3 ms·

Being an expert violinist takes about 4 hours of “purposeful practice” per day from 5 until 18. Really even this just means “good enough to get into the school

Being an expert violinist takes about 4 hours of “purposeful practice” per day from 5 until 18. Really even this just means “good enough to get into the school that can then maybe get you into the Berlin Philharmonic”. This is also where Malcolm Gladwell got and then sort of over-simplified the 10,000 hour rule. Of course, being a violinist takes that long because we have a well defined training platform that has been developed for 400 years. Being an expert cloud architect, a relatively new field, would take less time. Once someone gets into the Berlin Philharmonic and then plays for a few years, they are closer to 30,000 hours. Can’t imagine being an expert of cloud architecture couldn’t be done via 2 hours a day for 8 years, which is 6,000 hours. It barely existed 8 years ago!

stephencanon 8y ago
> Being an expert cloud architect, a relatively new field, would take less time. This is non-obvious. It seems at least as likely to me that there are no expert cloud architects yet.
- gamegoblin 8y ago
  Depends on how you would define expert. If you define it relative to one's peers (e.g. top 0.1% of practitioners), it makes sense.
- taneq 8y ago
  You're both right. Being an expert (relative to other living humans) is easier, because the bar is lower. In 500 years I bet it'll take 15+ years of daily deliberate practice to be a world-class cloud architect too. Of course, the bar will probably remain lower because there are far more jobs for cloud architects than there are for high-end professional concert violinists.
  - luckydata 8y ago
    Your average violinist now is much more proficient than 100 years ago. The phenomenon is particularly evident in electric guitar where the average player now would have been considered a GOD in the 70s. The bar keeps getting higher, but our ability to teach is also getting better, especially thanks to youtube.
    - joejerryronnie 8y ago
      I don’t know, name me an average guitar player today who is better than Jimmy Page?
      - luckydata 8y ago
        Jimmy was an innovator but also an extremely sloppy player. I can play his parts note for note better than he ever could. That's true for a LOT of people playing the guitar for fun at this point in time. Take a look at this to get an idea of what's "technically proficient" nowadays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0CjV1QxtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0CjV1QxtQ these are almost all folks making youtube videos, not exactly rockstars (with a couple exceptions).
        chosenbreed37 8y ago
        > Jimmy was an innovator but also an extremely sloppy player. I can play his parts note for note better than he ever could. Hard to argue with that. Except to say that ultimately it's not always the virtuosity that captures people's affections. Some have postulated that soon we'll have music made by machines. Perfect pitch and tempo. But it would appear that the irregularities in human performances actually produce the music we all enjoy listening to.
        luckydata 8y ago
        Agreed, but here we're talking about how difficult it is to become "technically proficient" and my answer to that is "not very with current tools and education methods". The biggest obstacle for most people is drive and interest. If you spend the time, you will get good at playing.
        joejerryronnie 8y ago
        Good point, if you're talking technical proficiency rather than pure artistry you may be right.
kaybe 8y ago
I think that depends on what you take as a baseline for a non-expert. For the violinist you seem to take somebody who does not know how to play the violin at all. For the cloud architect however, what do you use? A person who has never touched a computer? An average programmer/system architect? I'd argue that the time to cloud architecture expertise is far lower for the second than the first, and those things are older than 8 years.
jdietrich 8y ago
Classical music is a somewhat silly zero-sum game and we should be cautious about using it as an analogy. The supply of classical musicians outstrips demand by several orders of magnitude, hence the requirement for exceptional levels of virtuosity - if you're not the best, you're unemployable. That is absolutely not the case for most professions. Austen Allred has shown that you can turn willing adults into employable software developers in a matter of months. It is entirely plausible that if we abandon credentialism, many other professions could be taught in accelerated bootcamps at a fraction of the cost of a college degree.
JoeAltmaier 8y ago
Purposeful practice can take far less than 4 hours - that's the whole point. My youngest was interested in cello at 4, did some practice daily kind of, took years of lessons starting with fun exercises and games. He was 1st chair in state orchestra 3 out of 4 years, played as backup in local and state orchestras during Jr High and High School for money, and ultimately went to conservatory. I credit 'purposeful practice' because he would work his way through a piece a phrase at a time in slow motion until he understood what it was trying to do. Once he reached the end of the score he'd not need it any more, he'd learned each phrase like a friend. So did he have any gift? Was it all about practice? Well, ask his classmates in college and at conservatory, he was the best of them and they all did that and more. I think its easy to see opportunity and money get someone into the elite class of performers, and say "See! Its not giftedness at all!" Yes there's a scale in that group (that outsiders may have a hard time distinguishing) that shows something is different among them.

stephencanon 8y ago

> Being an expert cloud architect, a relatively new field, would take less time. This is non-obvious. It seems at least as likely to me that there are no expert cloud architects yet.

gamegoblin 8y ago
Depends on how you would define expert. If you define it relative to one's peers (e.g. top 0.1% of practitioners), it makes sense.
taneq 8y ago
You're both right. Being an expert (relative to other living humans) is easier, because the bar is lower. In 500 years I bet it'll take 15+ years of daily deliberate practice to be a world-class cloud architect too. Of course, the bar will probably remain lower because there are far more jobs for cloud architects than there are for high-end professional concert violinists.
- luckydata 8y ago
  Your average violinist now is much more proficient than 100 years ago. The phenomenon is particularly evident in electric guitar where the average player now would have been considered a GOD in the 70s. The bar keeps getting higher, but our ability to teach is also getting better, especially thanks to youtube.
  - joejerryronnie 8y ago
    I don’t know, name me an average guitar player today who is better than Jimmy Page?
    - luckydata 8y ago
      Jimmy was an innovator but also an extremely sloppy player. I can play his parts note for note better than he ever could. That's true for a LOT of people playing the guitar for fun at this point in time. Take a look at this to get an idea of what's "technically proficient" nowadays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0CjV1QxtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0CjV1QxtQ these are almost all folks making youtube videos, not exactly rockstars (with a couple exceptions).
      - chosenbreed37 8y ago
        > Jimmy was an innovator but also an extremely sloppy player. I can play his parts note for note better than he ever could. Hard to argue with that. Except to say that ultimately it's not always the virtuosity that captures people's affections. Some have postulated that soon we'll have music made by machines. Perfect pitch and tempo. But it would appear that the irregularities in human performances actually produce the music we all enjoy listening to.
        luckydata 8y ago
        Agreed, but here we're talking about how difficult it is to become "technically proficient" and my answer to that is "not very with current tools and education methods". The biggest obstacle for most people is drive and interest. If you spend the time, you will get good at playing.
        joejerryronnie 8y ago
        Good point, if you're talking technical proficiency rather than pure artistry you may be right.

kaybe 8y ago

I think that depends on what you take as a baseline for a non-expert. For the violinist you seem to take somebody who does not know how to play the violin at all. For the cloud architect however, what do you use? A person who has never touched a computer? An average programmer/system architect? I'd argue that the time to cloud architecture expertise is far lower for the second than the first, and those things are older than 8 years.

jdietrich 8y ago

Classical music is a somewhat silly zero-sum game and we should be cautious about using it as an analogy. The supply of classical musicians outstrips demand by several orders of magnitude, hence the requirement for exceptional levels of virtuosity - if you're not the best, you're unemployable. That is absolutely not the case for most professions. Austen Allred has shown that you can turn willing adults into employable software developers in a matter of months. It is entirely plausible that if we abandon credentialism, many other professions could be taught in accelerated bootcamps at a fraction of the cost of a college degree.

JoeAltmaier 8y ago

Purposeful practice can take far less than 4 hours - that's the whole point. My youngest was interested in cello at 4, did some practice daily kind of, took years of lessons starting with fun exercises and games. He was 1st chair in state orchestra 3 out of 4 years, played as backup in local and state orchestras during Jr High and High School for money, and ultimately went to conservatory. I credit 'purposeful practice' because he would work his way through a piece a phrase at a time in slow motion until he understood what it was trying to do. Once he reached the end of the score he'd not need it any more, he'd learned each phrase like a friend. So did he have any gift? Was it all about practice? Well, ask his classmates in college and at conservatory, he was the best of them and they all did that and more. I think its easy to see opportunity and money get someone into the elite class of performers, and say "See! Its not giftedness at all!" Yes there's a scale in that group (that outsiders may have a hard time distinguishing) that shows something is different among them.