4 ms·

> But often, you first become good at something, and then you become passionate about it. And I think most people can become good at almost anything. So many p

> But often, you first become good at something, and then you become passionate about it. And I think most people can become good at almost anything. So many people don't get this. When parents send you to learn a profession, don't say "I'll do what I want". You can always do it later. Instead, go get a proper, extensive education in anything - it will help you immensely, and you might find that you love doing what you learned. Otherwise, you may waste years being stuck in a loop of finding yourself and your purpose, which sometimes really sucks...

6stringmerc 11y ago
I'd like to think the counter-point to "most people can become good at almost anything" is tempered by the notion that to become "an expert at something" takes passion and commitment that far exceeds short-term rewards. This might sound like an endorsement of the "10,000 hours" concept that Malcom Gladwell espoused, but somebody can spend 10,000 hours playing the same 6 guitar chords, but that doesn't make them a guitar expert. It might be rather crass to say I'm skeptical of Dr. Ng's cultural perspective, but I am. In the US, it's a badge of honor to have achieved the means to buy a genuine Gibson Les Paul. In the popular culture of looking like a success, such as Baidu, it's relatively acceptable to simply make a copy, often lacking in the craftsmanship and utility of the original, simply to have the appearance of success. I'm not saying the US doesn't have some very blatant issues of posturing (the "30,000 dollar millionaire") based on access to credit, no, that's not fair in this context. I believe that the ability to innovate and to be creative are teachable processes. That's a big red flag to me. Teaching "creativity" is inherently encouraging insubordinate thought processes. That doesn't make sense. There are teachable avenues to capitalize on the inherent perspective that a student may have, one of rebellion and unique perspective, but teaching creativity is, well, about as far fetched to me as real, genuine AI. It might be possible, but probably not in my lifetime. I'd like to relate this back to education in that "a grade that isn't earned is no mark of distinction at all" because the pursuit of being good is fine, but to be excellent means once there's focus, it's okay to fail now and again. There is so much evidence of blatant, endemic fraud in China that touting Baidu must come with appropriate skepticism. Just like the Moeller Flying Car in the US.
temo4ka 11y ago
I first heard the notion from someone here on HN: instead of doing what you love, love what you do!

6stringmerc 11y ago

I'd like to think the counter-point to "most people can become good at almost anything" is tempered by the notion that to become "an expert at something" takes passion and commitment that far exceeds short-term rewards. This might sound like an endorsement of the "10,000 hours" concept that Malcom Gladwell espoused, but somebody can spend 10,000 hours playing the same 6 guitar chords, but that doesn't make them a guitar expert. It might be rather crass to say I'm skeptical of Dr. Ng's cultural perspective, but I am. In the US, it's a badge of honor to have achieved the means to buy a genuine Gibson Les Paul. In the popular culture of looking like a success, such as Baidu, it's relatively acceptable to simply make a copy, often lacking in the craftsmanship and utility of the original, simply to have the appearance of success. I'm not saying the US doesn't have some very blatant issues of posturing (the "30,000 dollar millionaire") based on access to credit, no, that's not fair in this context. I believe that the ability to innovate and to be creative are teachable processes. That's a big red flag to me. Teaching "creativity" is inherently encouraging insubordinate thought processes. That doesn't make sense. There are teachable avenues to capitalize on the inherent perspective that a student may have, one of rebellion and unique perspective, but teaching creativity is, well, about as far fetched to me as real, genuine AI. It might be possible, but probably not in my lifetime. I'd like to relate this back to education in that "a grade that isn't earned is no mark of distinction at all" because the pursuit of being good is fine, but to be excellent means once there's focus, it's okay to fail now and again. There is so much evidence of blatant, endemic fraud in China that touting Baidu must come with appropriate skepticism. Just like the Moeller Flying Car in the US.

temo4ka 11y ago

I first heard the notion from someone here on HN: instead of doing what you love, love what you do!