[HN Gopher] Do the Real Thing
___________________________________________________________________
Do the Real Thing
Author : reedwolf
Score : 84 points
Date : 2020-06-20 08:31 UTC (14 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.scotthyoung.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.scotthyoung.com)
| ookdatnog wrote:
| This is the kind of advice that, for one person, might be exactly
| what they need, and for another it might be the exact opposite of
| what they need. For example, Christopher McCandless dove head-
| first into the real thing (that is, surviving without help in the
| Alaskan wilderness), without proper preparation and training, and
| died. He didn't have to, he could have built up to it gradually
| by training various survival skills (aka "faking" it).
|
| Also, the author claims that the difference between "doing the
| real thing" and faking it is what success largely boils down to.
| That is a completely wild claim, with of course not a shred of
| evidence to back it up. Does the author really believe that this
| is a necessary and largely sufficient condition for success?
| war1025 wrote:
| > For example, Christopher McCandless dove head-first into the
| real thing (that is, surviving without help in the Alaskan
| wilderness), without proper preparation and training, and died.
|
| He didn't go straight from normal life to Alaskan wilderness
| though. He spent a good bit of time traveling and being
| homeless. If anything, he was in the uncanny valley of being
| skilled at most aspects of living in the wildnerness, but
| unaware of the specifics of being in Alaska and how the
| environment would change between seasons.
| SamBorick wrote:
| My takeaway from this is to always try for the thing that is just
| out of reach.
|
| Doing what's comfortable isn't going to lead to growth. At the
| same time, as others in this thread say, doing things that are
| radically out of reach is too likely to fail without a good
| foundation.
|
| Learning is in the struggle, so find something that is a little
| harder than you think you can handle.
| closeparen wrote:
| C25K does not start with a marathon. Skiing lessons do not start
| on a black diamond. Intro CS does not start by writing an OS.
| Skill development is an incrementalist game for patient people.
| I've made much more progress by finding a sustainable pace and
| chipping away over time, than by trying to conquer something in a
| weekend.
|
| Natural language acquisition is kind of a special case here, in
| that you are _actually_ wired to do this one from scratch.
| zexodus wrote:
| This article reminds me that I don't really know what I want to
| do in the first place.
| jkhdigital wrote:
| I'm in the middle of listening to Scott Young's book
| _Ultralearning_ , and honestly this article captures the most
| important idea. 90% of becoming an "ultra learner" is having the
| courage to tackle the real thing immediately; the rest is just
| tactics.
| emsal wrote:
| This kind of writing makes me upset.
|
| * It's really self-important. Not only is it selling you on a
| particular strategy for attaining success, it also tries to sell
| success in things like public speaking and doing architectural
| work as an absolutely important part of one's life, and that
| implicitly a person's existence is invalidated if they aren't
| constantly trying to achieve this kind of success. It doesn't do
| it explicitly but the very notion of "real" and "fake" and other
| words like "wasted" complete with the trite diagrams showing that
| "hey, all your efforts are going into this small circle" give a
| very strong implicit value-judgement of the reader.
|
| * There's no proof. I don't know if I'm on the mark with this
| one, but I think that the act of omitting any sort of data about
| measuring the outcome of success when taking different approaches
| seems to imply to the reader that the argument should just "make
| sense" i.e. it's a truth that the reader already knows, they
| should just find it within their own observations in order to
| understand it. Here, have a handful of anecdotes to top it all
| off in case you weren't convinced. Overall this just feels like
| it's made to make the reader feel a certain way (motivated)
| rather than actually teach them any solid information.
|
| * What even is real and fake? The readers are given a bunch of
| examples and then we're left on our own to figure out what falls
| into which category. Someone commented on the article saying that
| if someone wanted to watch and understand anime in Japanese, they
| could just do that and that'd be the real thing, with the fake
| thing being taking the time to learn Japanese. This is obviously
| not going to be successful, so at this point the author's
| prescription has failed as a framework for achieving success.
|
| ---
|
| This kind of fiery motivational content could be harmful as much
| as it is useful. It'd be fine if an article, devoid of substance
| as it may be, was only meant to make readers feel motivated, but
| the problem is that this kind of fiery motivational content does
| different things for different readers. A person in a bad, self-
| loathing emotional state could be rendered feeling even worse,
| thinking that everything that they're doing at present is fake
| while everything that their peers are doing are more real, even
| when that's blatantly untrue. The devil's in the details and
| personally, I'm not going to let myself get affected by this
| personal philosophy if the case for it is this weak.
| eebynight wrote:
| I think for your first point, you're definitely reading into it
| too much...
|
| As for you second point, what kind of proof do you need? Do you
| want scientific studies that dive way too deep into specifics
| and are not applicable to real life? This article is targeted
| towards learning, which varies heavily from person to person
| and can be very subjective. Think about it from your
| perspective and see if the ideas apply to what you do. Simple
| as that.
|
| For your third point, yeah sure real and fake are pretty
| subjective. In the end it's obviously up to you to decide or
| come to a decision about what is and what isn't. Our gut
| instinct usually fails here thought...
|
| However, to address the point about learning Japanese, I would
| argue that taking the time to learn before doing so is the
| "fake" way. How do children learn a language if they can't use
| a computer or phone to get on Duolingo or go to a community
| college to take a course? They literally just are exposed to it
| and pick it up over time.
|
| People may not know his background but he is a prominent figure
| when it comes to language learning and his strategies are to
| replicate natural learning methods and ignore the canned
| courses like Duolingo that don't do you any good...
| aazaa wrote:
| > People trying to get in shape who buy fancy workout gear
| instead of exercising.
|
| Translating this idea to learning a programming language, the
| best way to learn a language is to apply it to something real,
| almost immediately. Following tutorials has a use, but you'll get
| a lot more out of it after having flailed around trying to make
| the most ridiculously minimal version of something you really
| want to build.
|
| This is one of the main problems with science education. In most
| cases, there's nothing like the "flail around" stage while you
| try to do something applied but which you are desperately
| underqualified to do.
| Kye wrote:
| After tens of thousands of photos, hundreds of songs, and
| millions of words, I can confirm that doing the thing is more
| effective than aimless research and analysis. The doing guides
| the learning.
| [deleted]
| Animats wrote:
| For a contrary view, see "This is It".[1] (The one from the US
| Navy, not the one from the dead singer.) It's the story of four
| pilots who didn't take their training seriously enough.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com./watch?v=fNBwBHTWec4
| teddyh wrote:
| Reel 2: https://www.youtube.com./watch?v=a7pH6CQcGMU
| hymnsfm wrote:
| Possibly an over-simplification. Take this example: I want to
| sight-sing hymns. I know a bit of music theory but it's been
| cobbled together over the past year in an haphazard fashion. I
| pick up a hymnal to sing the first hymn and immediately need to
| look up the key signature (I never memorized them). Then I see
| the hymn is 12/8 time and realize I only superficially covered
| rhythm and time signatures. I go on YouTube to refresh my memory.
| This is before being able to sing a single note.
|
| When I do attempt to sing, my mind's ear says I'm way off (even
| when I've never heard the hymn before). I'm not hitting the
| notes. Next I need to learn Solfege and music intervals.
|
| So doing the "real thing" requires having the tools and basic
| skillset first. I suggest the opposite of this article: break the
| goal down into manageable parts and work the periphery. Then you
| can realistically take on the "real thing". And be prepared to be
| derailed from the real thing again and again.
| gridlockd wrote:
| Have you considered that sight-singing anything is not the real
| thing? Singing is the real thing.
| cortesoft wrote:
| I think this is actually a good thing, though... you have
| something real you are trying to do, which guides you to what
| you need to learn.
|
| I find it is a lot easier to learn in the pursuit of something
| I actually want to accomplish rather than studying in a vacuum.
|
| So your approach, for example, is better than if you had just
| picked up a book on key and time signatures and started
| reading. You first tried to do something, ran into something
| you didn't know, so started to learn that thing.
| disruptorman wrote:
| Stop these advertising schemes. Annoying as fuck
| abraae wrote:
| As with all good advice, this reads well and makes sense but the
| devil is in the details.
|
| > Eric Barone, who went on to sell millions of copies of his
| game, overcame his struggles at creating art by making and
| remaking the art assets for his game dozens of times.
|
| To someone else, frigging around with their art assets and
| remaking then over and over again could be the very definition of
| not doing "the real thing".
| eebynight wrote:
| I think you missed the entire point of the article. The "real"
| thing is subjective and varies from person to person depending
| on their experience with the subject.
|
| If someone else had no trouble creating art then this situation
| simply doesn't apply to them. That person might have a
| different part of the process that gives them trouble that they
| SHOULD be practicing.
|
| For Eric, practicing the thing he had trouble with over and
| over was the best way for him to get over his struggles. Now he
| can move onto the next thing he needs to work on and continue
| to make progress.
| trevyn wrote:
| Also-- do what makes you happy, not what you think will make you
| happy. ;)
| elcomet wrote:
| How to know though?
| kd5bjo wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_practice
| gfodor wrote:
| You gotta do both. Research, analyze, digest, and then execute.
| With time, you can reduce the duration of the cycle. Taking the
| first step often requires a lot of research and thinking, and
| then a lot of execution to go from zero to one. Then, iterate,
| with shorter cycles. Failing to think is as much a problem as
| failing to execute, you have to balance it.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| > Taking the first step often requires a lot of research and
| thinking
|
| I generally agree with your comment, but strongly disagree with
| this part. You will have much more success if you take this
| first step as soon as possible. No research, no thinking. And a
| "real thing" first step. You want to start running? Put on some
| shoes and go for a run. Don't sign up for a race, don't look up
| running tips, don't buy nice shoes. Just go run for a bit.
|
| Coding? Pop open repl.it. Scuba? Get your head under water.
| Even for things that might be out of reach like flying an
| airplane, read up on something specific like how to land.
|
| With your very first step out of the way, you can then start
| thinking a bit more.
| bsder wrote:
| > You want to start running? Put on some shoes and go for a
| run.
|
| I agree, but not for things like this which require
| significant physical exertion. Many physical things have
| components that, if done incorrectly, are injurious. And
| they're not always obvious.
|
| Guitar, for example, has barre chords. And _EVERYBODY_ always
| teaches them to beginners at the first fret so you can do an
| F chord.
|
| This is _LUDICROUS_. That is the maximum tension point on the
| guitar with respect to barre chords, and it 's a good way to
| injure new players if they're on a steel string acoustic. New
| players do _not_ have the strength or the flexibility to do
| that chord.
|
| Good guitar teachers teach that up much higher on the neck,
| and they generally only barre a couple strings. Once the
| student gets stronger, then they start moving it down and
| using more strings.
|
| Good teachers of any physical exertion activity _always_ have
| some pitfall like this that they instruct you to avoid.
| jkhdigital wrote:
| I tend to agree with this line of thinking... reminds me of
| Mike Tyson's admonition "everybody has a plan until they get
| punched in the mouth." You want to take that first punch as
| soon as possible.
| ookdatnog wrote:
| > You want to start running? Put on some shoes and go for a
| run.
|
| I did that, went for a run every day, overexerted my ankle,
| couldn't walk normally for a week and couldn't run for weeks
| after that, and got out of the habit of running again for a
| very long time.
|
| Your advice might work in specific cases for specific people,
| but for others it might be harmful. It is, in my opinion, not
| advice fit for "broadcast": you need to know the recipient
| and their situation to know whether the advice will not be
| harmful for them.
| eebynight wrote:
| Sounds like you didn't respond to your bodies natural
| negative feedback mechanism. You are bashing the method
| when in this case you were completely responsible for the
| failure.
|
| He never says in the article to keep doing something even
| if it is painful. If you went for a run and experienced
| pain, I think it would be safe to start trying to stretch
| or figure out why this happens.
|
| This is still compatible with the method he recommends
| here.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| Go for _a_ run. One. Then you start doing the thinking
| cycle the comment I replied to was talking about.
|
| It shouldn't even be a long one. I said "go run for a bit".
| If it hurts at all, stop. Don't do things that you think
| are dangerous. If you can't run or aren't sure if you
| should, then just walk. Maybe I should refine my advice to
| "do whatever is closest to the ultimate thing, that you can
| safely do right now".
| Kye wrote:
| As someone who digs inversion as a way to get started on
| things and avoid the big blockers: at least look up basics of
| how to avoid and recognize injuries while running. Injuries
| will stop you more firmly than analysis paralysis.
|
| You'll mostly discover the right things by doing, but the
| wrong things can hold you back, and they're often well-
| documented. Example: guitar players who discover music theory
| by plucking and poking until things sound good, but mess up
| their hands with bad form.
| gfodor wrote:
| Disagree, strongly.
|
| Gonna learn to lift? Read starting strength. Set yourself up
| for success by structuring an environment for habit
| formation. Take the steps to ensure you are getting good
| nutrition before you start. Don't just run to the local gym
| and staring trying to mess around in the squat rack.
|
| Going to build a new app? Get up to date on tech stack
| choices so you don't make a dumb decision. Look at prior art
| and understand the work that has come before you can learn
| from.
|
| Trying to learn a new skill? Do some research to find out
| what the best, most high quality resources there are first.
| Determine what level of mastery you'll be happy with before
| diving in unprepared to know how to assess opportunity costs.
|
| This doesn't mean get stuck in analysis paralysis. I feel
| pretty strongly those who give advice like the advice you
| mention do not think it's possible to avoid this obvious
| trap. It is if you are disciplined and have enough self
| awareness to know when you have hit the point of diminishing
| returns. Literally one day of focused thinking can outflank a
| week or more of pointless execution, even at the beginning.
| Thinking is underrated, execution without preparation is
| overrated. The most effective people know how to the mind for
| execution and not get bogged down doing so.
| superhuzza wrote:
| >You will have much more success if you take this first step
| as soon as possible. No research, no thinking.
|
| I'd be careful with this advice. Almost every time I climb
| outside I see groups who clearly have very little idea of
| what they're doing, because all the small but deadly details
| are wrong - no stopper knots, not backing up rappels,
| building weird anchors, having 1 point of failure, etc.
|
| From their perspective, they're just getting out there and
| taking those first steps - but with an inadequate
| understanding of how much risk they've taken on. They don't
| even realize they're doing anything wrong. It's really bad
| and regularly leads to serious accidents. To actually climb
| outside they need mentorship or a bunch of research and
| practice, both of which take a while to acquire. They should
| definitely not start by doing the thing.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| I'd say they weren't doing what I suggested (that could
| still mean my advice is bad).
|
| Before they actually started climbing the rock, they had to
| do a bunch of other stuff. They at least got their hands on
| some gear, probably drove and hiked. And this is partly
| what gets them into trouble.
|
| Fooling yourself into doing something unsafe generally
| requires a bit of work. I think there's a safety in doing
| what's immediately around you. For most people, it would be
| really hard to kill themselves rock climbing in the next 15
| minutes, but very easy to do it next weekend.
|
| My hope for someone doing what I suggest would be something
| like "I'm gonna go hang from that pull-up bar / low beam /
| jungle gym on and off for 5 minutes." Then they research
| how to actually start rock climbing safely.
| zomglings wrote:
| Definitely agree with the article, and would like to offer a
| useful supplement to "doing the real thing": "watch someone very
| skilled do the real thing".
|
| Watching a pro can really accelerate skill acquisition because it
| will expose you to high quality ideas that would have been
| difficult to develop on your own.
|
| Want to get better at Backgammon/Chess/Go? Play a lot of games
| (at various time controls). Yes. But also watch professional
| players and read their analyses of games.
|
| Want to get better at programming? Write a lot of programs. Yes.
| But also read a lot of high quality code written by others.
|
| Want to become a better mathematician? Spend your time mastering
| mathematical knowledge and techniques. Yes. But also spend some
| time trying to get in the heads of the masters - learning their
| patterns of thought at the mathematical and meta-mathematical
| levels.
|
| The increased accessibility of this kind of content is one of the
| greatest achievements of the internet.
| Kye wrote:
| Recent practical example: I had a lot of trouble picking which
| photographs out of 20-100 of a subject to use. Enough were
| sharp, well-composed, and properly exposed to make it near
| impossible to pick.
|
| I've been watching James Popsys' videos[1] lately. He doesn't
| take the greatest photos in the world from a technical
| standpoint, but there's a theme that runs through most of his
| videos and pictures: tell a story.
|
| It's a lot easier to pick the best photos out of a bunch of
| technically decent photos when "best" is well-defined. And it
| turns out fit in a story about the subject is a solid criteria
| for best.
|
| When I got my camera, I got this photo of a squirrel:
| https://kyefox.com/2020/05/20/squirrel-surprise/
|
| It's fine. Not bad, not great.
|
| Then, after thinking about that advice, I decided to tell a
| story: https://kyefox.com/2020/06/20/eastern-gray-squirrels-at-
| play...
|
| They're all worse in technical terms than that one photo, but
| they're better because they fit into a story.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6WYZrzBuNQnz_2F4EqjhDQ
| zomglings wrote:
| "I'll be invisible if I stay perfectly still" is a great
| photograph. Actually, that picture (with the caption) stands
| by itself - it tells its own story.
| kalonis wrote:
| Just watching someone doing the real thing is one of the most
| prominent strategies to avoid doing the real thing.
|
| It is not enough to watch someone very skilled do the real
| thing. You have to imitate them: Reading a lot of great novels
| will not make you a better writer. Instead write a story in the
| style of any writer you admire and you will learn a lot while
| still doing the real thing. The same is true for almost any art
| you want learn.
| zomglings wrote:
| Very true. I don't mean this as a strategy for
| procrastination, but rather as a strategy for finding
| patterns/modes of thought that would otherwise have been
| difficult for you to discover on your own from first
| principles.
|
| It is very important to test out first hand by "doing the
| real thing" the ideas you discover by watching skilled
| people.
| empath75 wrote:
| I play a lot of hearthstone, and I'm quite good at it, but to
| remain good at it, I absolutely do have to spent a fair bit
| of time watching streamers and reading strategy articles.
| There's a lot to know about the game and you absolutely
| cannot get everything you need to be a top player from only
| playing. Even the top professional players spend a lot of
| time in coaching sessions with their peers or just watching
| streams.
| chrisweekly wrote:
| "AND", not "OR".
|
| IOW, possibly necessary, definitely insufficient condition.
|
| It's irrelevant whether it's common to use watching to avoid
| doing. One should absolutely watch, read, listen, etc -- in
| parallel to the doing.
| cgrealy wrote:
| When asked about how to be a good writer, Terry Pratchett
| offered tips on boxing:
|
| "A good diet is essential, of course, as is a daily regime of
| exercise. Pay attention to your footwork, it will often get
| you into trouble. Go down to the gym every day - every day of
| your life that finds you waking up capable of standing. Take
| every opportunity to watch a good professional fight. In fact
| watch as many bouts as you can, because you can even learn
| something from the fighters who get it wrong. Don't listen to
| what they say, watch what they do. And don't forget the diet
| and the exercise and the roadwork.
|
| Got it? Well, becoming a writer is basically exactly the same
| thing, except that it isn't about boxing."
| OGWhales wrote:
| Truly watching others is the most natural way to learn. It
| applies to all aspects of life. I've often felt school, while
| important, was ill preparing people for actual jobs. Shadowing
| people is immensely helpful and something my school forced me
| to do and I was grateful for.
| zomglings wrote:
| What did you study? (And, if you don't mind sharing, where?)
| That is an extremely rare position for educational bodies to
| take.
| blickentwapft wrote:
| This really hit the mark.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-06-20 23:00 UTC)