3 ms·

I’m a generalist and it is awesome! When I get bored I rewrite my cv and maybe skill up a bit on my own time (or at work) and re-emerge as a new xxx I’ve gone

I’m a generalist and it is awesome! When I get bored I rewrite my cv and maybe skill up a bit on my own time (or at work) and re-emerge as a new xxx I’ve gone from support to ops to development to ops to development to devops and I can tell you that I am 100 times more valuable in any role than someone who has specialised for ten years in the same role. Being a generalist rules, embrace it and get with it just decide what you want to do next and make it happen. YOU WILL BE AWESOME AT IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE DONE LOTS :) it

thanatropism 7y ago
Is that really a generalist, though? In my mind a generalist is someone who e.g. knows quant finance up to hedge fund snuff and knows how to configure wsgi/asgi servers with nginx; can read and rebate legal documentation and use an SMT solver. I don't feel that anyone who hasn't eg watched the recent Jordan Peterson/Slavoj Zizek debate and has a working understanding of Ripser and UMAP can call himself a generalist.
- kristianc 7y ago
  > Anyone who hasn't eg watched the recent Jordan Peterson/Slavoj Zizek debate I watched that debate and found it a tedious rehashing of tired old talking points and straw men criticisms of Capitalism/Marxism. To use that in any way of a yardstick of intellectual depth seems odd.
  - thanatropism 7y ago
    Did you, though? The first hour was Jordan Peterson making a hacky point that capitalism is good and communism's not and Zizek doing Keith Jarret-type improv touching on a thousand topics. Then in the actual debate rounds Zizek got Jordan Peterson to agree with him. It was an actual debate. There was a winner and not in the sense of a rap battle. The loser was happy to have had it.
- Bjartr 7y ago
  "generalist" is opposing "specialist" and doesn't mean "everythingist". Someone who has done some full-stack dev, has run some marketing campaigns, and can kick out usable graphic design work when needed is a generalist (not an incredible one, but one nonetheless). What you're describing, if not a difference in kind (i.e. something other than generalist), is absolutely a significant difference of degree to the tune of the difference in degree between a mediocre junior software engineer fresh out of college and a 10x (in practice) senior software engineer with years of experience. They're absolutely not appropriate for the same set of jobs, but they absolutely are both "software engineers". Why is the term "generalist" so tightly constrained in your mind?

thanatropism 7y ago

Is that really a generalist, though? In my mind a generalist is someone who e.g. knows quant finance up to hedge fund snuff and knows how to configure wsgi/asgi servers with nginx; can read and rebate legal documentation and use an SMT solver. I don't feel that anyone who hasn't eg watched the recent Jordan Peterson/Slavoj Zizek debate and has a working understanding of Ripser and UMAP can call himself a generalist.

kristianc 7y ago
> Anyone who hasn't eg watched the recent Jordan Peterson/Slavoj Zizek debate I watched that debate and found it a tedious rehashing of tired old talking points and straw men criticisms of Capitalism/Marxism. To use that in any way of a yardstick of intellectual depth seems odd.
- thanatropism 7y ago
  Did you, though? The first hour was Jordan Peterson making a hacky point that capitalism is good and communism's not and Zizek doing Keith Jarret-type improv touching on a thousand topics. Then in the actual debate rounds Zizek got Jordan Peterson to agree with him. It was an actual debate. There was a winner and not in the sense of a rap battle. The loser was happy to have had it.
Bjartr 7y ago
"generalist" is opposing "specialist" and doesn't mean "everythingist". Someone who has done some full-stack dev, has run some marketing campaigns, and can kick out usable graphic design work when needed is a generalist (not an incredible one, but one nonetheless). What you're describing, if not a difference in kind (i.e. something other than generalist), is absolutely a significant difference of degree to the tune of the difference in degree between a mediocre junior software engineer fresh out of college and a 10x (in practice) senior software engineer with years of experience. They're absolutely not appropriate for the same set of jobs, but they absolutely are both "software engineers". Why is the term "generalist" so tightly constrained in your mind?