5 ms·

One word: play. I didn’t go to Unix school or do practice reps of building networks. I stayed up late nights building weird and sometimes nefarious projects.

by rsync 5y ago

One word: play. I didn’t go to Unix school or do practice reps of building networks. I stayed up late nights building weird and sometimes nefarious projects. Similarly, I have mediocre results when my schedule only allows BJJ classes but markedly better results when I can just go “play” Jiu jitsu with others. Just go get reps doing something you love, in an experimental and playful manner.

borroka 5y ago
The standard BJJ classes (warm-up, technique of the day, sparring) are pedagogical black holes (BB here), anything else decent enough is better.
- Pamar 5y ago
  Can you provide some suggestions on improving (or just pointing out what makes these pedagogical black holes)? I am a MA practitioner myself (Aikido, 32 years and counting) and while I am always interested in the pedagogical aspect even if I rarely held a lesson myself. (And yes, I know that BJJ is very different from Aikido, but at the end of the day, I see lots of other arts - including Karate, Judo... Aikido etc. - being taught as warm-up/a handful of techniques from the curriculum/sparring...).
  - elbows 5y ago
    A lot of martial arts training is focused on practicing techniques in isolation and developing "perfect" form (punches/kicks in the air, doing the same throw repeatedly against a cooperative partner). The problem is that any technique you want to apply against an opponent in a competition (or self-defense situation) also has a significant tactical/decision-making component, which is not really trained by that approach. You have to learn when to do a technique, how to set it up, and how to adapt the movement to your specific opponent. You can learn the tactical skills in sparring but it's difficult because there's so much going on. So when you try to jump from isolated technique practice to sparring, there's a disconnect because you haven't built the tactical skills. Even worse, the movement you practiced in isolation may be different from what works in sparring, so all that isolated practice can actually be counterproductive. You can see this pretty clearly in combat sports like kendo and fencing which have a strong component of tradition -- the movements of high-level competitors tend to be very different from the "correct" form taught in class. I'm not sure how much this would apply to aikido, which as I understand it is not particularly focused on competitive or self-defense applications. If you're interested in pedagogy for martial arts (or sports in general), I highly recommend "Development of Technique and Tactical Skill" by Luis Preto and Spyridon Katisgiannis. "Principles-Based Instruction for Self Defense" by Rory Miller is also pretty good, if a bit rambling.
    - Pamar 5y ago
      Thank you for the pointers. I have already put the Preto's book in my Amazon basket. Yes, I am aware that Aikido is radically different from most other martial arts (some dojos do practice a sort of "freeflow randori" but it's usually just having many ukes throwing attacks at you, and there is not much resistance to your techniques... and in any case it never really dominate the lesson in terms of time). Regarding your answer: personally I think this is a sort of paradox which cannot really be solved when teaching "how to fight": if I go to a "translator school" I will dedicate lots of time in actually translate texts. There will always be a practically infinite quantity of German texts to pick up, and I am expected to always tackle each with full energy and apply any trick I know. At the same time, there will never be a German text that will sue me from its hospital bed, or send the police to arrest my teachers and close down the school on Manslaughter charges. Even if we look at fighting arts/sports that were designed to freely apply full force (e.g. Judo) what you learn there is targeted to face an opponent which is wearing Judo Federation approved garb, is alone and is in your same weight class and probably level of expertise. And there is at least a referee around, fight happens on a sort of "consecrated ground" etc. etc.
  - borroka 5y ago
    This is for the common gym (and follows what was developed as class structure in the early days in Brazil), not for the more enlightened gyms that exist but they are not (or not likely) for the common person. Say, for 100 gym, 90 are set up the way I describe above. The technique section is like going to a seminar whose topic you didn't choose and whose content you won't likely see again for a few months or years. Like, today we do partial differential equation, and we will do them again in 6 months from now (apart from some of you who like them and decide to practice with no support). There is very little effort to present the common processes that make a technique work or not. For example, in ML you have broad categorization of approaches, such as supervised/unsupervised/reinforcement learning. Within supervised learning, you then have classification/regression. Then within those buckets, you have linear, non-linear. Within non-linear, you have bagged or boosted or neither. They share commonalities at different levels and they help the practitioner learn the techniques much faster and then apply those technique in a creative way. Likewise, in mount and side control you have similar need for hip control, shoulders on the mat, diaphragm under pressure for the more pressure-oriented jiu-jitseiro. But more often than not, the side control technique of the day is presented as just the technique of the day with very little connection to other techniques or common processes that make the technique work. A waste of potential deeper learning. More often than not, the instructors/coaches/professor love their voices and presentations way too much -- 5 minutes of explanation regarding some details of little relevance while students are getting cold and unfocused, then 5 minutes of drills that take 3 minutes to start because students have forgotten what the coach has shown (and you can imagine how long it will remain in the mind of the average practitioner after the class is over). Then, we have sparring, which in JJ is for some reason way too high stakes. In judo, you see top people getting thrown or give points all the time in randori/sparring with no ego bruised (well, more in judo than US wrestling, while in Russia for example you see more learning-oriented sparring, in the US it is grind, grind, grind), but in JJ, especially after people get their blue belt, they absolutely do not want to get chocked, arm-barred or swept by equal or lower belts. This creates defensive games that make thee knuckles white, but give little back in terms of improving the game of the practitioner. Positional sparring is pedagogically much better than free-sparring, since the same position or situation is presented or needs to be faced multiple times and that creates lower stakes, less defensive sparring and more "learning". That's the drilling that matters (and see Dave Alred's repair sessions https://leadersinsport.com/performance/dave-alred/ https://leadersinsport.com/performance/dave-alred/) and what for example Roger Gracie, the best JJ sport practitioner of all time) does. Many other points to discuss, but the main point is that coaches are not trained in coaching, they have no idea how to present ideas or concepts (clearly, there are exceptions and they are very often the most successful gyms, although there is selection bias at work), they are "just" good at JJ and they went into coaching. Some might say: but some people are getting very good at JJ. I agree, but "sink or swim" is a selection approach, not a teaching one.
  - sn9 5y ago
    It's been a few years since I read it, but Josh Waitzkin's Art of Learning discusses how he went from complete novice to winning the world championship in Tai Chi Push Hands within two years. It's a pretty good memoir for anyone interested in chess, martial arts, or just learning in general.
    - borroka 5y ago
      It is an interesting book and I know people who know him since they trained in the same gym, but along with the solid substance (meat) that he proposes, my impression is that he throws a lot of smoke at the problem (see for example the few interviews he gave to Tim Ferris). He is a smart guy and the book is one I recommend, but he overcomplicates what should be pretty straightforward. I met many high-level, sometimes world-level practitioners of various sports and at the risk of coming across as glib, I have yet to find one with higher-than-average intelligence (there are, I just have not met them). That's why when some NFL or NBA players are presented as semi-savant, it makes me chuckle and want to say to the interviewer or commentator, "that's what you want to believe, not what it is. They are simply much better, but very rarely in an intellectual way".
      - sn9 5y ago
        Yeah I get what you mean, but it's also pretty rare for people to achieve what he did in martial arts in such a small time frame. And the specifics he outlines about how he rapidly improved to the point where he could compete at an international level will surely benefit anyone looking to improve at their art.
- em-bee 5y ago
  how is sparring any different from just "playing" jiu-jitsu? the wikipedia page on BJJ ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu ) claims that live drilling ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness ) plays a major role in training and development, which suggests that it should be part of BJJ classes, but the way it is described, suggests that it is more similar to "playing", which, apparently is not part of BJJ classes. so how is sparring done that it doesn't have the desired effect? i also wonder why other sports (in particular other martial arts) should be any different. ps: i take it that BB means Black Belt?
  - matwood 5y ago
    I've only been training a little over 3 years (definitely not a BB), but maybe the BB meant there are many different types of sparring. Many (most?) schools warm up, show a move, (maybe drill it), then let everyone spar away. The problem is when sparring the person with more skill will severely limit the positions the less skilled person sees. If the less skilled person happens to be very strong or athletic they can in turn limit the positions the more skilled person sees just by holding on, which turns the sparring into very limited training value. For me, what has helped really learn is drilling. I know lots of BJJ people hate it, but I like winning and drilling works. Even those who hate drilling will admit it. Positional sparring. Start in some position and work from there. I purposely let less skilled people start in advantageous positions so they get to work from a dominant position (where most submissions come from), and I get work escaping from bad spots. Finally, flow rolling, which at higher training levels doesn't look that different from sparring. But, it's sparring where both sides give and get so that each sees many positions. At my level we also move much slower. Think about how hard it would be for someone to learn Chess if all they played was bullet chess? You need that bit of time so that your mind can start to build patterns, and then speed up. I'm fortunate that I lucked into a school that teaches a bit differently. EDIT I should add that free for all sparring still happens, it's just not the focus of every class. Open mat days and end of class is often when people go more free for all.
  - glangdale 5y ago
    Not a black belt myself, but agree with GP. Sparring frequently tends to be "people trying to murder each other on the mats in pursuit of their egos". There's a level of dynamism in good sparring that can immediately get shut down if one or both practioners are overly motivated by "winning". You need to take a lot of risks to learn in practice even if it means getting clowned by someone who you could beat if you had to, but you do see people sticking to conservative games in order to dominate. Which often doesn't teach them (as they aren't learning new aspects) but it also doesn't teach their opponent (as it's very hard to learn new stuff when trapped in someone's well-rehearsed "A Game"). The advantage of positional sparring (i.e. go from one position and stop when someone gets out of it to some outcome - not necessarily a tap) is that everyone gets to sharpen a single position. The ego motivation isn't as strong there as it is with full sparring.
- tsumnia 5y ago
  I've actually tried to frame my Computer Science instruction style based on my martial art experiences (BB Aikido, Purple BJJ). How I view it is that CS and MA share many properties in different environments. Both require a need for understanding technical skills (for loop or an arm bar), areas where to apply these skills (simulations or triangle->arm bar transition), and finally have an element of "problem-solving" (real world coding or sparring). Most of the issues I see with Deliberate Practice criticism are the 10k hours rule and limitations in training "problem solving". 10,000 hours is obviously an arbitrary number, but signals the importance of time on task. With regard to training problem solving, I don't think we really have a solid "here is how you train it", but instead that we focus on training patterns so we can identify opportune times to apply them. THAT is where I can see DP being useful, since the goal moves from problem solving to lower level Bloom levels (Remembering/Applying those Patterns).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kansface 5y ago
I don't think this is the correct model nor should we try to generalize it. Deliberate practice works by systematically forcing us to continually engage in the part of the activity that we suck the most at. That is the place where we can most readily improve and addressing it is consequently the best usage of our time (disregarding some side effects and constraints). This sort of engagement requires a brutal degree of discipline and integrity to accurately assess performance. Most people are unwilling or incapable which is why teachers are valuable. I did martial arts for years, but never quite deliberately. Its easiest for me to talk about music where I put in 3-5 hours a day for years - its so fucking hard to hear what you are playing instead of what you intend to be playing or what other performers have played. Music lives in your head more than the real world. After a few years, undirected practice was stealing my time, holding me back. > Just go get reps doing something you love, in an experimental and playful manner. This may have addressed some problems you faced (maybe the practical application of otherwise the Platonic ideal technique), but that is a specific problem. I'd wager the more common problem is one of mindlessly playing with no regard for performance because that's the easy trap. At the end of the day, training BJJ to improve is an entirely different endeavor than going to class 2-3 times a week (though both are perfectly reasonable activities of course).
poetaster 5y ago
I agree that 3 hours on hannons (pattern excercices) on the piano a day might hold you back. But that's not playful. I built my own metronome. Disasemble the piano! Really. I admit that I will never be a good pianist, but have made good music, with others, on keys. It is really difficult to be mindfull and conscious of your production. I try swapping modalities. Loop record some chords on top of euclidean rythms... Swap to the drums. Obviously the dilettante approach can also be a dead end. But I've been learning music, more and more this way for decades. I'll never be a virtuoso, but have recordings where I think, wow, was that really me? Does help to play with others who help 'carry' you. I have a similar approach to software. PS. I did have to save for the basement studio.
loudtieblahblah 5y ago
>I didn’t go to Unix school or do practice reps of building networks. I stayed up late nights building weird and sometimes nefarious projects. This is how i learned Linux/Unix, AWS, bash scripting and all sorts of things. And then .. one day I found myself ... older. Work would kick my ass and I had spent my 20s eating like shit because i spent too much time sitting at a computer. So time once used for computer play became gym time, jogging time, swimming, hiking, yoga, lifting time. Then a little older, and starting to buckle down the finances because we got married and now wanted a house so we stopped going out so much and started staying in more and watching movies, playing board games. The money i once used to build new computer or have spare machines or pay for EC2 instances and ELBs and S3 buckets, that all dried up. Then i have a house to take care of - which takes time. Then i have a kid to take care of. All of a sudden I'm 40, with a house, a kid, a 8-10 hour a day job, i get up at 6am and go jogging. The stress of life has boiled into an anxiety problem - so i can't over caffeinate anymore (which used to keep my ADHD at bay, to an extent). I have to exercise daily to keep in shape and htat anxiety at bay. I'm getting older and stressed out and maybe i need to eat healthier and spend more time in the kitchen making sure I'm getting whole, nutritional, well balanced meals and not a lot of quick, processed shit. This makes my child's health better too. And now i have no time for "play". And when i have time for play - one more computer screen is the last thing in the world i want to look at. and now i understand how STEM basically exploits young men who are willing to spend 8 hours a day working, plus a couple hours of overtime daily or weekly, ontop of all the free training they're constantly giving themselves via "play"..then looking at people 20-30 years their senior and expecting them to keep up. What you love - also just changes. Work is the best way to ruin any passion. The toxic co-workers, the preachy HR departments, the exciting projects ruined by bureaucracy, the small companies that expect too much of you, the large companies that lock you into narrowly defined roles and treat you like a number, the endless meetings (zoom or IRL), the jam packed calendars to the point you don't know how you're going to have the time to ramp your brain up to take on something complex. You start to realize.. hey, i like gardening. I like making furniture. I l ike writing poetry. I like playing video games with my kid or teaching him to swim or ride a bike. I like taking care of my yard. I like just... putting a pair of headphones on and listening to a record, carving time out to read on a regular basis, maybe catch and old movie with the wife after t he kid's asleep. I like some fine dining, or a couple glasses of red wine 1-2x a month. All the things that bring you the joy that computer-play once did, do absolute fuck all to further your career. Then what? what do you do then?

by rsync 5y ago

borroka 5y ago

The standard BJJ classes (warm-up, technique of the day, sparring) are pedagogical black holes (BB here), anything else decent enough is better.

Pamar 5y ago
Can you provide some suggestions on improving (or just pointing out what makes these pedagogical black holes)? I am a MA practitioner myself (Aikido, 32 years and counting) and while I am always interested in the pedagogical aspect even if I rarely held a lesson myself. (And yes, I know that BJJ is very different from Aikido, but at the end of the day, I see lots of other arts - including Karate, Judo... Aikido etc. - being taught as warm-up/a handful of techniques from the curriculum/sparring...).
- elbows 5y ago
  A lot of martial arts training is focused on practicing techniques in isolation and developing "perfect" form (punches/kicks in the air, doing the same throw repeatedly against a cooperative partner). The problem is that any technique you want to apply against an opponent in a competition (or self-defense situation) also has a significant tactical/decision-making component, which is not really trained by that approach. You have to learn when to do a technique, how to set it up, and how to adapt the movement to your specific opponent. You can learn the tactical skills in sparring but it's difficult because there's so much going on. So when you try to jump from isolated technique practice to sparring, there's a disconnect because you haven't built the tactical skills. Even worse, the movement you practiced in isolation may be different from what works in sparring, so all that isolated practice can actually be counterproductive. You can see this pretty clearly in combat sports like kendo and fencing which have a strong component of tradition -- the movements of high-level competitors tend to be very different from the "correct" form taught in class. I'm not sure how much this would apply to aikido, which as I understand it is not particularly focused on competitive or self-defense applications. If you're interested in pedagogy for martial arts (or sports in general), I highly recommend "Development of Technique and Tactical Skill" by Luis Preto and Spyridon Katisgiannis. "Principles-Based Instruction for Self Defense" by Rory Miller is also pretty good, if a bit rambling.
  - Pamar 5y ago
    Thank you for the pointers. I have already put the Preto's book in my Amazon basket. Yes, I am aware that Aikido is radically different from most other martial arts (some dojos do practice a sort of "freeflow randori" but it's usually just having many ukes throwing attacks at you, and there is not much resistance to your techniques... and in any case it never really dominate the lesson in terms of time). Regarding your answer: personally I think this is a sort of paradox which cannot really be solved when teaching "how to fight": if I go to a "translator school" I will dedicate lots of time in actually translate texts. There will always be a practically infinite quantity of German texts to pick up, and I am expected to always tackle each with full energy and apply any trick I know. At the same time, there will never be a German text that will sue me from its hospital bed, or send the police to arrest my teachers and close down the school on Manslaughter charges. Even if we look at fighting arts/sports that were designed to freely apply full force (e.g. Judo) what you learn there is targeted to face an opponent which is wearing Judo Federation approved garb, is alone and is in your same weight class and probably level of expertise. And there is at least a referee around, fight happens on a sort of "consecrated ground" etc. etc.
- borroka 5y ago
  This is for the common gym (and follows what was developed as class structure in the early days in Brazil), not for the more enlightened gyms that exist but they are not (or not likely) for the common person. Say, for 100 gym, 90 are set up the way I describe above. The technique section is like going to a seminar whose topic you didn't choose and whose content you won't likely see again for a few months or years. Like, today we do partial differential equation, and we will do them again in 6 months from now (apart from some of you who like them and decide to practice with no support). There is very little effort to present the common processes that make a technique work or not. For example, in ML you have broad categorization of approaches, such as supervised/unsupervised/reinforcement learning. Within supervised learning, you then have classification/regression. Then within those buckets, you have linear, non-linear. Within non-linear, you have bagged or boosted or neither. They share commonalities at different levels and they help the practitioner learn the techniques much faster and then apply those technique in a creative way. Likewise, in mount and side control you have similar need for hip control, shoulders on the mat, diaphragm under pressure for the more pressure-oriented jiu-jitseiro. But more often than not, the side control technique of the day is presented as just the technique of the day with very little connection to other techniques or common processes that make the technique work. A waste of potential deeper learning. More often than not, the instructors/coaches/professor love their voices and presentations way too much -- 5 minutes of explanation regarding some details of little relevance while students are getting cold and unfocused, then 5 minutes of drills that take 3 minutes to start because students have forgotten what the coach has shown (and you can imagine how long it will remain in the mind of the average practitioner after the class is over). Then, we have sparring, which in JJ is for some reason way too high stakes. In judo, you see top people getting thrown or give points all the time in randori/sparring with no ego bruised (well, more in judo than US wrestling, while in Russia for example you see more learning-oriented sparring, in the US it is grind, grind, grind), but in JJ, especially after people get their blue belt, they absolutely do not want to get chocked, arm-barred or swept by equal or lower belts. This creates defensive games that make thee knuckles white, but give little back in terms of improving the game of the practitioner. Positional sparring is pedagogically much better than free-sparring, since the same position or situation is presented or needs to be faced multiple times and that creates lower stakes, less defensive sparring and more "learning". That's the drilling that matters (and see Dave Alred's repair sessions https://leadersinsport.com/performance/dave-alred/ https://leadersinsport.com/performance/dave-alred/) and what for example Roger Gracie, the best JJ sport practitioner of all time) does. Many other points to discuss, but the main point is that coaches are not trained in coaching, they have no idea how to present ideas or concepts (clearly, there are exceptions and they are very often the most successful gyms, although there is selection bias at work), they are "just" good at JJ and they went into coaching. Some might say: but some people are getting very good at JJ. I agree, but "sink or swim" is a selection approach, not a teaching one.
- sn9 5y ago
  It's been a few years since I read it, but Josh Waitzkin's Art of Learning discusses how he went from complete novice to winning the world championship in Tai Chi Push Hands within two years. It's a pretty good memoir for anyone interested in chess, martial arts, or just learning in general.
  - borroka 5y ago
    It is an interesting book and I know people who know him since they trained in the same gym, but along with the solid substance (meat) that he proposes, my impression is that he throws a lot of smoke at the problem (see for example the few interviews he gave to Tim Ferris). He is a smart guy and the book is one I recommend, but he overcomplicates what should be pretty straightforward. I met many high-level, sometimes world-level practitioners of various sports and at the risk of coming across as glib, I have yet to find one with higher-than-average intelligence (there are, I just have not met them). That's why when some NFL or NBA players are presented as semi-savant, it makes me chuckle and want to say to the interviewer or commentator, "that's what you want to believe, not what it is. They are simply much better, but very rarely in an intellectual way".
    - sn9 5y ago
      Yeah I get what you mean, but it's also pretty rare for people to achieve what he did in martial arts in such a small time frame. And the specifics he outlines about how he rapidly improved to the point where he could compete at an international level will surely benefit anyone looking to improve at their art.
em-bee 5y ago
how is sparring any different from just "playing" jiu-jitsu? the wikipedia page on BJJ ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu ) claims that live drilling ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness ) plays a major role in training and development, which suggests that it should be part of BJJ classes, but the way it is described, suggests that it is more similar to "playing", which, apparently is not part of BJJ classes. so how is sparring done that it doesn't have the desired effect? i also wonder why other sports (in particular other martial arts) should be any different. ps: i take it that BB means Black Belt?
- matwood 5y ago
  I've only been training a little over 3 years (definitely not a BB), but maybe the BB meant there are many different types of sparring. Many (most?) schools warm up, show a move, (maybe drill it), then let everyone spar away. The problem is when sparring the person with more skill will severely limit the positions the less skilled person sees. If the less skilled person happens to be very strong or athletic they can in turn limit the positions the more skilled person sees just by holding on, which turns the sparring into very limited training value. For me, what has helped really learn is drilling. I know lots of BJJ people hate it, but I like winning and drilling works. Even those who hate drilling will admit it. Positional sparring. Start in some position and work from there. I purposely let less skilled people start in advantageous positions so they get to work from a dominant position (where most submissions come from), and I get work escaping from bad spots. Finally, flow rolling, which at higher training levels doesn't look that different from sparring. But, it's sparring where both sides give and get so that each sees many positions. At my level we also move much slower. Think about how hard it would be for someone to learn Chess if all they played was bullet chess? You need that bit of time so that your mind can start to build patterns, and then speed up. I'm fortunate that I lucked into a school that teaches a bit differently. EDIT I should add that free for all sparring still happens, it's just not the focus of every class. Open mat days and end of class is often when people go more free for all.
- glangdale 5y ago
  Not a black belt myself, but agree with GP. Sparring frequently tends to be "people trying to murder each other on the mats in pursuit of their egos". There's a level of dynamism in good sparring that can immediately get shut down if one or both practioners are overly motivated by "winning". You need to take a lot of risks to learn in practice even if it means getting clowned by someone who you could beat if you had to, but you do see people sticking to conservative games in order to dominate. Which often doesn't teach them (as they aren't learning new aspects) but it also doesn't teach their opponent (as it's very hard to learn new stuff when trapped in someone's well-rehearsed "A Game"). The advantage of positional sparring (i.e. go from one position and stop when someone gets out of it to some outcome - not necessarily a tap) is that everyone gets to sharpen a single position. The ego motivation isn't as strong there as it is with full sparring.
tsumnia 5y ago
I've actually tried to frame my Computer Science instruction style based on my martial art experiences (BB Aikido, Purple BJJ). How I view it is that CS and MA share many properties in different environments. Both require a need for understanding technical skills (for loop or an arm bar), areas where to apply these skills (simulations or triangle->arm bar transition), and finally have an element of "problem-solving" (real world coding or sparring). Most of the issues I see with Deliberate Practice criticism are the 10k hours rule and limitations in training "problem solving". 10,000 hours is obviously an arbitrary number, but signals the importance of time on task. With regard to training problem solving, I don't think we really have a solid "here is how you train it", but instead that we focus on training patterns so we can identify opportune times to apply them. THAT is where I can see DP being useful, since the goal moves from problem solving to lower level Bloom levels (Remembering/Applying those Patterns).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kansface 5y ago

I don't think this is the correct model nor should we try to generalize it. Deliberate practice works by systematically forcing us to continually engage in the part of the activity that we suck the most at. That is the place where we can most readily improve and addressing it is consequently the best usage of our time (disregarding some side effects and constraints). This sort of engagement requires a brutal degree of discipline and integrity to accurately assess performance. Most people are unwilling or incapable which is why teachers are valuable. I did martial arts for years, but never quite deliberately. Its easiest for me to talk about music where I put in 3-5 hours a day for years - its so fucking hard to hear what you are playing instead of what you intend to be playing or what other performers have played. Music lives in your head more than the real world. After a few years, undirected practice was stealing my time, holding me back. > Just go get reps doing something you love, in an experimental and playful manner. This may have addressed some problems you faced (maybe the practical application of otherwise the Platonic ideal technique), but that is a specific problem. I'd wager the more common problem is one of mindlessly playing with no regard for performance because that's the easy trap. At the end of the day, training BJJ to improve is an entirely different endeavor than going to class 2-3 times a week (though both are perfectly reasonable activities of course).

poetaster 5y ago

I agree that 3 hours on hannons (pattern excercices) on the piano a day might hold you back. But that's not playful. I built my own metronome. Disasemble the piano! Really. I admit that I will never be a good pianist, but have made good music, with others, on keys. It is really difficult to be mindfull and conscious of your production. I try swapping modalities. Loop record some chords on top of euclidean rythms... Swap to the drums. Obviously the dilettante approach can also be a dead end. But I've been learning music, more and more this way for decades. I'll never be a virtuoso, but have recordings where I think, wow, was that really me? Does help to play with others who help 'carry' you. I have a similar approach to software. PS. I did have to save for the basement studio.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago

>I didn’t go to Unix school or do practice reps of building networks. I stayed up late nights building weird and sometimes nefarious projects. This is how i learned Linux/Unix, AWS, bash scripting and all sorts of things. And then .. one day I found myself ... older. Work would kick my ass and I had spent my 20s eating like shit because i spent too much time sitting at a computer. So time once used for computer play became gym time, jogging time, swimming, hiking, yoga, lifting time. Then a little older, and starting to buckle down the finances because we got married and now wanted a house so we stopped going out so much and started staying in more and watching movies, playing board games. The money i once used to build new computer or have spare machines or pay for EC2 instances and ELBs and S3 buckets, that all dried up. Then i have a house to take care of - which takes time. Then i have a kid to take care of. All of a sudden I'm 40, with a house, a kid, a 8-10 hour a day job, i get up at 6am and go jogging. The stress of life has boiled into an anxiety problem - so i can't over caffeinate anymore (which used to keep my ADHD at bay, to an extent). I have to exercise daily to keep in shape and htat anxiety at bay. I'm getting older and stressed out and maybe i need to eat healthier and spend more time in the kitchen making sure I'm getting whole, nutritional, well balanced meals and not a lot of quick, processed shit. This makes my child's health better too. And now i have no time for "play". And when i have time for play - one more computer screen is the last thing in the world i want to look at. and now i understand how STEM basically exploits young men who are willing to spend 8 hours a day working, plus a couple hours of overtime daily or weekly, ontop of all the free training they're constantly giving themselves via "play"..then looking at people 20-30 years their senior and expecting them to keep up. What you love - also just changes. Work is the best way to ruin any passion. The toxic co-workers, the preachy HR departments, the exciting projects ruined by bureaucracy, the small companies that expect too much of you, the large companies that lock you into narrowly defined roles and treat you like a number, the endless meetings (zoom or IRL), the jam packed calendars to the point you don't know how you're going to have the time to ramp your brain up to take on something complex. You start to realize.. hey, i like gardening. I like making furniture. I l ike writing poetry. I like playing video games with my kid or teaching him to swim or ride a bike. I like taking care of my yard. I like just... putting a pair of headphones on and listening to a record, carving time out to read on a regular basis, maybe catch and old movie with the wife after t he kid's asleep. I like some fine dining, or a couple glasses of red wine 1-2x a month. All the things that bring you the joy that computer-play once did, do absolute fuck all to further your career. Then what? what do you do then?