4 ms·

> Is the fact that I'm bad at competitive coding a symptom of something serious (weak foundations in algorithms/data structures)? Am I missing out on something?

> Is the fact that I'm bad at competitive coding a symptom of something serious (weak foundations in algorithms/data structures)? Am I missing out on something? Maybe. Assuming equal practice/preparation time, they're smarter than you. No big deal.

levythe 8y ago
Do people actually think like this? All it means is that they're better at what competitive coding tests for. There's nothing about being "smart."
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  What do you think being smart does for you, then?
  - solipsism 8y ago
    Here we are thinking you're not very smart for making a comment like that. The fact is that there is no single "smart". Instead there are many aptitudes, which combine and overlap to make people good or bad at specific skills. Arnold Schwarzenegger was strong, but an average rock climber could best him at rock climbing. The average long distance runner could run laps around him. We all understand this to be the case with respect to physical activities, but for some reason this idea of single-faceted intelligence persists.
    - SamReidHughes 8y ago
      I'm not positing single-faceted intelligence. (Which does exist, there are obvious kinds of brain problems that hurt you at every task.) I'm saying their intellectual talent is what makes them better than OP. Their natural ability. The stuff that's useful for programming contests, obviously. Low on geometry, high on logic and algebra, good for one-hour problems moreso than research, that sort of math.
fzeroracer 8y ago
You would be wrong. People being skilled in different environments does not mean they're more or less intelligent than others. Someone being poor at spelling bees would not a bad writer make for example.
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  Okay, so to settle this question, OP can ask these classmates what they got on the SAT.
  - fzeroracer 8y ago
    If you think the SAT is in any way shape or form an indicator of intelligence or skills you would be objectively wrong. Someone with ADHD is likely going to perform poorly on the SATs due to the test environment but that does not indicate how well they'll perform in a professional environment. Similarly I can think of people in college who would abuse Adderall in order to get higher scores. Do you think those people are more or less intelligent? Should we consider the metrics before or after usage?
    - SamReidHughes 8y ago
      This is a wild tangent that has nothing to do with OP's situation, which is that he went to a university with several classmates that are smarter than him/her. This is generally a good thing for your university to have. And no, he doesn't have any hypothetical brain powers that make up for it.
      - fzeroracer 8y ago
        You keep assuming that his classmates are smarter than them on the basis of one point of data. You're extrapolating so much out of a simple statement that it ventures into the realm of absurdity. And you brought us into this wild tangent by implying that SAT scores are somehow indicative of general intelligence and asking the OP to see what they got on their SATs.

levythe 8y ago

Do people actually think like this? All it means is that they're better at what competitive coding tests for. There's nothing about being "smart."

SamReidHughes 8y ago
What do you think being smart does for you, then?
- solipsism 8y ago
  Here we are thinking you're not very smart for making a comment like that. The fact is that there is no single "smart". Instead there are many aptitudes, which combine and overlap to make people good or bad at specific skills. Arnold Schwarzenegger was strong, but an average rock climber could best him at rock climbing. The average long distance runner could run laps around him. We all understand this to be the case with respect to physical activities, but for some reason this idea of single-faceted intelligence persists.
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    I'm not positing single-faceted intelligence. (Which does exist, there are obvious kinds of brain problems that hurt you at every task.) I'm saying their intellectual talent is what makes them better than OP. Their natural ability. The stuff that's useful for programming contests, obviously. Low on geometry, high on logic and algebra, good for one-hour problems moreso than research, that sort of math.

fzeroracer 8y ago

You would be wrong. People being skilled in different environments does not mean they're more or less intelligent than others. Someone being poor at spelling bees would not a bad writer make for example.

SamReidHughes 8y ago
Okay, so to settle this question, OP can ask these classmates what they got on the SAT.
- fzeroracer 8y ago
  If you think the SAT is in any way shape or form an indicator of intelligence or skills you would be objectively wrong. Someone with ADHD is likely going to perform poorly on the SATs due to the test environment but that does not indicate how well they'll perform in a professional environment. Similarly I can think of people in college who would abuse Adderall in order to get higher scores. Do you think those people are more or less intelligent? Should we consider the metrics before or after usage?
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    This is a wild tangent that has nothing to do with OP's situation, which is that he went to a university with several classmates that are smarter than him/her. This is generally a good thing for your university to have. And no, he doesn't have any hypothetical brain powers that make up for it.
    - fzeroracer 8y ago
      You keep assuming that his classmates are smarter than them on the basis of one point of data. You're extrapolating so much out of a simple statement that it ventures into the realm of absurdity. And you brought us into this wild tangent by implying that SAT scores are somehow indicative of general intelligence and asking the OP to see what they got on their SATs.