3 ms·

21 days is way too short, but 10 years is a bit too pessimistic. 2 years...?

by empressplay 12y ago

michaelchisari 12y ago
I've been doing it for going on 18 years, and sometimes I feel like I haven't even scratched the surface.
- Swizec 12y ago
  I'm in the same boat. Sometimes I feel like I'm getting pretty good at this, but then I talk to somebody and I have no idea what they're saying half the time. It's really ... I want to say humbling, but it's more stupefying than humbling.
  - mitchty 12y ago
    Yep, I've been learning Haskell for the past year. Honestly, I consider myself still at the beginner stage at best. But I'm just starting to see a light at the end of a tunnel. It is most definitely humbling to learn new ways to compute that force you to reconsider what you hold true. I liken it to learning a human language and having it force you to learn another cultural viewpoint. You quickly learn that you have been in a filter bubble.
    - eru 12y ago
      I've been dabbling in Haskell for around a decade now. I'm still learning new things.
      - mitchty 12y ago
        My light at the end of the tunnel remark was more of an analogy that at that point I'll be able to use the language with minimal competency. >.< I can see with things like Idris and dependent types even more of the same of the whole, well I thought I understood computation to a minimal degree, here is another bit of it that totally changes how I view the world.
- Raphmedia 12y ago
  Take a look at this. http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ Doing more that scratching the surface requires a lot of work and focus.
quonn 12y ago
Well, Norvig really means _mastering_ the thing. For him, this includes learning half a dozen languages, learning them well, applying them in all kinds of projects with others and so on. This probably can't be done in two years.
- borgia 12y ago
  Mastering something and merely learning competence in it are two different things though. I don't think the "Teach yourself X in Y" type books are claiming to be turning people into masters, similarly I'm sure many of the learning piano/sculpting/art type books aren't claiming to be making master artists out of their readers. I think, with the right resources (people, material), if someone dedicated themselves to learning programming/software development actively for 2 years they could become extremely proficient in it. Not masters across a number of different languages and paradigms, of course, but just very proficient in a few of them to the point where they could churn out good work/projects/ideas with it.
dwc 12y ago
I can show you how to use a table saw and all the other tools of carpentry in a day or two. It takes a long time to become a master carpenter. Heck, it takes 30 seconds to learn to use a planer, but a good while to really learn how to use it well.
sosuke 12y ago
A comment at the bottom seemed relevant and funny: You need 10 years to be an expert programmer but what if someone is just trying to put together a prototype? ...reads like "You need 10 years to be a surgeon but what if someone is just trying to open up a patient?" I think 10 years is pessimistic, 2 years feels about right, but I don't think the time is really the point of this page. You just can't rush learning, or expect to get a job after reading one of those books that sell a quick solution. It takes time, longer than you think it will, which is funny again considering how much I've experienced underestimating timelines in the past.
- emodendroket 12y ago
  Well, the nice thing is that in most cases we don't have to worry about killing anyone when we screw up so we can practice by just creating programs.
Kluny 12y ago
I've been at it for 4 years, and I feel like I'm almost ready to start trying to learn the difficult parts.

21 days is way too short, but 10 years is a bit too pessimistic. 2 years...?

michaelchisari 12y ago

I've been doing it for going on 18 years, and sometimes I feel like I haven't even scratched the surface.

Swizec 12y ago
I'm in the same boat. Sometimes I feel like I'm getting pretty good at this, but then I talk to somebody and I have no idea what they're saying half the time. It's really ... I want to say humbling, but it's more stupefying than humbling.
- mitchty 12y ago
  Yep, I've been learning Haskell for the past year. Honestly, I consider myself still at the beginner stage at best. But I'm just starting to see a light at the end of a tunnel. It is most definitely humbling to learn new ways to compute that force you to reconsider what you hold true. I liken it to learning a human language and having it force you to learn another cultural viewpoint. You quickly learn that you have been in a filter bubble.
  - eru 12y ago
    I've been dabbling in Haskell for around a decade now. I'm still learning new things.
    - mitchty 12y ago
      My light at the end of the tunnel remark was more of an analogy that at that point I'll be able to use the language with minimal competency. >.< I can see with things like Idris and dependent types even more of the same of the whole, well I thought I understood computation to a minimal degree, here is another bit of it that totally changes how I view the world.
Raphmedia 12y ago
Take a look at this. http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ Doing more that scratching the surface requires a lot of work and focus.

quonn 12y ago

Well, Norvig really means _mastering_ the thing. For him, this includes learning half a dozen languages, learning them well, applying them in all kinds of projects with others and so on. This probably can't be done in two years.

borgia 12y ago
Mastering something and merely learning competence in it are two different things though. I don't think the "Teach yourself X in Y" type books are claiming to be turning people into masters, similarly I'm sure many of the learning piano/sculpting/art type books aren't claiming to be making master artists out of their readers. I think, with the right resources (people, material), if someone dedicated themselves to learning programming/software development actively for 2 years they could become extremely proficient in it. Not masters across a number of different languages and paradigms, of course, but just very proficient in a few of them to the point where they could churn out good work/projects/ideas with it.

dwc 12y ago

I can show you how to use a table saw and all the other tools of carpentry in a day or two. It takes a long time to become a master carpenter. Heck, it takes 30 seconds to learn to use a planer, but a good while to really learn how to use it well.

sosuke 12y ago

A comment at the bottom seemed relevant and funny: You need 10 years to be an expert programmer but what if someone is just trying to put together a prototype? ...reads like "You need 10 years to be a surgeon but what if someone is just trying to open up a patient?" I think 10 years is pessimistic, 2 years feels about right, but I don't think the time is really the point of this page. You just can't rush learning, or expect to get a job after reading one of those books that sell a quick solution. It takes time, longer than you think it will, which is funny again considering how much I've experienced underestimating timelines in the past.

emodendroket 12y ago
Well, the nice thing is that in most cases we don't have to worry about killing anyone when we screw up so we can practice by just creating programs.

Kluny 12y ago

I've been at it for 4 years, and I feel like I'm almost ready to start trying to learn the difficult parts.