4 ms·

Always Swim Downstream

16 points by kanamekun 14y ago

diego 14y ago
Just what we need: generic advice from Michael Arrington. Sorry Mike, but you are not the mold from which everyone else was made. It works for you, great. Other people may do better focusing on addressing and improving their weaknesses.
- kanamekun 14y ago
  I think this is one of Mike's best posts, actually. I've definitely benefited from addressing and improving weaknesses, and that has helped. But when I've focused more on neutralizing my weaknesses (by say, surrounding myself with people who complement my shortcomings) and then really doubling down on my strengths... that's when I've seen the best results.
- TeMPOraL 14y ago
  > Just what we need: generic advice from Michael Arrington. "Hate Arrington" seems to be a common attitude on HN recently. What did he do to deserve so much bad will on the Internet?
xiaoma 14y ago
I've thought about this issue a lot. In some ways I'm the very model of someone "swimming upstream" and I'm trying to reverse it. Growing up, I was really good at math. Good enough that I demolished the SAT at the age of 12 (getting a 770 I think), and got into college as a 13 year old. I did well at it for two years and then set it aside to be a normal high school student and try to become more well rounded. In the end, the one subject I really, really sucked at was foreign languages. And yet, when I did finally go back to college, I had no motivation for working at or even attending math classes; I graduated as a Japanese major. Then I moved to Taiwan to learn Chinese with traditional characters, not simplified. I learned Chinese, and I can read. But I'm certainly not one of those foreigners with incredible language skills they put on TV for everyone to oooh and ahhh at. Similarly with sports, I had a natural aptitude for co-ordination based ones like bowling, fencing, etc... so I put myself through absurd training on top of the regular team training to become an okay distance runner. Looking back on it now, in many ways I was an idiot. I could have done so much more, been so much more if I'd focused more on my strengths... which is why I'm back in the US doing everything I can to get my foot in the door at a tech company where I can return to the kind of work that's more of a natural fit. That said, I think there's a clear separation between things which should be improved if they're weak and things that aren't worth the time: Improve the weaknesses that will hurt the rest of your life! If you're in terrible cardio-vascular shape, that's worth improving. It will affect your health, your energy and even your brain. If you have terrible social skills, that's worth improving. They affect your work life, your personal life, your happiness and even your health in the long run. If you are terrible with money, that's worth improving. Poverty also affects the social, physical spheres. However, if you're just not that good at stringed instruments, sticking with the piano is probably good for you. If you can't code, it's fine to become a lawyer instead and focus on your verbal skills. Many skills really can be overlooked in favor of a substitute that's a better fit. Others are universal and worth the time to bring up to at least a 3 or 4 out of 10.
- chipsy 14y ago
  In complement - I have a strong tendency to approach learning by "nibbling" at problems and soaking up the low-hanging fruit, not diving into them and front-loading all the effort. This isn't time-efficient, since with a lot of skills, intense practice is eventually required to get any result. But it lets me explore my interest in the subject, so that by the time I commit to serious study, I've developed a feel for what I want to learn, and how good I intend to become at it. Addressing weaknesses does give you a certain kind of long-term flexibility, and in my case, I tend to incrementally become more motivated as I detect weaknesses in what I'm doing - so, for example, I haven't felt too motivated to learn advanced mathematics or foreign languages until recently. But this isn't the way to get a fast result. I'm in agreement that a prodigy's talent is derived from the willingness to be unbalanced.

16 points by kanamekun 14y ago

diego 14y ago

Just what we need: generic advice from Michael Arrington. Sorry Mike, but you are not the mold from which everyone else was made. It works for you, great. Other people may do better focusing on addressing and improving their weaknesses.

kanamekun 14y ago
I think this is one of Mike's best posts, actually. I've definitely benefited from addressing and improving weaknesses, and that has helped. But when I've focused more on neutralizing my weaknesses (by say, surrounding myself with people who complement my shortcomings) and then really doubling down on my strengths... that's when I've seen the best results.
TeMPOraL 14y ago
> Just what we need: generic advice from Michael Arrington. "Hate Arrington" seems to be a common attitude on HN recently. What did he do to deserve so much bad will on the Internet?

xiaoma 14y ago

I've thought about this issue a lot. In some ways I'm the very model of someone "swimming upstream" and I'm trying to reverse it. Growing up, I was really good at math. Good enough that I demolished the SAT at the age of 12 (getting a 770 I think), and got into college as a 13 year old. I did well at it for two years and then set it aside to be a normal high school student and try to become more well rounded. In the end, the one subject I really, really sucked at was foreign languages. And yet, when I did finally go back to college, I had no motivation for working at or even attending math classes; I graduated as a Japanese major. Then I moved to Taiwan to learn Chinese with traditional characters, not simplified. I learned Chinese, and I can read. But I'm certainly not one of those foreigners with incredible language skills they put on TV for everyone to oooh and ahhh at. Similarly with sports, I had a natural aptitude for co-ordination based ones like bowling, fencing, etc... so I put myself through absurd training on top of the regular team training to become an okay distance runner. Looking back on it now, in many ways I was an idiot. I could have done so much more, been so much more if I'd focused more on my strengths... which is why I'm back in the US doing everything I can to get my foot in the door at a tech company where I can return to the kind of work that's more of a natural fit. That said, I think there's a clear separation between things which should be improved if they're weak and things that aren't worth the time: Improve the weaknesses that will hurt the rest of your life! If you're in terrible cardio-vascular shape, that's worth improving. It will affect your health, your energy and even your brain. If you have terrible social skills, that's worth improving. They affect your work life, your personal life, your happiness and even your health in the long run. If you are terrible with money, that's worth improving. Poverty also affects the social, physical spheres. However, if you're just not that good at stringed instruments, sticking with the piano is probably good for you. If you can't code, it's fine to become a lawyer instead and focus on your verbal skills. Many skills really can be overlooked in favor of a substitute that's a better fit. Others are universal and worth the time to bring up to at least a 3 or 4 out of 10.

chipsy 14y ago
In complement - I have a strong tendency to approach learning by "nibbling" at problems and soaking up the low-hanging fruit, not diving into them and front-loading all the effort. This isn't time-efficient, since with a lot of skills, intense practice is eventually required to get any result. But it lets me explore my interest in the subject, so that by the time I commit to serious study, I've developed a feel for what I want to learn, and how good I intend to become at it. Addressing weaknesses does give you a certain kind of long-term flexibility, and in my case, I tend to incrementally become more motivated as I detect weaknesses in what I'm doing - so, for example, I haven't felt too motivated to learn advanced mathematics or foreign languages until recently. But this isn't the way to get a fast result. I'm in agreement that a prodigy's talent is derived from the willingness to be unbalanced.