Research." Then I realized that the funny part is that PG has already linked to Hamming's talk on his site ( http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html ), and mentioned it on Twitter ( https://twitter.com/paulg/status/849300780997890048 ). There’s a part in that talk that has always stuck with me: he advises to ask y…

There's an unspoken aspect of the word "important" here — important to you , or important to the world (society, etc)? From Hamming: "I thought hard about where was my field going, where were the opportunities, and what were the important things to do. Let me go there so there is a chance I can do important things." It seems he is talking about the important to the world aspect. He wants to have a big impact on the w…

>I think a lot of people will decide, like Hamming did, that they want to be where the action is, that they want to participate in transforming the world, that that is what makes them happy.

In my 37 years of experience: people do want to be where the action is, but many people who are the main examples of 'being at the action' already were at a location where the action happened to end up. I.e., people working for a long time on an 'obscure' problem interesting to them suddenly see that 'obscure' problem become important and fall into success (think of all the CS people working on DL/ANNs in the 90s. I don't think Yann LeCunn was a known name in the 90s).

The tragedy is that it's very hard to predict where the action will be. Literature is full of people who lucked into that position, and obviously ignores the millions who were where the action never ended up.

With some experience you can shift your focus to where you think the action will be: it's probably best not to run after the money, but walk towards it.

Re: How to Do Great Work

#277

As I've gotten older, I believe more and more that having a desire for great work has more negatives than it does positives. This post really demonstrates why I believe this – mainly because PG doesn't touch at all on why someone would want to do great work while romanticizing how great it is to have that desire. I don't think the question that ambitious people should be asking themselves is "what is work that I can…

I wonder if you might have found it more fulfilling if you had received some psychological help with all the harshness on yourself.

Re: How to Do Great Work

#278

Fascinated as I might be to read an approximately 11 trillion word article which says "if you want to be great then work on things you are passionate about stay fresh and curious" I have to first stop and wonder if this is advice that I've already seen being given in embroideries, on countless coffee mugs, or along the side of a ballpoint pen.

Yeah cynically this is jezebel for our demographic.

Live,laugh love. It’s wine o’clock. Do great work.

Re: How to Do Great Work

#279
post #155

Ive been conflicted for 12 years now on what field to pursue. I’m between mechanical engineering because of my interest in materials and aerodynamics (I’d love to do research in this field), and software engineering (I don’t know what I’d do research in, but I like the idea of making tools people use). I work in IT/light software dev, and I think I’m inclined towards software because that’s where I’ve been building m…

No need to choose, you can have both - there is this very nice place where software meets hardware; call it embedded, call it robotics, call it industrial automation; this is the place where software actually gets to interface to physics: read sensors, drive solenoids and motors, make things move and act and do things in the real world. I got into this business 25 years ago and never left. Still loving every single d…

information, communication and fabrication (see the huge influx of fab labs)

Re: How to Do Great Work

#280

> What are you excessively curious about — curious to a degree that would bore most other people? That's what you're looking for. This is a great article, but there are many, many people for whom this advice is going to lead nowhere or worse. They have often been to fancy universities and have often earned fancy degrees. But what they don't realize is that they've also been trained to respond to the praise of authori…

Somewhat related, Kevin Gross and Carl T Bergstrom just put up this preprint on risk aversion in science: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.13816

> incentives to motivate effort clash with incentives to motivate risk-taking, because a failed project may be evidence of a risky undertaking but could also be the result of simple sloth. As a result, the incentives needed to encourage effort actively discourage risk-taking. Scientists respond by working on safe projects that generate evidence of effort but that don't move science forward as rapidly as riskier projects would.

Post reply on HN