Hacker News Reader

Comment by majani | Hacker News Reader

That's where you give him a pass since he's 16 years old doing this in his spare time

I don't, though. I'm not saying he sucks, or that this doesn't look good, or anything. I'm saying that this could be improved by having the animations looking more real by behaving more like they would in reality.

Saying something can be improved is not the same as saying that something is crap.

Well we can definitely start doing that from any movie in that case because all of them include totally unrealistic stuff regardless if it about physics or narrative. In that case, voluntary or not it give that bigger robotic feeling.

But guess what, that is also part of what makes movies interesting.

There is such a thing as suspension of disbelief, though, so I disagree with you.

I would just argue I have not the same tolerance/expectancy regarding reality when it comes to animated movie vs those with actors made of flesh or depending which subject is treated.

For example I kind of hate most action movies starring actors like Tom Cruise or movies such as the James Bond or Jason Bourne series but I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to movies treating on myths/legends, science fiction or animated movies.

Everyone put their own cursor. This discussion is kind of moot anyway without knowing the author intention.

There's a difference between consistent, explained differences and inconsistent and inexplicable things. If you were watching a scifi film and, half way through, the characters became fish, without anyone acknowledging or explaining this, you might not enjoy it.

> I do love more liberty with reality when it comes to [fantasy] movies

I have the same - probably because you know from experience that, e.g., someone taking the punishment that John Wick or Bourne does wouldn't be running around two minutes later but you have no frame of reference for, say, an 8ft goblin doing the same.

(Like the first episode of Slow Horses: there is no way a huge anti-terrorism training exercise across London stations wouldn't have every second of communications recorded for later examination and it made the whole premise of the show - that the fella is exiled because someone lied about what they said to him over those comms - nonsense to me.)

Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles.

It happened to me with programming games; I entered competitions and even won one or two, making me believe I'm just SO good.

Now that I'm 30+ years old I still crave that same level of recognition which is basically unobtainable for me now as I'm just another cog in the system. Sure, I have some nice projects here and there and I get a compliment out of that some time, but never on the level I received while I was young.

I think it's incredibly important to give people advice on what could be improved, while still being respectful / praising of the work that's already done. That's how, in my opinion, you get a balanced individual.

>Being critical regardless of age is very valuable. There's this thing that if a young person does something pretty damn cool, they're made to believe it's extraordanirily good, rivalling even the best in the industry. I think it's called the "Gifted Kid Problem" in certain circles.

I think you nailed something that I was wondering while browsing this thread. What difference does it make if a person practiced 5-10 years a craft resulting to winning an award if that person started when he was 10 vs. 25? The headline would not only be radically different if it was a 30-year old who did it because he studied since he was 20-25; We might not even have a headline. It would have been "oh, someone won the award. Yay?"

Do we reward the output as as standalone (as is) during the contest, or do we also reward our perceived potential (imagine what this person would do in 20 years)?

this is another reason why as a gifted kid who became lazy and average I feel like every effort I make now at 25 to improve myself is honestly just too late. In 5 years I will be irrelevant.

strength and self-worth as a gifted child cannot come from utter mastery of a single field. The incentives and behaviors learned do not produce the patience and long hours required to push through to top most fields. However self-worth can come from the ability to master many skills quickly. I suggest learning something new with an open mind and no expectation you will become great, just try to get to the point where its fun to play around with. I taught myself 3d modelling this year to a reasonably good degree and its been amazing. Last year I learned good typesetting and graphic design. Having a broad spectrum understanding is not only personally gratifying but has been great for my career when someone asks me to do a simple task (make some slides showing the data) and I come back with professional grade work

Yeah this gifted kid syndrome has basically made me depressed as an adult because I always expected to become great with very little effort since I was apparently already great. Turns out I'm now stunningly average and I struggle to find any meaning any more and when I try to improve at things I feel this incredible weight of all my lost potential that makes it unbearable to continue.

I got clobbered for pointing out flaws in a deceptively good-looking project at an 8th grade science fair. The kid had basically been pre-anointed as the winner, but there were serious methodological shortcomings.

Then again, I have sought criticism my whole life. The harsher the better, especially from people whose opinions I respect. Criticism and failure fire the crucible of improvement.

To some people all criticism is bad. Even if they aren’t the target of it. There is such a thing as constructive criticism which is what you were offering.

I would claim we should give a pass to everybody because we are all human.

I would also claim I don’t think it’s nice to judge people based on their age, regardless if it’s good or bad judgement. Furthermore, I would definitely be annoyed as 16yo if I were deemed “good enough for my age”. He competes with peers, at the highest level, not with superiors who do him a favour.

Yes and no.

We have separate sports classes based on gender on age to reflect abilities.

It's takes time to get good at this stuff, a younger person has inherently had less time.

I'd structure it as one overall ranking, but special age rankings within that.

A 5 year old could hypothetically win overall, but if they didn't they'd still be rewarded in relation to their (age) peers.

There's an 'encouragement' element that you're missing. My 5 year old draws objectively bad pictures. I wouldn't tell him that though. I want him to get better so that he does become objectively good.

This is specifically a competition for young people. It's totally based around age and that's fine. A teenager doesn't have the luxury of 20 years of professional experience.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com