Instructions unclear: get java job, spend 2 hours watching Prime's videos, then 4 hours watching Prime's twitch stream every day for 6 months, amirite?
I think a lot of people can't turn something they _want_ into something that makes them _money._ If they can't direct their passion at _any_ available job, then they won't have any passion for the job they're forced into.
@@reixyz4852 See, _any_ profession that designs things will say that. Which nowadays is _most_ professions, since execution is so much easier to automate.
This is the magic of programming: you only need a computer to start making something, then incrementally keep making it better. Just like many of the arts, playing a musical instrument, sketching, sculpting, writing, it provides an open-ended path to improvement.
Figure out your passion and just start. After some time the effect snowballs and you'll have results you can be proud of. Even just 1 hour, three times per week, you can build something great out of that.
I coded a 3D cube in asm early high school not knowing no shit about projection, matrices, homogenous coordinates... you know what I knew about? I held a pencil, a paper and looked how its shadow is changing while I stood below the lamp of the room and thought and thought and realized "if I divide the coordinates with Z it would somehow look like this" then I added random constants to it until it started looking good.... Moved and translated the box without matrices too... it was very awful lot of code and pretty shitty - very bogus.... it however worked.... I literally wrote my very own line-drawing algorithm for its wireframe. Later I learned from a BOOK a faster line drawing algo and this became much faster, it became "nearly" a very tiny star wars wireframe game..... ^^no internet.... no I was not genius, except if all programmers at that time were pretty much genius.... maybe we were? Stilll... you can do it too: I agree with Prime!
Did about the same when i "self taught" BFS/DFS (to make my own roguelike) because all i could find back then was either "too academic" for me to read or "weird language i don't know". Sure, i didn't write a* or anything optimal, but it worked... And the line drawing part hit me so hard, ehehehh. My own algo for it was ok'ish and worked, sort of like a snail runs. But because i had DIY'ed it, when i found Bresenham's work i felt enlightened instead of stupid. Which is a running theme i guess, because if you've done it sub optimally you can really grasp the optimal when you see it and sort of admire it. When you've never put in the work to try and do it you can't see why the optimal solution is so good.
@@ErazerPT My line drawing alg was also very slow - but I remember mine "looked better" (to my eyes) because it drew more pixels than the bresenham algo (that's how calculations came out) I did not know Bresenham's algs name. In the book I found this it was just named the "Növekményes algoritmus" (algorithm using increments) described in Hungarian. The same "Haladó Gyakorlati Assembly" book had various graphics algorithms which were fast. Yes, reading those were amazing. I totally did not care that "oh I did not invent this myself" - all I could care is that now things are fast enough that it runs not just "render a scene", but "game" speeds so I can make 3D wireframe games. Still did not know matrices - all rotations and translations were done to all vertex via high school coordinate geometry from math books 🙂 Similar event was happening when I was doing collision detection - it was in 2D in a doom-like-map collision model - but the game was proper 3D just the collision / physics was 2D calculated and most movements... So stairs and walls were lines on a top-down map and had to collide / slide along the walls and change elevation crossing stairs. First I wrote my own solution utilizing the equation of the line and then doing extra checks if where they cross are in the section part or not. Not only this, but I only knew the famous "y = a * x + b" form at the time so I branched into 4-8 different calculations depending on how the two lines were aligned first and only do calculation from there. Then a friend of mine had the famous "Riversons Algorithms" book and told me that with the "2D" cross product I can tell if a point is on which side of a section.... Things again became very-very fast afterwards. As you say: You feel like a huge amazement when seeing how a good solutions can be so fast speed-wise. Later I developed a texturig routine instead of filling triangles and my routine was also "Növekményes" (similar to bresenham) and did not use any division or multiplication just simpler primitives so was very fast - and of course math-wise had actually visible error artifacts but you could make out the images so I did not care. I wish I have the alg to analyse what the hell I was doing and why.... it was half-bogus "that seemed to work" and was fast-enough to run on my back then amd 386....
You undersell the variability of intelligence. There are people out there who, try as they might, will never be able to achieve the things you can achieve. You recognise the gap from you to Gauss, but you should also recognise that there's just as large of a gap between you and some members of your audience. You don't have to be a genius to be capable of intellectual feats beyond the reach of others. The hard work message is great, and anyone can reach much higher by working hard than they would otherwise. For some that reach makes them great software engineers, for some it makes them Gauss, and for others it allows them to read and understand their local newspaper.
Human brain is very flexible and anyone can learn even if it takes longer and more attempts. In life you're competing against millions of people who are too lazy to put in even the most basic effort. So you can come ahead easily even with lower intellect but willing to improve, do the hard work hours.
@@jan.tichavsky i taught a dude who rolled his tahoo 46 times, had 5 bur holes in his head, dropped 20 iq, how to be master of the grill in short order cooking. if enough effort is applied. you will find results. may take the heat death of the universe. the bro in question will not be coding c in this life time. but he can slap 22 patties on the grill and know where each of them goes
I think a lot of people conflate all hard work with a job. Hard work for your employer is often only rewarded with additional work. Hard work for yourself (such as learning a skill) is always worth it.
You describe exactly why most people don't want to work anymore. If reward is not additional money but the fat pig boss is a millionaire then it's killing all the motivation for hard work.
Ironically enough the best line is at 4:04 "I am not a genius. I am a regular person who is willing to do something that's uncomfortable for an extended period of time" Grind. The grind is real. Do the grind. Just do the grind. Do it. DO IT! (Palpatine mode on DEW IT). The grind *will* reward you. Just grind.
@@UNKNOWN-mz6fnThe quote technically started at 4:00 to which he says "I am not some genius. I'm just a regular person who's willing to do something that's uncomfortable for an extended period of time."
It's funny how people have no problem spending thousands of hours grinding in some virtual game for no actual results other than stats next to your nickname. But in a real world situation with real effect not many people are willing to grind it.
I think he's not really getting "work smarter not harder." It just means to apply leverage, use the tools at your disposal instead of just throwing yourself at it. I think using the learning center counts as "working smarter." Just struggling through the homework and studying many hours on his own would be "working harder." Everything else he said is golden though.
This all goes back to the whole "Learn to code" movement. Everyone and their grandma got told to major in CompSci/Engineering because it was the path to easy 6 figure jobs and financial freedom. Now you have all these new people in the field who are not really passionate or interested about programming. Just the paycheck that comes along with it.
Never underestimate the motivation of mercenaries. Just because they're in it for the money doesn't make them less motivated, because they want money. The ones that don't make the cut are the ones that neither care about it for the passion nor are willing to steam through for the cash.
@@monad_tcp He's not average at all, prob at the 80th percentile. I'm prob at the 70th. If that sounds close, it's not, not by a mile... Our PERCEPTION of average is because when you come across anyone in the 97th+ you notice this HUGE chasm between us and them. Then you look back at the 50th and mentally you feel as if the distance to the "baseline" is the same as to the 97th. And if the distance to the baseline feels the same as the distance to genius, then you "must" be average. Also, as per Dunning-Kruger, as you go up in competency you start underestimating your competence, because you're deeply aware of how much you don't know. As for lazy, it's probably a normal distribution too, so the average person is just average lazy, but they feel "super lazy" to anyone above the 60th percentile, and we all feel like total bums to the 97th+, the famous workaholics.
You are very right about not knowing at the start and to work smarter you have to have the experience to know what it means to work smart. The more you learn, the easier it is to know where to look for the answer. When you start you're just thrashing your arms. I was lucky that I had some experience in High School with Pascal (yes I'm that old) but everything I've done was through a lot of grind. I haven't done much great, but I still try even though I've never made anything "releasable". It's fun to share with family/friends. I know I'm never gonna make money off of it, and that's ok. Sometimes you can do things because they're fun and a hobby. And if it's a project you really love, there will be a spark to get motivated. But there are times you do have to slog through. Inspiration song: "Spermbirds - Nothing is Easy" Listen, Jam, Code.
I would love for you to have a conversation with Dr K. (TH-cam psychologist focusing on Internet and gaming things). So much stuff in this video relates to the stuff he talks about. Plus his interviews with PirateSoftware were super interesting, and I'm sure you'd bring some new things to the table.
@@Manhunternew Lots of folks lack the foresight and wisdom to understand what can be done and what was done - They would probably need an advisory figure over failing and not being able to get back up. Someone like him fits perfectly, whether or not he's anything special.
Chat's sampling will always be kinda losers by simple virtue that the average productive person doesn't have twitch open and is busy reading/doing/trying different programming things that interest them, leaving Debby doubters
Good advice, _if_ your direct objective is to get good. If it's to solve a particular problem, or just to keep a roof over your head, there is a limit to how much time and effort is sensible. It might seem silly to explicate this, since surely if someone its looking into how to get good, they _want_ to get good, right? Right, but not at the expense of _everything else_ they do with their finite time and energy. I've seen a lot of people get so used to the idea that a person has _one_ thing, and that thing is what they are above (and at the expense of) _everything_ else; but that is simply not how a healthy human functions, and having been sucked into that philosophy myself when I was unformed and misplaced I know how devastating it can be to the practitioner's wellbeing.
I feel like as a society, people have largely forgotten or never learned what a learning process actually looks like. People see the end result from other people and assume that they just knew how to do it from the start. _Everything_ is an iterative process and you have to put in the time and effort to get to a goal that you want to achieve. I agree that "you can't work smart", but you can learn to "learn smart"! As demonstrated by this rant, a large part of that is figuring out questions to ask and answer those questions over and over again.
Honestly, when people talk about AI sometimes the things people say when comparing how humans operate to how AI operates absolutely baffle me sometimes. I've heard tech bros make claims like "humans don't learn how to do anything without copying someone else, we're no different from AI" before and I just have no idea how to respond to something that unbelievably stupid. The way they think is sometimes so foreign to me that I have no idea what I can possibly say to someone with such a warped view of the world.
Beginning a programming with actual task in mind adds so much in learnng process. I wanted lightsaber effect in Gimp. So my first actual program was a script on Scheme.
It takes 5000 dedicated hours for me to go from aimlessly struggling in every single match to be one of the best Auto Chess players that ever exist. I think the same can be applied to everything. Try to set apart a period of time like 6 months or 1 year and focus 8+ hours everyday (including weekends) into programming and see what would happen.
I slept through every calc 2 exam because I had ruck marches at the crack of dawn before my 8 am exams. And I had to run every single ruck to make exams on tome. I can run a 12 mile ruck with full battle rattle in under 2:15:00 while holding a shit because I had to in order to make my exam and not be failed out and loose my scholarship. And still got an A- in calc 2 because I did so so so much practice because I knew I wouldn’t be able to finish any of the exams passing out during them
Brute forcing when you are young is important. That's why I feel sad for 20 year olds that have antiwork mentality. Later they will see their colleagues get ahead in life and later will be clueless on why they were left behind.
You can work smarter in the sense that you can be efficient with your time and be able to balance other stuff in your life, but yeah there are no shortcuts. You gotta grind this shit for years regardless
I have a real "L take" counter. L'ish... Ok, more like an extension on what he's saying. The main problem I have is that I think he's too rigid and final about it. There's more about progressing than just "grinding". It's like that Conan meme, where if you really put a guy on a wheel like in the movie - he wouldn't emerge looking like Arnold Schwarzenegger 20 years later - he'd be an emaciated cripple if even alive. Not every person in every context will be psychologically compatible with 12-hour-a-day learning crams and (more importantly) not for EVERY topic. When it happens - it's the best thing in the world, the best feeling in the world. But it's extremely rare, unfortunately. Realistically, one should adjust the rate of information consumption (/any kind of training) to keep "the fire burning". Sometimes it's better to stop at the peak of passion (if you had one to begin with) so that you can continue to the next day with that same passion instead of burning yourself out and forcing things. Work towards consistency, not towards maximum rates. And if you think it's not "disciplined" enough - it's fine. Do it your way. For me - forcing myself to stop when I don't want to and forcing myself to continue when I want to stop are fundamentally the same, the former being much harder but much more advantageous in the long run if/when I manage to do it.
@@adambickford8720 Mediocrity is relative. Who'd you feel "special" and "exceptional" against if there was no "mediocrity"? I'm just insuring that not everyone's cut out to do 200 benchpress sets to failure per day while doing differential calculus and maintaining infinite growth like You... so, you should be thanking me if anything. Other than that, it's a road to a healthy and balanced LIFE firs and foremost.
the first opengl game i wrote ran terribly, was written in java using lwjgl, and used the opengl fixed pipeline with no shaders. it ran at like 30 fps max, didn't even render much, was super cpu limited, and had a particle system that tanked framerate whenever it actually got used. later i actually learned about how to make performant graphics applications with opengl. i refactored the entire graphics codebase, and ended up with something that actually looked and ran well. it had actual shaders, shadows, and a particle system that was actually somewhat efficient.
You just gotta start somewhere. It will be shitty but you can step up from there, learn more about how it works and what to improve. Nobody does some masterpiece on the first try.
Shoulda started with Logo for the car moving :P (turn right 1; move forward 1; turn right 1) Also - I still want Nintendo to make a version of Logo with the turtleshells as the turtles.
I mean the first two years of me learning programming was just messing around with javascript and html at 11 and 12 years old, I don't think that was super consequential considering now I code in everything under the sun depending on what I need.
I remember when I started with C# and I didn't know shit, I used to make GUI applications and without knowing actual programming I just those GUI elements as my variables and the hidden parameter to true
Its crazy to see how much people don't believe in themselves. It is to a point where people never even try to learn something because it seems hard. Things are hard when you don't know something, no matter the complexity. Just try and learn, forget about becoming a master in 3 months, just take the time to learn the basics.
Industriousness is a personality dimension. I'm not of course trying to say you can't try to increase or stretch your personality, but while people with a lot of it will "just do it" people without it won't. Industriousness is more important than raw intelligence.
Old koan that correlates and shows that smarter not harder is correct, but has a very important unspoken part: Disciple: Master, how to i achieve enlightenment? Master: By doing good things... D: And how will i know they are good? M: Through experience... D: And how will i gain experience? M: By making mistakes... You can only work smarter AFTER you worked harder long enough that you can figure out how to do it smarter. You can't "work smarter" off the bat because you have zero clue of what that means... Even if you read somewhere about the "smarter way to do x" you won't correlate it to anything because you haven't done it the other way yet, so you don't even know when to apply it...
Google the article for algorithmic thinking Go to front end masters and check out the free class named “The last algorithm and data structure video you’ll need” It is a 2 day course of a 9.5 hour video that is broken up into small digestible bits. I am learning go by writing the tests and answers myself. It is not the same as typescript and I struggle sometimes and I first try sometimes. Highly recommend it
I don't even think you need to be the 80 hour guy, nor put in crazy hours. It's fine to advance at a slower pace and have a balanced life. Just be aware it will take you longer than someone else who puts in more time, which I'm fine with. BUT you just HAVE to be willing to be uncomfortable and not know shit and just drag yourself through it, if you keep jumping from easy thing to easy thing or only try to do something when you already have a decent idea of how to do it, you're never going to truly grow or gain the confidence to tackle new things. You need to be OK with the feeling of not knowing shit and nothing is working and you don't even really know what question to google, getting comfortable with that feeling is what keeps you moving forward.
a few months into learning my first programming language (C++) in my spare time, i figured out how to make an ascii CRPG in the terminal. data structures? smart pointers? GUIs? i had no idea what those things were yet, and i didnt care. i didnt even know the terminal could have different colors. i wrote the whole thing without any 3rd-party libraries, and used a single 1-dimensional c-style array with my own raw pointer arithmetic formulas to translate that to a screen. th-cam.com/video/aBXjfu3d-fQ/w-d-xo.html dont let a lack of knowledge stop you. like the boomers say, where theres a will, theres a way.
Work as hard as you can. BUT Sleep is nonoptional. Good eating is nonoptional. Exercise? Nonoptional. Do you want to burn out before your skills actually get to the point of letting you have a lucrative job?
"You can't work smart" may be true... but as an expert at heads-down doing nothing for years at a time, switching jobs only once they catch on... you can absolutely "Can't work" "Smart"
"You can't program for more than 6 hours a day" is so funny to me, because I work as a software developer for 40 hours a week, and I'm often programming at home as well, whether that be game development in Unity or working on something in Rust.
It is possible but it depends. Because if you are working smart it assumes you have some smartness in you. But if you don't have. You have to work hard until you become smart.
Easy to explain. Imagine you're playing an MMO that is brand new and has no info around about it. So, the only way to figure out how to min-max it (work smarter) is by doing a lot of stuff (work harder) until you actually have enough knowledge to stop working harder and start working smarter. How do you get good at loops, working with arrays,lists and all that "basic" s**t? You do A LOT of it, to the point you're instinctively doing it (almost always) right without even thinking (much) about it. Look up DIKW (Data>Information>Knowledge>Wisdom) and the Learning Pyramid. Correlate and you'll understand why "do" (harder) puts you at the 75% and opens up the way for the last step "teach" (smarter).
I don't understand how people learn like that. So you just created your own physics for your game when you didn't even know one line of code? I can't learn like that. I like to first buy a good book (a book about java for example), understand the theory, do a lot of exercises and then when i'm done with that move to a couple of projects. There's no way i can learn a programming language, or how to make games, just by starting them and googling my way through everything.
It depends on the person. The main thing is to start if you begin to read books about it and that's your way it's fine. Some people only say "I can't do that" and they don't try to create something or try to dig more into the subject, they expected that other person teaches them how to do everything
It just works on me this way 1. You don't know shit 2. you need/want to do something 3. you try 4. you find out why it doesn't work 5. you repeat steps 3-4 about 10 times 6. you have something that barely works 7. you want to improve it 8. repeat steps 3-4 about 10 times 9. you have something working and are satisfied with it 10. you repeat steps 7-8-9 Reading books and following the steps is very tedious for me. I want something I can build myself, not a recipe to build something else.
I think you are overestimating what Prime meant with "game", it probably was just a simple triangle that moved in response to keyboard input. That isn't as complicated as you would think.
To be honest, doing it your way will probably get you farther than just gigachadding your way through a project by googling documentation and SO to figure out how to do X -- even if you were a genius. To truly master something you have to practice at it -- boring, tedious practice -- until it becomes second nature. 10,000 kicks once vs. 1 kick 10,000 times. You see this also in math education. The only way to get kids proficient in math -- the ONLY way -- is through drilling. Only when the kid knows their times tables and such by heart are they ready for the higher level concepts that make math really interesting. Every failed experiment in math education, from New Math to Common Core, has made the fatal assumption that there's a shortcut to mathematical proficiency by way of conceptual understanding and building interest, that if only we could teach Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory to a bunch of six-year-olds in a FUN and INTERESTING way, the rest will fall into place. But no. There is no royal road to geometry. You've got to 19th-century schoolmarm that shit and make them memorize their basic math facts by rote, drilling over and over and over until they can do arithmetic as easy as breathing. THEN you can add in the BEGINNINGS of higher conceptual stuff. Keep doing what you're doing, man. It's the golden path.
"You have talent" and "You are a genius" sounds flattering at first, but it is both demeaning yourself and somewhat insulting to the person you say it to. Stop implying, that none of what people do came from spending countless afternoons, evenings and nights learning and failing. Some of us choose to stare at gibberish blocks of code for hours. Others became good at talking to people instead. Besides that, there is only one genius, and that is Tom.
do something daily for a year and people will start to call you a genius. calling someone a genius is disreagarding the hours spend in training that skill. everyone can be a genius in one skill. you just need to actually want to learn it and actually put in the hours in daily work. do that for a year and you will be good in the skill.
"I'm not some genius, I'm just a regular person who's willing to do something that's uncomfortable for an extended period of time."
"Hi honey, you want to come back to my place and do something uncomfortable for an extended period of time?"
Its called autism
10,000 hours of experience happens one hour at a time.
Instructions unclear: get java job, spend 2 hours watching Prime's videos, then 4 hours watching Prime's twitch stream every day for 6 months, amirite?
You’ve got to want it. Most people don’t realise that they don’t really want it…
I think a lot of people can't turn something they _want_ into something that makes them _money._ If they can't direct their passion at _any_ available job, then they won't have any passion for the job they're forced into.
@@i-am-linja if you're forced into something please do anything other than programming
@@reixyz4852 See, _any_ profession that designs things will say that. Which nowadays is _most_ professions, since execution is so much easier to automate.
@@reixyz4852 how about they go create power grids, dams, airplanes? This notion that programming is somehow different from any other field is stupid.
@@ProtossOPfr lol
This is the magic of programming: you only need a computer to start making something, then incrementally keep making it better. Just like many of the arts, playing a musical instrument, sketching, sculpting, writing, it provides an open-ended path to improvement.
The genius is figuring out a way to convince your mind and body to dedicate that many hours on self improvement.
Figure out your passion and just start. After some time the effect snowballs and you'll have results you can be proud of. Even just 1 hour, three times per week, you can build something great out of that.
@@jan.tichavskyi find that having an actual positive reinforcement makes you try harder.
I coded a 3D cube in asm early high school not knowing no shit about projection, matrices, homogenous coordinates... you know what I knew about? I held a pencil, a paper and looked how its shadow is changing while I stood below the lamp of the room and thought and thought and realized "if I divide the coordinates with Z it would somehow look like this" then I added random constants to it until it started looking good.... Moved and translated the box without matrices too... it was very awful lot of code and pretty shitty - very bogus.... it however worked....
I literally wrote my very own line-drawing algorithm for its wireframe. Later I learned from a BOOK a faster line drawing algo and this became much faster, it became "nearly" a very tiny star wars wireframe game.....
^^no internet.... no I was not genius, except if all programmers at that time were pretty much genius.... maybe we were? Stilll... you can do it too: I agree with Prime!
Did about the same when i "self taught" BFS/DFS (to make my own roguelike) because all i could find back then was either "too academic" for me to read or "weird language i don't know". Sure, i didn't write a* or anything optimal, but it worked...
And the line drawing part hit me so hard, ehehehh. My own algo for it was ok'ish and worked, sort of like a snail runs. But because i had DIY'ed it, when i found Bresenham's work i felt enlightened instead of stupid.
Which is a running theme i guess, because if you've done it sub optimally you can really grasp the optimal when you see it and sort of admire it. When you've never put in the work to try and do it you can't see why the optimal solution is so good.
@@ErazerPT My line drawing alg was also very slow - but I remember mine "looked better" (to my eyes) because it drew more pixels than the bresenham algo (that's how calculations came out)
I did not know Bresenham's algs name. In the book I found this it was just named the "Növekményes algoritmus" (algorithm using increments) described in Hungarian. The same "Haladó Gyakorlati Assembly" book had various graphics algorithms which were fast.
Yes, reading those were amazing. I totally did not care that "oh I did not invent this myself" - all I could care is that now things are fast enough that it runs not just "render a scene", but "game" speeds so I can make 3D wireframe games.
Still did not know matrices - all rotations and translations were done to all vertex via high school coordinate geometry from math books 🙂
Similar event was happening when I was doing collision detection - it was in 2D in a doom-like-map collision model - but the game was proper 3D just the collision / physics was 2D calculated and most movements... So stairs and walls were lines on a top-down map and had to collide / slide along the walls and change elevation crossing stairs.
First I wrote my own solution utilizing the equation of the line and then doing extra checks if where they cross are in the section part or not. Not only this, but I only knew the famous "y = a * x + b" form at the time so I branched into 4-8 different calculations depending on how the two lines were aligned first and only do calculation from there. Then a friend of mine had the famous "Riversons Algorithms" book and told me that with the "2D" cross product I can tell if a point is on which side of a section.... Things again became very-very fast afterwards.
As you say: You feel like a huge amazement when seeing how a good solutions can be so fast speed-wise.
Later I developed a texturig routine instead of filling triangles and my routine was also "Növekményes" (similar to bresenham) and did not use any division or multiplication just simpler primitives so was very fast - and of course math-wise had actually visible error artifacts but you could make out the images so I did not care. I wish I have the alg to analyse what the hell I was doing and why.... it was half-bogus "that seemed to work" and was fast-enough to run on my back then amd 386....
I remember when I reverse engineered a bad newton rhapson formula while trying to find a way to find a square root of some number lol.
You undersell the variability of intelligence. There are people out there who, try as they might, will never be able to achieve the things you can achieve. You recognise the gap from you to Gauss, but you should also recognise that there's just as large of a gap between you and some members of your audience. You don't have to be a genius to be capable of intellectual feats beyond the reach of others. The hard work message is great, and anyone can reach much higher by working hard than they would otherwise. For some that reach makes them great software engineers, for some it makes them Gauss, and for others it allows them to read and understand their local newspaper.
Human brain is very flexible and anyone can learn even if it takes longer and more attempts. In life you're competing against millions of people who are too lazy to put in even the most basic effort. So you can come ahead easily even with lower intellect but willing to improve, do the hard work hours.
@@jan.tichavsky i taught a dude who rolled his tahoo 46 times, had 5 bur holes in his head, dropped 20 iq, how to be master of the grill in short order cooking. if enough effort is applied. you will find results. may take the heat death of the universe. the bro in question will not be coding c in this life time. but he can slap 22 patties on the grill and know where each of them goes
this is one of the best video, please keep doing this I really like you and I hope to see you here for a really long time
"I couldn't google my way out of a paper bag"
I think a lot of people conflate all hard work with a job. Hard work for your employer is often only rewarded with additional work. Hard work for yourself (such as learning a skill) is always worth it.
You describe exactly why most people don't want to work anymore. If reward is not additional money but the fat pig boss is a millionaire then it's killing all the motivation for hard work.
Ironically enough the best line is at 4:04
"I am not a genius. I am a regular person who is willing to do something that's uncomfortable for an extended period of time"
Grind. The grind is real. Do the grind. Just do the grind. Do it. DO IT! (Palpatine mode on DEW IT). The grind *will* reward you. Just grind.
That minute of gold is literally me 😊
Where? I can't find it..
@@UNKNOWN-mz6fnThe quote technically started at 4:00 to which he says "I am not some genius. I'm just a regular person who's willing to do something that's uncomfortable for an extended period of time."
It's funny how people have no problem spending thousands of hours grinding in some virtual game for no actual results other than stats next to your nickname. But in a real world situation with real effect not many people are willing to grind it.
Real world and video game ain't no difference. It hits the same. Also reality is not what you think it is
If anyone is a genius, Tom is. But also Prime.
I think he's not really getting "work smarter not harder." It just means to apply leverage, use the tools at your disposal instead of just throwing yourself at it. I think using the learning center counts as "working smarter." Just struggling through the homework and studying many hours on his own would be "working harder." Everything else he said is golden though.
This all goes back to the whole "Learn to code" movement. Everyone and their grandma got told to major in CompSci/Engineering because it was the path to easy 6 figure jobs and financial freedom. Now you have all these new people in the field who are not really passionate or interested about programming. Just the paycheck that comes along with it.
Never underestimate the motivation of mercenaries. Just because they're in it for the money doesn't make them less motivated, because they want money. The ones that don't make the cut are the ones that neither care about it for the passion nor are willing to steam through for the cash.
@@ErazerPT Prime keeps saying he's average, but he's not lazy. The average person is super lazy. You don't need to be a genius, just don't be lazy.
@@monad_tcp He's not average at all, prob at the 80th percentile. I'm prob at the 70th. If that sounds close, it's not, not by a mile... Our PERCEPTION of average is because when you come across anyone in the 97th+ you notice this HUGE chasm between us and them. Then you look back at the 50th and mentally you feel as if the distance to the "baseline" is the same as to the 97th. And if the distance to the baseline feels the same as the distance to genius, then you "must" be average.
Also, as per Dunning-Kruger, as you go up in competency you start underestimating your competence, because you're deeply aware of how much you don't know.
As for lazy, it's probably a normal distribution too, so the average person is just average lazy, but they feel "super lazy" to anyone above the 60th percentile, and we all feel like total bums to the 97th+, the famous workaholics.
So like every industry ever?
Skill is a trajectory, not a destination.
Thanks, great time to hear it
You are very right about not knowing at the start and to work smarter you have to have the experience to know what it means to work smart. The more you learn, the easier it is to know where to look for the answer. When you start you're just thrashing your arms. I was lucky that I had some experience in High School with Pascal (yes I'm that old) but everything I've done was through a lot of grind. I haven't done much great, but I still try even though I've never made anything "releasable". It's fun to share with family/friends. I know I'm never gonna make money off of it, and that's ok. Sometimes you can do things because they're fun and a hobby. And if it's a project you really love, there will be a spark to get motivated. But there are times you do have to slog through.
Inspiration song: "Spermbirds - Nothing is Easy" Listen, Jam, Code.
I would love for you to have a conversation with Dr K. (TH-cam psychologist focusing on Internet and gaming things). So much stuff in this video relates to the stuff he talks about. Plus his interviews with PirateSoftware were super interesting, and I'm sure you'd bring some new things to the table.
Prime tweeted at HealthyGamer asking to have a conversation with Dr K a couple years ago, and he replied with "check your dms", but nothing happened.
@@DestopLine Lol, that sounds exactly like Prime.
Healthy gamer is nothing special. I guess for teenagers it's appropriate
@@Manhunternew Lots of folks lack the foresight and wisdom to understand what can be done and what was done - They would probably need an advisory figure over failing and not being able to get back up.
Someone like him fits perfectly, whether or not he's anything special.
@@Manhunternew You are never to old to learn something.
it is like learning tennis, you just don't know what you are doing, you just have to try everything.
Honestly inspired. Grinding can take you so far.
"Stop trying to convince chat to work hard"😂
Chat's sampling will always be kinda losers by simple virtue that the average productive person doesn't have twitch open and is busy reading/doing/trying different programming things that interest them, leaving Debby doubters
A lot of productive people spend little to no time on social media
Good advice, _if_ your direct objective is to get good. If it's to solve a particular problem, or just to keep a roof over your head, there is a limit to how much time and effort is sensible.
It might seem silly to explicate this, since surely if someone its looking into how to get good, they _want_ to get good, right? Right, but not at the expense of _everything else_ they do with their finite time and energy. I've seen a lot of people get so used to the idea that a person has _one_ thing, and that thing is what they are above (and at the expense of) _everything_ else; but that is simply not how a healthy human functions, and having been sucked into that philosophy myself when I was unformed and misplaced I know how devastating it can be to the practitioner's wellbeing.
I feel like as a society, people have largely forgotten or never learned what a learning process actually looks like. People see the end result from other people and assume that they just knew how to do it from the start. _Everything_ is an iterative process and you have to put in the time and effort to get to a goal that you want to achieve.
I agree that "you can't work smart", but you can learn to "learn smart"! As demonstrated by this rant, a large part of that is figuring out questions to ask and answer those questions over and over again.
Honestly, when people talk about AI sometimes the things people say when comparing how humans operate to how AI operates absolutely baffle me sometimes. I've heard tech bros make claims like "humans don't learn how to do anything without copying someone else, we're no different from AI" before and I just have no idea how to respond to something that unbelievably stupid. The way they think is sometimes so foreign to me that I have no idea what I can possibly say to someone with such a warped view of the world.
Beginning a programming with actual task in mind adds so much in learnng process. I wanted lightsaber effect in Gimp. So my first actual program was a script on Scheme.
it took me 923 lines of code just to write a triangle to the screen in vulkan
everything is in the grinding… love your content
Genius of Hard Work. Rock Lee-agen.
#ifyouknowyouknow
It takes 5000 dedicated hours for me to go from aimlessly struggling in every single match to be one of the best Auto Chess players that ever exist. I think the same can be applied to everything. Try to set apart a period of time like 6 months or 1 year and focus 8+ hours everyday (including weekends) into programming and see what would happen.
The only genius is Tom, the rest of us must work hard for it.
I slept through every calc 2 exam because I had ruck marches at the crack of dawn before my 8 am exams. And I had to run every single ruck to make exams on tome. I can run a 12 mile ruck with full battle rattle in under 2:15:00 while holding a shit because I had to in order to make my exam and not be failed out and loose my scholarship. And still got an A- in calc 2 because I did so so so much practice because I knew I wouldn’t be able to finish any of the exams passing out during them
I was planning on making a Next JS app and am currently working on my CSS tailwind skills. T_T
you need to work farter 😭
LOVED IT :)
feel like this should have went on primetime, this is great
This is exactly how I learned to code, except with books instead of the internet and BASIC instead of Java! Same principle applies.
This is my biggest motivator today
Brute forcing when you are young is important. That's why I feel sad for 20 year olds that have antiwork mentality. Later they will see their colleagues get ahead in life and later will be clueless on why they were left behind.
It's not that you can't work smarter it's more that you can't learn smart without learning hard. Learn hard to work smart
You can work smarter in the sense that you can be efficient with your time and be able to balance other stuff in your life, but yeah there are no shortcuts. You gotta grind this shit for years regardless
smart work > hard work
He's talking about when you are learning you don't actually know what smart is. Also why not smart and hard work?
3:52 Pirate Software mentioned
I have a real "L take" counter. L'ish... Ok, more like an extension on what he's saying.
The main problem I have is that I think he's too rigid and final about it. There's more about progressing than just "grinding". It's like that Conan meme, where if you really put a guy on a wheel like in the movie - he wouldn't emerge looking like Arnold Schwarzenegger 20 years later - he'd be an emaciated cripple if even alive.
Not every person in every context will be psychologically compatible with 12-hour-a-day learning crams and (more importantly) not for EVERY topic. When it happens - it's the best thing in the world, the best feeling in the world. But it's extremely rare, unfortunately.
Realistically, one should adjust the rate of information consumption (/any kind of training) to keep "the fire burning". Sometimes it's better to stop at the peak of passion (if you had one to begin with) so that you can continue to the next day with that same passion instead of burning yourself out and forcing things. Work towards consistency, not towards maximum rates.
And if you think it's not "disciplined" enough - it's fine. Do it your way. For me - forcing myself to stop when I don't want to and forcing myself to continue when I want to stop are fundamentally the same, the former being much harder but much more advantageous in the long run if/when I manage to do it.
The road to mediocrity rationalized.
@@adambickford8720 Mediocrity is relative. Who'd you feel "special" and "exceptional" against if there was no "mediocrity"? I'm just insuring that not everyone's cut out to do 200 benchpress sets to failure per day while doing differential calculus and maintaining infinite growth like You... so, you should be thanking me if anything.
Other than that, it's a road to a healthy and balanced LIFE firs and foremost.
@@arcuscerebellumus8797 Spin it however you'd like
That's really good advice !
I always say I’m a dedicated idiot
How can I not work hard, when I'm already so hard?
the first opengl game i wrote ran terribly, was written in java using lwjgl, and used the opengl fixed pipeline with no shaders. it ran at like 30 fps max, didn't even render much, was super cpu limited, and had a particle system that tanked framerate whenever it actually got used. later i actually learned about how to make performant graphics applications with opengl. i refactored the entire graphics codebase, and ended up with something that actually looked and ran well. it had actual shaders, shadows, and a particle system that was actually somewhat efficient.
You just gotta start somewhere. It will be shitty but you can step up from there, learn more about how it works and what to improve. Nobody does some masterpiece on the first try.
Shoulda started with Logo for the car moving :P (turn right 1; move forward 1; turn right 1)
Also - I still want Nintendo to make a version of Logo with the turtleshells as the turtles.
I mean the first two years of me learning programming was just messing around with javascript and html at 11 and 12 years old, I don't think that was super consequential considering now I code in everything under the sun depending on what I need.
I remember when I started with C# and I didn't know shit, I used to make GUI applications and without knowing actual programming I just those GUI elements as my variables and the hidden parameter to true
Tom's a genius
Best rant ever… and so true
i approve the message of this video
Diminishing returns are still... returns. And the guy w/the most returns is the most qualified.
What, to become good you have work hard?
That’s not the answer we want to hear!
I always got this guy mixed up with DougDoug, and right when I get it down he goes and opens the fartgates.
To be fair, the 2 seems to be...quite common in some place
@@uuu12343 "Hey, the name is ThePrimeagen, where we solve problems that viewers think they have."
I learned to fart harder thanks Prime
Calculus was the absolute worst, but the absolute necessary
Java applets were the greatest thing ever. yeah okay security issues, but we had 3D animationson the web IN THE 90's
Just as insecure as flash but with 4x the ram, whats not to love?
@@adambickford8720 calm down
@@JP-hr3xq ok, karen
Describes normal programming process... Twitch dummy: you're a genius
On the other side, I’ve seen many a “genius” put absolutely no work in and completely fail 😅
Its crazy to see how much people don't believe in themselves. It is to a point where people never even try to learn something because it seems hard. Things are hard when you don't know something, no matter the complexity. Just try and learn, forget about becoming a master in 3 months, just take the time to learn the basics.
Industriousness is a personality dimension. I'm not of course trying to say you can't try to increase or stretch your personality, but while people with a lot of it will "just do it" people without it won't.
Industriousness is more important than raw intelligence.
Old koan that correlates and shows that smarter not harder is correct, but has a very important unspoken part:
Disciple: Master, how to i achieve enlightenment?
Master: By doing good things...
D: And how will i know they are good?
M: Through experience...
D: And how will i gain experience?
M: By making mistakes...
You can only work smarter AFTER you worked harder long enough that you can figure out how to do it smarter. You can't "work smarter" off the bat because you have zero clue of what that means... Even if you read somewhere about the "smarter way to do x" you won't correlate it to anything because you haven't done it the other way yet, so you don't even know when to apply it...
Aspiring programmers should look up to Richard Feynman.
Man i wish i had this guy's logic solving problems 4:10
Getting to classfirst in math in the mood "ill get there, its just some work into uni" is very inspireing.
Google the article for algorithmic thinking
Go to front end masters and check out the free class named “The last algorithm and data structure video you’ll need”
It is a 2 day course of a 9.5 hour video that is broken up into small digestible bits.
I am learning go by writing the tests and answers myself. It is not the same as typescript and I struggle sometimes and I first try sometimes.
Highly recommend it
Gotta learn how to learn
Google driven development is extremely effective.
yyea yeah the genius yapping again, easy for him to say when hes genus
Work farter 😭😭😭
I don't even think you need to be the 80 hour guy, nor put in crazy hours. It's fine to advance at a slower pace and have a balanced life.
Just be aware it will take you longer than someone else who puts in more time, which I'm fine with.
BUT you just HAVE to be willing to be uncomfortable and not know shit and just drag yourself through it, if you keep jumping from easy thing to easy thing or only try to do something when you already have a decent idea of how to do it, you're never going to truly grow or gain the confidence to tackle new things.
You need to be OK with the feeling of not knowing shit and nothing is working and you don't even really know what question to google, getting comfortable with that feeling is what keeps you moving forward.
This is me on the bezier path RN
a few months into learning my first programming language (C++) in my spare time, i figured out how to make an ascii CRPG in the terminal. data structures? smart pointers? GUIs? i had no idea what those things were yet, and i didnt care. i didnt even know the terminal could have different colors.
i wrote the whole thing without any 3rd-party libraries, and used a single 1-dimensional c-style array with my own raw pointer arithmetic formulas to translate that to a screen.
th-cam.com/video/aBXjfu3d-fQ/w-d-xo.html
dont let a lack of knowledge stop you. like the boomers say, where theres a will, theres a way.
I failed Calc 5 times in a row
Then I FINALLY figured out how to understand it. Got a 98 the 6th time with 0 homework done lol
I've been programming 35 years and it's still googling shit regularly.
I personally prefer working farter
Work as hard as you can. BUT
Sleep is nonoptional. Good eating is nonoptional. Exercise? Nonoptional.
Do you want to burn out before your skills actually get to the point of letting you have a lucrative job?
"You can't work smart" may be true... but as an expert at heads-down doing nothing for years at a time, switching jobs only once they catch on... you can absolutely "Can't work" "Smart"
"You can't program for more than 6 hours a day" is so funny to me, because I work as a software developer for 40 hours a week, and I'm often programming at home as well, whether that be game development in Unity or working on something in Rust.
Why Isn't It Possible? Why Not?
It is a myth that work is gatekept by intelligence
It is possible but it depends. Because if you are working smart it assumes you have some smartness in you.
But if you don't have. You have to work hard until you become smart.
Easy to explain. Imagine you're playing an MMO that is brand new and has no info around about it. So, the only way to figure out how to min-max it (work smarter) is by doing a lot of stuff (work harder) until you actually have enough knowledge to stop working harder and start working smarter. How do you get good at loops, working with arrays,lists and all that "basic" s**t? You do A LOT of it, to the point you're instinctively doing it (almost always) right without even thinking (much) about it.
Look up DIKW (Data>Information>Knowledge>Wisdom) and the Learning Pyramid. Correlate and you'll understand why "do" (harder) puts you at the 75% and opens up the way for the last step "teach" (smarter).
It's just not.
Because you're a generic javascript dev.
The only thing you can diff yourself with is experience.
You gain experience by doing things all the time.
I don't understand how people learn like that. So you just created your own physics for your game when you didn't even know one line of code? I can't learn like that.
I like to first buy a good book (a book about java for example), understand the theory, do a lot of exercises and then when i'm done with that move to a couple of projects. There's no way i can learn a programming language, or how to make games, just by starting them and googling my way through everything.
It depends on the person. The main thing is to start if you begin to read books about it and that's your way it's fine. Some people only say "I can't do that" and they don't try to create something or try to dig more into the subject, they expected that other person teaches them how to do everything
It just works on me this way
1. You don't know shit
2. you need/want to do something
3. you try
4. you find out why it doesn't work
5. you repeat steps 3-4 about 10 times
6. you have something that barely works
7. you want to improve it
8. repeat steps 3-4 about 10 times
9. you have something working and are satisfied with it
10. you repeat steps 7-8-9
Reading books and following the steps is very tedious for me. I want something I can build myself, not a recipe to build something else.
I think you are overestimating what Prime meant with "game", it probably was just a simple triangle that moved in response to keyboard input. That isn't as complicated as you would think.
To be honest, doing it your way will probably get you farther than just gigachadding your way through a project by googling documentation and SO to figure out how to do X -- even if you were a genius. To truly master something you have to practice at it -- boring, tedious practice -- until it becomes second nature. 10,000 kicks once vs. 1 kick 10,000 times.
You see this also in math education. The only way to get kids proficient in math -- the ONLY way -- is through drilling. Only when the kid knows their times tables and such by heart are they ready for the higher level concepts that make math really interesting. Every failed experiment in math education, from New Math to Common Core, has made the fatal assumption that there's a shortcut to mathematical proficiency by way of conceptual understanding and building interest, that if only we could teach Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory to a bunch of six-year-olds in a FUN and INTERESTING way, the rest will fall into place. But no. There is no royal road to geometry. You've got to 19th-century schoolmarm that shit and make them memorize their basic math facts by rote, drilling over and over and over until they can do arithmetic as easy as breathing. THEN you can add in the BEGINNINGS of higher conceptual stuff.
Keep doing what you're doing, man. It's the golden path.
He read what he needed as he was “just doing it”
W take
People in the chat just dont want to put in the hours. All i see is excuses.
But great take
Turns out Shia LaBeouf was right.
"can't learn well after 6 hours" yeah? so learn for 2 hours and spend 4 hours reinforcing with practice and experimentation
Knowledge retention & being half decent at improvisation will carry you very, very far in this world. Everything else is work your bollocks off.
"You have talent" and "You are a genius" sounds flattering at first, but it is both demeaning yourself and somewhat insulting to the person you say it to. Stop implying, that none of what people do came from spending countless afternoons, evenings and nights learning and failing.
Some of us choose to stare at gibberish blocks of code for hours. Others became good at talking to people instead.
Besides that, there is only one genius, and that is Tom.
do something daily for a year and people will start to call you a genius.
calling someone a genius is disreagarding the hours spend in training that skill.
everyone can be a genius in one skill. you just need to actually want to learn it and actually put in the hours in daily work. do that for a year and you will be good in the skill.
The comparison of 30 hour week to 80 week is false. A well rested and happy 30 over the long term nets a better end result
I think the title is only good in this context.
More like work on what you can until you get good.
L Take
Why L take
For the joke at the end of the video