9 ms·

Practice is the key to getting better at everything. Ignore the concept of innate talent or gift. People who are good are good because they spent a lot of time

Practice is the key to getting better at everything. Ignore the concept of innate talent or gift. People who are good are good because they spent a lot of time practicing. People who practice a lot usually do so because they’re interested in it. It’s not hard or homework for them. If there’s a gift, it’s the gift of interest. Artists copy a lot. They don’t come up with stuff clear out of their heads. They look at a lot of things, keep a lot of references, and blend ideas together. Most people who are famous are so not because they’re good, but because they’ve worked hard to become famous. It was important to them, so they did what it took to become famous. Being good at something is a small part of that, small enough that famous people aren’t usually all that good. Their time was better spent becoming famous. (This is the biggest lesson from this list. It basically implies that you can ignore people who have blogs and podcasts. Seek out the unknown experts in your field.) Don’t make decisions based on money. Don’t stay at a job because the shares might be worth something, or because the company might get acquired. These things rarely happen and you can’t get your time back. Everyone is totally winging it all the time. Confident people are just better at hiding it.

mortenjorck 12y ago
My favorite example of someone gradually working their way from rank amateur to accomplished professional through sheer volume of dedicated practice has to be the cartoonist Mike Krahulik of Penny Arcade. Over the span of about ten years, you see his art style transform from what would pass for an average college newspaper comic into the richly expressive vision of a master illustrator.
- stingraycharles 12y ago
  Would you mind to show us some concrete samples that show us what you mean?
  - OedipusRex 12y ago
    Not Penny Arcade but here is an early xkcd: https://xkcd.com/6/ https://xkcd.com/6/ Contrast that against current xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1471/ https://xkcd.com/1471/ And it doesn't stop there. He's done amazing things that stretch the concept of "web comic", like https://xkcd.com/1446/ https://xkcd.com/1446/ or arguably his most famous work https://xkcd.com/1190/ https://xkcd.com/1190/ "Time" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_%28xkcd%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_%28xkcd%29
    - proveanegative 12y ago
      I don't think xkcd is a good example of practice making perfect. Many former xkcd fans think that the average xkcd comic became noticeable less funny somewhere in the low to mid hundreds. Part of it was the novelty being gone but part, I'd say, really had to do with the quality of the comic's writing. The author's growing experience and confidence allowed him to pull off ambitious and genuinely imperative things like "Time", which improved the mean comic, but the median never really recovered.
      - proveanegative 12y ago
        Instead of "genuinely imperative" I meant to write "genuinely impressive".
      - OedipusRex 12y ago
        Yes but we're not talking about how funny the comic is just the how good the illustration has become.
  - visural 12y ago
    First penny arcade comic - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1998/11/18 http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1998/11/18 A recent one - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2015/02/16/attempted-recidivism http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2015/02/16/attempted-recid...
    - vacri 12y ago
      To me that recent one is an example of overdevelopment of the art. I remember commenting on a different artist's rework of his old comic strip, about how the new strips looked too busy and that there was something beautiful and thematic about his earlier work. He replied that he also preferred his earlier work, but he just couldn't make himself 'stop that early' when drawing anymore. Certainly in both cases there's a lot more skill in the later work, but it's interesting to note that overdevelopment is also a thing.
      - xmonkee 12y ago
        I call this the Pink Floyd Effect.
      - lifeformed 12y ago
        I think a better example would be the side stories that they sometimes work on: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/sand http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/sand http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/automata http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/automata http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/may-we-die-in-the-forest-part-1 http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/may-we-die-in-the-fo...
      - dnr 12y ago
        The non-regular-format pieces might be a better example. Here's a recent one: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/12/12/fan-fiction http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/12/12/fan-fiction
      - 1123581321 12y ago
        I agree and thought he peaked around 2004, e.g.: http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499399_pfUFC/0/1050x10000/215499399_pfUFC-1050x10000.jpg http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499399_pfUFC/0/1050x10... http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499192_iWbzW/0/1050x10000/215499192_iWbzW-1050x10000.jpg http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499192_iWbzW/0/1050x10... The cartoon faces were more expressive with less detail than the current ones, but he was able to draw just about anything he wanted in a funny way, which wasn't the case in the beginning.
  - ajuc 12y ago
    http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ First strip: http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20000612.png?1297712534 http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20000612.pn... Last strip: http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20150223.jpg?1424572031 http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20150223.jp...
- signa11 12y ago
  something very similar from derek-sivers: http://sivers.org/15-years http://sivers.org/15-years
- thenomad 12y ago
  Jeph Jacques of Questionable Content has had a similar journey. Very interesting to watch the transformation.
LiweiZ 12y ago
"It basically implies that you can ignore people who have blogs and podcasts. Seek out the unknown experts in your field." Fully agree with this. But it seems not easy to find hidden gems. It takes time and energy to deliver what's in one's mind. Take this into account, what we can find is only a fraction of the real gems with lots of noises mixed with them. The best shot I can think of is to have some kind of small circle to exchange ideas and opinions. Another resource is reading books, I guess. As for famous people's wisdom, they have way more access to information average people don't have. And the average quality is probably better. Just like what the artists do you mentioned, they do the same with information.
- graycat 12y ago
  > But it seems not easy to find hidden gems. Yup. Very glad to hear that you want the "hidden gems". Finding them is a nutshell description of the purpose of my startup. Thanks for the wording!
- charliefg 12y ago
  > Another resource is reading book Absolutely. I've gotten high quality information from books. Sometimes it seems you gotta pay through the nose... but when you look at it, many of these books are refined down from the person's life in the field. That is pretty cool!
AndrewKemendo 12y ago
Everyone is totally winging it all the time. Confident people are just better at hiding it. I don't think people really understand how true this is. I think we all might feel it, but to really believe that [insert name] doesn't really know what is going on is a revelation. To wit, whenever given the opportunity to talk with someone who is or was in a large powerful role (Fmr Undersecretary of the Navy two weeks ago for example) I always ask them how confident they were, that what they were doing was the right choice, or how much they felt in control of a particular action/decision. Across the board they all say they feel like they have very little control and are just doing the best with what they have.
- steven2012 12y ago
  85% of the population will listen to anyone who who talks with authority. Even in tech, when someone talks with authority, most people rarely push back. I know plenty of below-average programmers who formulated great careers by simply talking and talking and talking.
- rm999 12y ago
  There's a subtle caveat here: true confidence is earned, not fabricated. If you try to bullshit your way through life you'll lose credibility and rarely be given the chance to get far. I think your advice is most valuable to people who constantly underestimate themselves. I've worked around extremely capable people who do this, and it's frustrating to see how little they achieve because of it.
  - djloche 12y ago
    The best is someone that knows exactly how capable they are in the moment - and how to reach beyond that when needed.
  - AndrewKemendo 12y ago
    I think it's a blend. "Fake it till you make it" is a valid strategy in my experience, but only works if you genuinely want to be good/get better. You still have to eventually "make it" though otherwise you will run up against someone who has made it and they will see right through your faking.
SilasX 12y ago
>Everyone is totally winging it all the time. Confident people are just better at hiding it. So skyscrapers and jumbo jets are built on guesswork, despite all the things that can go wrong in their design and construction? I wish people would be more precise about what is meant by this, since it seems trivially false when taken literally.
- AndrewKemendo 12y ago
  I think the OP is speaking more strategically. eg. When do you make the decision that it is the right time to build this kind of skyscraper or jumbo jet with this compliment of people etc...
  - SilasX 12y ago
    I saw nothing in the OP's statement to clarify that context, nor have I seen it in any of the numerous other posts that repeat the same claim. If there are a hundred non-obvious caveats, which people may even disagree on ... maybe it's not actually so wise? At the very least, those who promote this claim should verify they're not confusing "use gut instinct when you have to make a judgement call" with "the entirety of coding, including iterating 1 to 100, is a judgement call".
- 31reasons 12y ago
  I think your question is legit. It shouldn't be down voted. It doesn't apply to science and engineering disciplines because we humans have made those disciplines "human proof" by rigorous analysis and testing. Here when people say "winging it" is I think meant to point out that Humans are limited in their capacity to know everything about things ,especially predict the future yet people sometime act like they do know. "Winging" might be a coping mechanism we have to employ to stay relevant in the rapidly changing world. It may not have been true 100 years ago.
- graycat 12y ago
  Thanks for the emphasis on the possibility and importance of rock solid engineering. At times, information technology entrepreneurship seems to believe that no such thing is possible.
harkyns_castle 12y ago
I like the practice bit. And if you enjoy something, and live it every day and do it all the time, you'll get good at it. If you hate something, and you have to force yourself to do it, I wouldn't bother, and I'd look for something else to do. That, and our whole system of fractional reserve banking is deeply flawed and is killing us, to the benefit of a greedy few.
mathattack 12y ago
Practice is the key to getting better at everything. Ignore the concept of innate talent or gift. People who are good are good because they spent a lot of time practicing. Very true. And even when it's not 100% true, we're better off pretending that it is. If you think you can learn something, you're much better off than if you think you can't. The latter attitude is self-fulfilling.

mortenjorck 12y ago

My favorite example of someone gradually working their way from rank amateur to accomplished professional through sheer volume of dedicated practice has to be the cartoonist Mike Krahulik of Penny Arcade. Over the span of about ten years, you see his art style transform from what would pass for an average college newspaper comic into the richly expressive vision of a master illustrator.

stingraycharles 12y ago
Would you mind to show us some concrete samples that show us what you mean?
- OedipusRex 12y ago
  Not Penny Arcade but here is an early xkcd: https://xkcd.com/6/ https://xkcd.com/6/ Contrast that against current xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1471/ https://xkcd.com/1471/ And it doesn't stop there. He's done amazing things that stretch the concept of "web comic", like https://xkcd.com/1446/ https://xkcd.com/1446/ or arguably his most famous work https://xkcd.com/1190/ https://xkcd.com/1190/ "Time" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_%28xkcd%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_%28xkcd%29
  - proveanegative 12y ago
    I don't think xkcd is a good example of practice making perfect. Many former xkcd fans think that the average xkcd comic became noticeable less funny somewhere in the low to mid hundreds. Part of it was the novelty being gone but part, I'd say, really had to do with the quality of the comic's writing. The author's growing experience and confidence allowed him to pull off ambitious and genuinely imperative things like "Time", which improved the mean comic, but the median never really recovered.
    - proveanegative 12y ago
      Instead of "genuinely imperative" I meant to write "genuinely impressive".
    - OedipusRex 12y ago
      Yes but we're not talking about how funny the comic is just the how good the illustration has become.
- visural 12y ago
  First penny arcade comic - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1998/11/18 http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1998/11/18 A recent one - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2015/02/16/attempted-recidivism http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2015/02/16/attempted-recid...
  - vacri 12y ago
    To me that recent one is an example of overdevelopment of the art. I remember commenting on a different artist's rework of his old comic strip, about how the new strips looked too busy and that there was something beautiful and thematic about his earlier work. He replied that he also preferred his earlier work, but he just couldn't make himself 'stop that early' when drawing anymore. Certainly in both cases there's a lot more skill in the later work, but it's interesting to note that overdevelopment is also a thing.
    - xmonkee 12y ago
      I call this the Pink Floyd Effect.
    - lifeformed 12y ago
      I think a better example would be the side stories that they sometimes work on: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/sand http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/sand http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/automata http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/automata http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/may-we-die-in-the-forest-part-1 http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/story/may-we-die-in-the-fo...
    - dnr 12y ago
      The non-regular-format pieces might be a better example. Here's a recent one: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/12/12/fan-fiction http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/12/12/fan-fiction
    - 1123581321 12y ago
      I agree and thought he peaked around 2004, e.g.: http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499399_pfUFC/0/1050x10000/215499399_pfUFC-1050x10000.jpg http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499399_pfUFC/0/1050x10... http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499192_iWbzW/0/1050x10000/215499192_iWbzW-1050x10000.jpg http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215499192_iWbzW/0/1050x10... The cartoon faces were more expressive with less detail than the current ones, but he was able to draw just about anything he wanted in a funny way, which wasn't the case in the beginning.
- ajuc 12y ago
  http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ First strip: http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20000612.png?1297712534 http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20000612.pn... Last strip: http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20150223.jpg?1424572031 http://static.schlockmercenary.com/comics/schlock20150223.jp...
signa11 12y ago
something very similar from derek-sivers: http://sivers.org/15-years http://sivers.org/15-years
thenomad 12y ago
Jeph Jacques of Questionable Content has had a similar journey. Very interesting to watch the transformation.

LiweiZ 12y ago

"It basically implies that you can ignore people who have blogs and podcasts. Seek out the unknown experts in your field." Fully agree with this. But it seems not easy to find hidden gems. It takes time and energy to deliver what's in one's mind. Take this into account, what we can find is only a fraction of the real gems with lots of noises mixed with them. The best shot I can think of is to have some kind of small circle to exchange ideas and opinions. Another resource is reading books, I guess. As for famous people's wisdom, they have way more access to information average people don't have. And the average quality is probably better. Just like what the artists do you mentioned, they do the same with information.

graycat 12y ago
> But it seems not easy to find hidden gems. Yup. Very glad to hear that you want the "hidden gems". Finding them is a nutshell description of the purpose of my startup. Thanks for the wording!
charliefg 12y ago
> Another resource is reading book Absolutely. I've gotten high quality information from books. Sometimes it seems you gotta pay through the nose... but when you look at it, many of these books are refined down from the person's life in the field. That is pretty cool!

AndrewKemendo 12y ago

Everyone is totally winging it all the time. Confident people are just better at hiding it. I don't think people really understand how true this is. I think we all might feel it, but to really believe that [insert name] doesn't really know what is going on is a revelation. To wit, whenever given the opportunity to talk with someone who is or was in a large powerful role (Fmr Undersecretary of the Navy two weeks ago for example) I always ask them how confident they were, that what they were doing was the right choice, or how much they felt in control of a particular action/decision. Across the board they all say they feel like they have very little control and are just doing the best with what they have.

steven2012 12y ago
85% of the population will listen to anyone who who talks with authority. Even in tech, when someone talks with authority, most people rarely push back. I know plenty of below-average programmers who formulated great careers by simply talking and talking and talking.
rm999 12y ago
There's a subtle caveat here: true confidence is earned, not fabricated. If you try to bullshit your way through life you'll lose credibility and rarely be given the chance to get far. I think your advice is most valuable to people who constantly underestimate themselves. I've worked around extremely capable people who do this, and it's frustrating to see how little they achieve because of it.
- djloche 12y ago
  The best is someone that knows exactly how capable they are in the moment - and how to reach beyond that when needed.
- AndrewKemendo 12y ago
  I think it's a blend. "Fake it till you make it" is a valid strategy in my experience, but only works if you genuinely want to be good/get better. You still have to eventually "make it" though otherwise you will run up against someone who has made it and they will see right through your faking.

SilasX 12y ago

>Everyone is totally winging it all the time. Confident people are just better at hiding it. So skyscrapers and jumbo jets are built on guesswork, despite all the things that can go wrong in their design and construction? I wish people would be more precise about what is meant by this, since it seems trivially false when taken literally.

AndrewKemendo 12y ago
I think the OP is speaking more strategically. eg. When do you make the decision that it is the right time to build this kind of skyscraper or jumbo jet with this compliment of people etc...
- SilasX 12y ago
  I saw nothing in the OP's statement to clarify that context, nor have I seen it in any of the numerous other posts that repeat the same claim. If there are a hundred non-obvious caveats, which people may even disagree on ... maybe it's not actually so wise? At the very least, those who promote this claim should verify they're not confusing "use gut instinct when you have to make a judgement call" with "the entirety of coding, including iterating 1 to 100, is a judgement call".
31reasons 12y ago
I think your question is legit. It shouldn't be down voted. It doesn't apply to science and engineering disciplines because we humans have made those disciplines "human proof" by rigorous analysis and testing. Here when people say "winging it" is I think meant to point out that Humans are limited in their capacity to know everything about things ,especially predict the future yet people sometime act like they do know. "Winging" might be a coping mechanism we have to employ to stay relevant in the rapidly changing world. It may not have been true 100 years ago.
graycat 12y ago
Thanks for the emphasis on the possibility and importance of rock solid engineering. At times, information technology entrepreneurship seems to believe that no such thing is possible.

harkyns_castle 12y ago

I like the practice bit. And if you enjoy something, and live it every day and do it all the time, you'll get good at it. If you hate something, and you have to force yourself to do it, I wouldn't bother, and I'd look for something else to do. That, and our whole system of fractional reserve banking is deeply flawed and is killing us, to the benefit of a greedy few.

mathattack 12y ago

Practice is the key to getting better at everything. Ignore the concept of innate talent or gift. People who are good are good because they spent a lot of time practicing. Very true. And even when it's not 100% true, we're better off pretending that it is. If you think you can learn something, you're much better off than if you think you can't. The latter attitude is self-fulfilling.