8 ms·

Given the 10,000 hour rule as generally true (at least in spirit), what's very difficult and seldom discussed is just how hard it is to get there at anything wo

Given the 10,000 hour rule as generally true (at least in spirit), what's very difficult and seldom discussed is just how hard it is to get there at anything worthwhile once you're passed a certain point in life. Why? Because job. Having gone through college and taken work terms between years, I saw this first-hand: after you're done 9 to 5 for that paycheck (+food, +commuting, +exercise, +social life), good luck finding 4 hours a day for building your skills at something meaningful - or starting a side project. You have to sacrifice a ton, or say goodbye to full-time work. While a lot of graduate students won't outright admit it, I get the feeling this is a big motivator for a lot of people "delaying the real world". (BTW, 4 hours a day means an actual 4 hours of high concentration and high output, which can take a full working day as anyone with a day job will attest.) And then you get people who look down on you for "delaying the real world", and so many people who do anything other than a 9-5 after basic college feel guilty for doing so. I used to look down on those people too quite frankly (lazy bums, you don't get to learn interesting things while I fix this bullshit Perl script). But now I get it. To me, this is the best argument for basic income, although I'm still not sold on it. How can we have a passionate society of master craftsmen and artisans when we're busy inventing bullshit jobs for people to fill, so they can support themselves? A big caveat is if somehow the stars align and your work contributes to mastery at your craft. The odds actually aren't nearly so bad if you're in tech. As I alluded to above, they didn't work out so great for me, at least initially. Web and app development, I found out, isn't my thing. As some final anecdotal data, it's fairly well-known that the Dutch have a disproportionately high amount of world-class DJs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dutch_DJs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dutch_DJs). In examining this anomaly, one finds out that the Dutch offer disproportionately more grants and funding for music and the arts. So people can take those years they would have otherwise spent in typical 9-5's and instead focus on DJ-ing. </rant from someone who would rather not be job hunting>

DanielStraight 12y ago
It's interesting you didn't mention family at all. Having kids is a huge commitment of time. I think a good take-away from your rant (plus the consideration of family) is that we need to be talking more about making time for things. Too often we talk a great deal about what can be done in a few hours a day, but when it comes to making that time, we just say, "If it's important to you, you'll make the time." We should be looking at ways to maximize the use of very small chunks of time. I may not be able to commit even a single hour of dedicated time per day... but I can certainly do something for a few minutes here and there throughout the day which adds up to an hour. How can we make that kind of practice more effective?
- nervousvarun 12y ago
  Maybe I'm wrong but I interpreted the logic there as: Having kids is definitely an enormous time-sink but that is a choice. Without basic income having a job essentially is not.
  - DanielStraight 12y ago
    I guess I took it a different way. My interpretation was basically... once you get to a certain point in your life, the amount of time required for your responsibilities is significantly higher than it was in your youth. Four hours per day is probably achievable for the average college student but incredibly unlikely for the average "adult", for lack of a better term.
- zxcvvcxz 12y ago
  Gahhh I'm not even that old, don't scare me with this family talk. >We should be looking at ways to maximize the use of very small chunks of time. I may not be able to commit even a single hour of dedicated time per day... but I can certainly do something for a few minutes here and there throughout the day which adds up to an hour. Sounds noble in theory, but in practice there are two problems: 1) you won't be entering a state of flow on your tasks, and 2) you still won't be racking up the volume to get anywhere close to world-class.
  - DanielStraight 12y ago
    To point number 1, I tend to think of flow as helpful but not necessary. For some tasks, I'm not really sure flow applies at all. I mean, I'm pretty damn good at tying my shoes. I do it without even thinking about it. I don't think flow was involved in learning that; it's just muscle memory. That's a trivial example of course, but there are other factors than flow which influence the effectiveness of practice. I don't think we should just give up if we can't have flow. To point 2, you're right of course, but we can't be world-class at more than 1 or 2 things anyway. There's still benefit to being pretty good at something. A great phrase I stole from a blog called All Japanese All The Time is "You can have, do or be anything, but you can't have, do and be everything." If you want to commit your whole life to being say... the greatest chainsaw juggler in history, that's probably achievable. But you aren't also going to be fluent in 10 languages, an expert computer programmer, a world-class guitarist, and a grandmaster in chess. I'm alright with only being an expert in things I'm able to devote full-time efforts to. But I'd also like to be pretty good in other stuff. How can I take bits and pieces of time here and there to achieve that? That's what I'd like to see some research (formal or informal) on.
jacquesm 12y ago
There are ways around the 'because job' problem. I've been reading a lot on this guys blog: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ and he's got some pretty interesting ideas on getting off the treadmill, with both actionable advice and the lead character eating his own dogfood.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- kamaal 12y ago
  Most people are astonishingly bad at savings and investments, and this includes some really smart people who fail to make a good recurring income out of windfall scenarios. I tend to see this as failure of humans in general to visualize large structures. There fore similar things like large timelines, growth scenario's, compounding. One would be surprised how common this is. People can think of probably a couple of years, but their understanding fails them when they have imagine of scenarios 2 or 3 decades from now. Some times its so bad, they even totally avoid thinking about it. I know a lot of people who made a fortune in the 1990's when they were in their 20's, but are now back to where they were when they are in their 40's. And you don't have to even to win the start up lottery to do this. A good savings and investment strategy will get you there. But that very rarely happens. Most people can at most simply maintain the status quo all their lives.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    I've never had a very large amount of cash at my disposal, up to now it was mostly 'cash flow' and I buried as much of it as I could in stones and land. Now that is changing and I'm back to school because I realize that managing any amount of money is a risky operation and it is too important for me to consider outsourcing the job to so called experts the majority of which appear to be at least as clueless as I am when asked some pointed questions. So so far the lack of capital has kept me from seeing just how deficient I am in this respect, I was so focused on achieving a certain goal that I lost sight of what to do once it was achieved. Luxury problems, that's for sure, but still, they are problems and I'm fairly determined not to go down the route you sketch. Thanks for the underlining and implicit warning.
berkes 12y ago
I've always planned and managed to take two to four months per year off: between jobs, or simply blocking my freelance-agenda for a few (slower) months. During these months, I take on a personal project with a certain focus. I don't force myself to release anything: though shipping is nice. I don't set any hard goal. Just two, three or even four months of playing around and learning. A new Database-concept. Geocoding. TDD. A new framework or language. This is not enough to become expert or even good at anything. But it allows me to keep up with the field and ever evolving technologies; I'm a webdeveloper, so my field is rather fast-moving. And, because I plan this ahead, I can afford the time off (by asking a little more during the rest of the year) and I can actually tell clients "nope, I don't have time the coming X weeks".
- llllllllllll 12y ago
  I did that basically, but I saved up enough to move to and live comfortably in SE Asia for at least 3 or 4 years. I spend less then $400 a month, so maybe this lifestyle is not for everyone, and it's certainly not feasible with a family, but the move has totally changed my life. Before, I felt stuck and directionless. Now though, after a little less than a year of total freedom, I've finished two big projects that I'm proud of. I have a much wider range of skills and I'd be confident walking into an interview at a tech company. I hope I never have to though! I would absolutely recommend a similar path for anyone struggling with the full-time work grind.
seren 12y ago
You have not addressed something in your post, but maybe is is obvious : why do you want or need to become an expert ? You can have a very fulfilling life being a jack-of-all-trade. In a fast moving word, I am not sure I would like to become a world expert in a shrinking domain. I would say the vast majority of humain beings, both dead and alive, are no expert. So is this because you have an insatiable curiosity ?(but I don't think that being an expert is necessary the best to quench your thirst for knowledge) Do you want to stand out in a crowd ? To have a legacy ? I am also kind of frustrated knowing that my time is limited, and it reduces somehow my options, but I have come to term with the fact that I won't be able to do "everything" during my time on Earth.
kamaal 12y ago
>>this is the best argument for basic income You only feel the need for a basic income because you are currently strapped for time and you crave for more time to work on something far more creative. Once time comes in abundant supply you will now be faced with a situation where you will have a lot of time and won't really understand the reason why you would want to work hard(Your basic needs are met) or spend time doing <some work of interest>, since you now have unlimited time to delay those projects. People generally think they can pull of miracles if they get time. Instead what happens is most people wake up late, sleep late, waste time doing pointless stuff. As a general rule you will only consider things in short supply as precious. Which is why being busy is probably a good idea, because that way you will value the most important thing in your life-- time and opportunities.
- zxcvvcxz 12y ago
  A good point to be sure, but I disagree entirely in my own case. In fact I realized this a while ago and put strict controls so that I actually earn whatever free time I have. My current schedule looks something like: wake up at 7am, apply to jobs during the morning, then I get to work on side projects and read technical texts the rest of the day, usually a good 6+ hrs (with exercise and some people time thrown in). I fear for the day I actually get a job, haha...
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    > I fear for the day I actually get a job The fear is well-founded. When you get a job you'll find yourself with no time for much technical texts and side projects. I wish you find a fulfilling job though, working on what feels like bullcrap to you is terribly frustrating.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  You have a point and it's definitely true that for many, the big part of the desire to do something creative that is not job comes from being busy and not having time to do this. But I doubt that if you got rid of jobs, people would waste time. I sometimes wondered why I can't seem to be as productive, or learn as much fast enough, as I had been in high school or when I started university. I realized that it's not that I was a fast learner there, it was that I had tons of free time to throw at stuff without having to worry about deadlines, or bullshit like a job. > most people wake up late, sleep late Many people don't sleep enough for a healthy and productive life. "Sleeping late" is often "sleeping the amount you should, but don't, because you're too busy".
jtheory 12y ago
Depending on your skill level, you may be able to work a deal with your employer to work reduced hours, or to disappear for a few months of each year -- basically, unpaid leave, but as a regular thing. I worked reduced hours for quite a while after my second child was born; and we have an developer on the team who disappears for 3 months a year to go be a theater director. There's basically quite a lot of flexibility that's perfectly possible, and not even costly for the employer, but it's not habitually permitted. I suspect in a lot of companies you might be able to get a lot more leeway just by asking for it, though. See if you can get away with only working a half-day Friday, in exchange for an extra hour the other 4 days, for example.
applecore 12y ago
Your "passionate society" is appealing in theory, but it doesn't work in practice. In a market economy, someone offers you a price for your labor. You decide whether or not to accept it. If you're passionate about something nobody wants to pay for, why should you still be paid?
- disputin 12y ago
  Citizen's income is no fantasy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
  - adfgadfsg 12y ago
    What is the difference between these proposals and fantasy at this point? As this article points out, the idea has been around a long time, yet has not been implemented on any wide scale, why will this ever change?
    - disputin 12y ago
      Is it expected that I respond to the throw-away account of a down-voting anonymous coward?
kybernetyk 12y ago
> Why? Because job. So, why do you trade your lifetime away for cash and perceived "job security"? Maybe it's time to get a little more entrepreneurial?
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  "Because job" I don't think specifically refers to wage labor; entrepreneurship is often people apply existing expertise, not developing new expertise from scratch, because that's generally where their competitive advantage lies, and competitive edge is at least as important in entrepreneurial efforts as in wage labor. The constraint seems to be that needing to spend significant time applying your current-best skills reduces available time to develop expertise in new skill areas.
xorcist 12y ago
I once heard about an interview with a very dedicated wikipedia volunteer, who spent hours daily on the project. The reporter asked a bit tongue in cheek how he had the time for it, silently implying that he had no life. The volunteer hesitated a second asked the reporter back: "Did you know that the average person watch TV two hours every day. How do they find time for that?". I've carried this reply with me since then.
- teddyh 12y ago
  First expressed, I believe, by Clay Shirky: […] She heard this story and she shook her head and said, “Where do people find the time?” That was her question. And I just kind of snapped. And I said, “No one who works in TV gets to ask that question. You know where the time comes from. It comes from the cognitive surplus you've been masking for 50 years.” — Gin, Television, and Social Surplus, Clay Shirky, May 2008 (http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008009.html http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008009.html)
  - xorcist 12y ago
    The wikipedia presentation must have been a couple of years before that. But the idea didn't originate with them. You can find similar musings from the 70s. (Which is funny, because they probably watched a lot less back then.)
- tiglionabbit 12y ago
  > (BTW, 4 hours a day means an actual 4 hours of high concentration and high output, which can take a full working day as anyone with a day job will attest.) TV-watching is not high-concentration.
- general_failure 12y ago
  Sadly, watching tv is considered having a 'life'

DanielStraight 12y ago

It's interesting you didn't mention family at all. Having kids is a huge commitment of time. I think a good take-away from your rant (plus the consideration of family) is that we need to be talking more about making time for things. Too often we talk a great deal about what can be done in a few hours a day, but when it comes to making that time, we just say, "If it's important to you, you'll make the time." We should be looking at ways to maximize the use of very small chunks of time. I may not be able to commit even a single hour of dedicated time per day... but I can certainly do something for a few minutes here and there throughout the day which adds up to an hour. How can we make that kind of practice more effective?

nervousvarun 12y ago
Maybe I'm wrong but I interpreted the logic there as: Having kids is definitely an enormous time-sink but that is a choice. Without basic income having a job essentially is not.
- DanielStraight 12y ago
  I guess I took it a different way. My interpretation was basically... once you get to a certain point in your life, the amount of time required for your responsibilities is significantly higher than it was in your youth. Four hours per day is probably achievable for the average college student but incredibly unlikely for the average "adult", for lack of a better term.
zxcvvcxz 12y ago
Gahhh I'm not even that old, don't scare me with this family talk. >We should be looking at ways to maximize the use of very small chunks of time. I may not be able to commit even a single hour of dedicated time per day... but I can certainly do something for a few minutes here and there throughout the day which adds up to an hour. Sounds noble in theory, but in practice there are two problems: 1) you won't be entering a state of flow on your tasks, and 2) you still won't be racking up the volume to get anywhere close to world-class.
- DanielStraight 12y ago
  To point number 1, I tend to think of flow as helpful but not necessary. For some tasks, I'm not really sure flow applies at all. I mean, I'm pretty damn good at tying my shoes. I do it without even thinking about it. I don't think flow was involved in learning that; it's just muscle memory. That's a trivial example of course, but there are other factors than flow which influence the effectiveness of practice. I don't think we should just give up if we can't have flow. To point 2, you're right of course, but we can't be world-class at more than 1 or 2 things anyway. There's still benefit to being pretty good at something. A great phrase I stole from a blog called All Japanese All The Time is "You can have, do or be anything, but you can't have, do and be everything." If you want to commit your whole life to being say... the greatest chainsaw juggler in history, that's probably achievable. But you aren't also going to be fluent in 10 languages, an expert computer programmer, a world-class guitarist, and a grandmaster in chess. I'm alright with only being an expert in things I'm able to devote full-time efforts to. But I'd also like to be pretty good in other stuff. How can I take bits and pieces of time here and there to achieve that? That's what I'd like to see some research (formal or informal) on.

jacquesm 12y ago

There are ways around the 'because job' problem. I've been reading a lot on this guys blog: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ and he's got some pretty interesting ideas on getting off the treadmill, with both actionable advice and the lead character eating his own dogfood.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
kamaal 12y ago
Most people are astonishingly bad at savings and investments, and this includes some really smart people who fail to make a good recurring income out of windfall scenarios. I tend to see this as failure of humans in general to visualize large structures. There fore similar things like large timelines, growth scenario's, compounding. One would be surprised how common this is. People can think of probably a couple of years, but their understanding fails them when they have imagine of scenarios 2 or 3 decades from now. Some times its so bad, they even totally avoid thinking about it. I know a lot of people who made a fortune in the 1990's when they were in their 20's, but are now back to where they were when they are in their 40's. And you don't have to even to win the start up lottery to do this. A good savings and investment strategy will get you there. But that very rarely happens. Most people can at most simply maintain the status quo all their lives.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  I've never had a very large amount of cash at my disposal, up to now it was mostly 'cash flow' and I buried as much of it as I could in stones and land. Now that is changing and I'm back to school because I realize that managing any amount of money is a risky operation and it is too important for me to consider outsourcing the job to so called experts the majority of which appear to be at least as clueless as I am when asked some pointed questions. So so far the lack of capital has kept me from seeing just how deficient I am in this respect, I was so focused on achieving a certain goal that I lost sight of what to do once it was achieved. Luxury problems, that's for sure, but still, they are problems and I'm fairly determined not to go down the route you sketch. Thanks for the underlining and implicit warning.

berkes 12y ago

I've always planned and managed to take two to four months per year off: between jobs, or simply blocking my freelance-agenda for a few (slower) months. During these months, I take on a personal project with a certain focus. I don't force myself to release anything: though shipping is nice. I don't set any hard goal. Just two, three or even four months of playing around and learning. A new Database-concept. Geocoding. TDD. A new framework or language. This is not enough to become expert or even good at anything. But it allows me to keep up with the field and ever evolving technologies; I'm a webdeveloper, so my field is rather fast-moving. And, because I plan this ahead, I can afford the time off (by asking a little more during the rest of the year) and I can actually tell clients "nope, I don't have time the coming X weeks".

llllllllllll 12y ago
I did that basically, but I saved up enough to move to and live comfortably in SE Asia for at least 3 or 4 years. I spend less then $400 a month, so maybe this lifestyle is not for everyone, and it's certainly not feasible with a family, but the move has totally changed my life. Before, I felt stuck and directionless. Now though, after a little less than a year of total freedom, I've finished two big projects that I'm proud of. I have a much wider range of skills and I'd be confident walking into an interview at a tech company. I hope I never have to though! I would absolutely recommend a similar path for anyone struggling with the full-time work grind.

seren 12y ago

You have not addressed something in your post, but maybe is is obvious : why do you want or need to become an expert ? You can have a very fulfilling life being a jack-of-all-trade. In a fast moving word, I am not sure I would like to become a world expert in a shrinking domain. I would say the vast majority of humain beings, both dead and alive, are no expert. So is this because you have an insatiable curiosity ?(but I don't think that being an expert is necessary the best to quench your thirst for knowledge) Do you want to stand out in a crowd ? To have a legacy ? I am also kind of frustrated knowing that my time is limited, and it reduces somehow my options, but I have come to term with the fact that I won't be able to do "everything" during my time on Earth.

kamaal 12y ago

>>this is the best argument for basic income You only feel the need for a basic income because you are currently strapped for time and you crave for more time to work on something far more creative. Once time comes in abundant supply you will now be faced with a situation where you will have a lot of time and won't really understand the reason why you would want to work hard(Your basic needs are met) or spend time doing <some work of interest>, since you now have unlimited time to delay those projects. People generally think they can pull of miracles if they get time. Instead what happens is most people wake up late, sleep late, waste time doing pointless stuff. As a general rule you will only consider things in short supply as precious. Which is why being busy is probably a good idea, because that way you will value the most important thing in your life-- time and opportunities.

zxcvvcxz 12y ago
A good point to be sure, but I disagree entirely in my own case. In fact I realized this a while ago and put strict controls so that I actually earn whatever free time I have. My current schedule looks something like: wake up at 7am, apply to jobs during the morning, then I get to work on side projects and read technical texts the rest of the day, usually a good 6+ hrs (with exercise and some people time thrown in). I fear for the day I actually get a job, haha...
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  > I fear for the day I actually get a job The fear is well-founded. When you get a job you'll find yourself with no time for much technical texts and side projects. I wish you find a fulfilling job though, working on what feels like bullcrap to you is terribly frustrating.
TeMPOraL 12y ago
You have a point and it's definitely true that for many, the big part of the desire to do something creative that is not job comes from being busy and not having time to do this. But I doubt that if you got rid of jobs, people would waste time. I sometimes wondered why I can't seem to be as productive, or learn as much fast enough, as I had been in high school or when I started university. I realized that it's not that I was a fast learner there, it was that I had tons of free time to throw at stuff without having to worry about deadlines, or bullshit like a job. > most people wake up late, sleep late Many people don't sleep enough for a healthy and productive life. "Sleeping late" is often "sleeping the amount you should, but don't, because you're too busy".

jtheory 12y ago

Depending on your skill level, you may be able to work a deal with your employer to work reduced hours, or to disappear for a few months of each year -- basically, unpaid leave, but as a regular thing. I worked reduced hours for quite a while after my second child was born; and we have an developer on the team who disappears for 3 months a year to go be a theater director. There's basically quite a lot of flexibility that's perfectly possible, and not even costly for the employer, but it's not habitually permitted. I suspect in a lot of companies you might be able to get a lot more leeway just by asking for it, though. See if you can get away with only working a half-day Friday, in exchange for an extra hour the other 4 days, for example.

applecore 12y ago

Your "passionate society" is appealing in theory, but it doesn't work in practice. In a market economy, someone offers you a price for your labor. You decide whether or not to accept it. If you're passionate about something nobody wants to pay for, why should you still be paid?

disputin 12y ago
Citizen's income is no fantasy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
- adfgadfsg 12y ago
  What is the difference between these proposals and fantasy at this point? As this article points out, the idea has been around a long time, yet has not been implemented on any wide scale, why will this ever change?
  - disputin 12y ago
    Is it expected that I respond to the throw-away account of a down-voting anonymous coward?

kybernetyk 12y ago

> Why? Because job. So, why do you trade your lifetime away for cash and perceived "job security"? Maybe it's time to get a little more entrepreneurial?

dragonwriter 12y ago
"Because job" I don't think specifically refers to wage labor; entrepreneurship is often people apply existing expertise, not developing new expertise from scratch, because that's generally where their competitive advantage lies, and competitive edge is at least as important in entrepreneurial efforts as in wage labor. The constraint seems to be that needing to spend significant time applying your current-best skills reduces available time to develop expertise in new skill areas.

xorcist 12y ago

I once heard about an interview with a very dedicated wikipedia volunteer, who spent hours daily on the project. The reporter asked a bit tongue in cheek how he had the time for it, silently implying that he had no life. The volunteer hesitated a second asked the reporter back: "Did you know that the average person watch TV two hours every day. How do they find time for that?". I've carried this reply with me since then.

teddyh 12y ago
First expressed, I believe, by Clay Shirky: […] She heard this story and she shook her head and said, “Where do people find the time?” That was her question. And I just kind of snapped. And I said, “No one who works in TV gets to ask that question. You know where the time comes from. It comes from the cognitive surplus you've been masking for 50 years.” — Gin, Television, and Social Surplus, Clay Shirky, May 2008 (http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008009.html http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008009.html)
- xorcist 12y ago
  The wikipedia presentation must have been a couple of years before that. But the idea didn't originate with them. You can find similar musings from the 70s. (Which is funny, because they probably watched a lot less back then.)
tiglionabbit 12y ago
> (BTW, 4 hours a day means an actual 4 hours of high concentration and high output, which can take a full working day as anyone with a day job will attest.) TV-watching is not high-concentration.
general_failure 12y ago
Sadly, watching tv is considered having a 'life'