3 ms·

This seems like an interesting presentation that I just skimmed through. But I really like the idea I get from the title, as a counter-statement against the gen

This seems like an interesting presentation that I just skimmed through. But I really like the idea I get from the title, as a counter-statement against the general trend of presenting things as easy, and "learn x in five simple steps". Some things are hard, and maybe you can learn something useful in five minutes, true mastery takes time.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
My issue / problem is that it doesn't feel like there's much job opportunities for "true mastery"; a lot of places are fluid and will do big rearchs every couple of years. Or maybe I'm biased for having worked in consultancy for ages and mainly being involved in said big rearchs. That said, I can't fathom working on the same thing for a decade. I tried in my last job, but after two and a half years of slow progress (I was my own product owner and the company didn't want to hire anyone else... or they did, it's just that they went onto Monsterboard and the like to find staff).
- silisili 3y ago
  I mostly agree. My DNS mentor, whose job was basically a DNS industry expert, was fired without cause one day, and it always left a bad taste in my mouth. That said, while I've always considered myself a generalist, being the 'DNS guy' has proven invaluable in my experience. People treat you like some kind of wizard. I guess I've come to the conclusion that it's likely best to be a generalist with a few really deep specialist qualities.
- sfink 3y ago
  > I can't fathom working on the same thing for a decade. I don't think that is being suggested here? In fact, jvns specifically talks about working on other things for the vast majority of that time. I think the idea is that you're doing whatever you're doing, but there are these threads that you'll return to repeatedly, deepening your understanding each time. Specialization in one area is an interesting topic (when does it make sense? When is it career-limiting vs career-enhancing? Can it be done in a way that avoids overfitting?) but it's something different than being discussed in the article.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

My issue / problem is that it doesn't feel like there's much job opportunities for "true mastery"; a lot of places are fluid and will do big rearchs every couple of years. Or maybe I'm biased for having worked in consultancy for ages and mainly being involved in said big rearchs. That said, I can't fathom working on the same thing for a decade. I tried in my last job, but after two and a half years of slow progress (I was my own product owner and the company didn't want to hire anyone else... or they did, it's just that they went onto Monsterboard and the like to find staff).

silisili 3y ago
I mostly agree. My DNS mentor, whose job was basically a DNS industry expert, was fired without cause one day, and it always left a bad taste in my mouth. That said, while I've always considered myself a generalist, being the 'DNS guy' has proven invaluable in my experience. People treat you like some kind of wizard. I guess I've come to the conclusion that it's likely best to be a generalist with a few really deep specialist qualities.
sfink 3y ago
> I can't fathom working on the same thing for a decade. I don't think that is being suggested here? In fact, jvns specifically talks about working on other things for the vast majority of that time. I think the idea is that you're doing whatever you're doing, but there are these threads that you'll return to repeatedly, deepening your understanding each time. Specialization in one area is an interesting topic (when does it make sense? When is it career-limiting vs career-enhancing? Can it be done in a way that avoids overfitting?) but it's something different than being discussed in the article.