Hacker News Reader

Comment by elp | Hacker News Reader

This.

The world needs more feel good stories. Also if she's doing AI on infrared images at 17 she's probably going to be really impressive work later on.

View on HN

It depends, the followup is often unimpressive. Many people who did really impressive things in their youth ended up with quite mundane lives.

I mean it along the lines of "at 17, she is doing AI on IR images, at 30 she will be fixing bugs in traffic sign detection code for a big car company, with no mention of her name except in commit logs".

And it is not a bad thing! We need people to fix bugs in traffic sign detection code, and she may have a nice pay, in a reputable company, with a good work-life balance. It may not be impressive work, but it is work that needs to be done.

It may not be a feel good story for the press, but I believe living a mundane life certainly feels good to the one living it.

I'm somewhat confused by statements like these because they imply that the reason why we're mostly excited about it is not what she achieved but where she could potentially achieve many years later. Are these "years later" something exclusive to young people? I mean, if you're 40 years old doing exactly the same thing, and you're not retiring anytime soon it's safe to assume that you'll be working until your 50's and maybe beyond.

So then, are we celebrating the potential growth of a teenager more than that of the potential growth of a middle-aged person, on the grounds of potential, or are we celebrating that she managed to achieve this at 17?

I'm trying really hard to see beyond age. I don't care if someone is 16 or 36. Both can have the same years of experience (say 8-10 years of programming), and yet the former sounds more romantic and sellable to headliners because it's easier to dream big about achievements someone in their 25 will do than someone in their 45. Why?

>I'm somewhat confused by statements like these because they imply that the reason why we're mostly excited about it is not what she achieved but where she could potentially achieve many years later.

Did you just describe the stock market?

Because people who become high-achieving outliers tend to distinguish themselves in their adolescence. It's the start of a virtuous cycle where talent + hard work leads to admission into elite institutions (universities and, later, companies) which lead to positive network effects which amplify the ongoing application of talent + hard work.

It's rare for a previously unremarkable 36-year-old to suddenly turn in to Jeff Bezos (for a lot of reasons, not least that cognitive power peaks at age 25 so learning and adapting to novel situations gets harder with age).

I see I'm getting downvoted: why?

I'm a thoroughly average 33-year-old, for what it's worth :) I don't mean to imply that we shouldn't continue strive for growth and development as we age, but I certainly am not as mentally quick or energetic as I was ten years ago. There is very little chance I will suddenly transform into jwz or John Carmack or <insert name of legendary hacker here>.

On the bright side, I am a better communicator and strategic decision-maker, and am more satisfied with my life as it is.

I don't think you need to be at peak cognitive power for your contributions to be measurable and worth doing in society. No one would care about the age of the person who finds treatment for an autoimmune or teleportation.

Sure, you'll be delivering slower than what you would if you were 25 but slower is better than not delivering whatever unique you have to offer at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com