"Talented" I think mostly is used to describe people who practised something every day for many years. You will only do that if you like/love/enjoy doing it.
I started music lessons at 4 and still make music every day (age 50). Also I love chess and programming. ..How about music?
I understand that it may not be fun, but the idea is to build a good foundation,a framework upon which other things can be built upon.
So to that end I'd say chess. It would be terrible to grow up hating programming.
It sounds like the approach you will be taking will not involve fun. That's fine, but I think it needs to be acknowledged. Forcing them to study a subject will be work to them. The fun way is to let let them explore chess and programming naturally and build their knowledge out of a desire to increase their skill/pleasure in the task, but then "they may not take the best decision".
If the stuff you have planned for them may not be fun, that makes emotional development all the more important.
Read to them. Childrens books when young but progress as they get older.
Play with them. Let them dictate the game. Often it means just watching. Don't force your way; they'll tell you how to play.
Be there. Be aware of them. Ask what they're thinking about. When they show an interest in something, explore it with them. Show them the pieces but let them make the discoveries.
You probably know all of this but for others who may not know: Raising a smart child isn't just about exposing them to what we see as "clever" activities but really much more about being present.
My first child knows every flag, every capital city, and taught me the politics of Kosovo, Yugoslavia, and Serbia. My second child memorized part of the times table at 3 years old just by watching her older sister do it. My third child is a genius with motor skills - he's learned to walk at 11 months, can "parrot" conversation/song, move furniture around, throw things with his full body mass.
I think you have to find what clicks for them, what fascinates them.
I bought my eldest kid a chess set, Rubik's cube, guided her to programming. They're very interested and want to be good at it but the fascination isn't there. It's like a chore.
Also be wary that chess might have been your unique talent as a kid. You might not be world class, but you could also be in the 1% who actually liked chess as child. So just because you and other kids can do it, it doesn't mean every kid can.
Check out this early 20th century educational experiment to see what I mean: https://www.inference.org.uk/sanjoy/benezet/three.html
Both is perfectly acceptable IMO, lots of people can enjoy activities like chess without being a potential grandmaster.
As a fellow parent, I’ll just say don't overthink it, let them lead with their interests.
Under 7? Programming at that age is pointless.
The age group is 5 to 8. See my profile for details if you are interested.
https://www.forbes.com/2004/07/15/cx_0715health.html?sh=9728...
Planning ahead, self study, are learned by the first two, logic is a prerequisite to good code.
Like observations, of small details understanding of proportion, concentration/focus. Plus it's a useful skill.
Especially a topic like nature study (drawing living things i.e leaves, plants, insects) and portraits.
Plus everyone who can write can learn to draw. It's also less infested with the "not intelligent enough" myths. unlike maths & programming.