5 ms·
Ask HN: First in the second league or second in the first league
Inspired by the recent discussion about benefits of moving to San Francisco. Someone commented that in many places you'll be the first (e.g. most skilled) in the office but after moving to SF you might easily find yourself to be just an average programmer.
It's interesting to hear different views on being in the top of the second league or to be just an average in the first league. What is more important for you (what would you prefer). I think both have their pluses and minuses.
Please don't misunderstand. I am not referring to SF or to the rest of the world as the first or the second league here. It was just an example.
- aristus 16y agoYour innate potential is not enough. Good problems and good collaborators are necessary to becoming whatever you want to become. Given a choice between being a big fish in a little pond, and being surrounded by some of the smartest people in the world, I'll choose the latter every time. It took me a while to figure that out. Don't waste years learning the same thing.
- ryanelkins 16y agoI've always felt that you grow and perform best when faced with stiff competition. If no one around you is challenging you it's probably time to move on for your own sake. Otherwise you become complacent and stagnate. Even if you push yourself, you probably won't be able to push yourself harder than others would. So, while last place in the majors might not be as much fun as first place in the minors, it does provide the best opportunity for growth. Ultimately it probably depends on your own goals.