Same experience here. I could find just about anything else I wanted to do except homework. Spent all night coding many times. Went to school and aced all the tests, skipped all the homework, did not get good grades as a result. My dad actually arranged a visit with a psychiatrist who did an official IQ test (wooo! I'm a genius! yay!) and then told my dad I was destined to either be a fabulously wealthy entrepreneur, or homeless. LOL
The joke's on them, I ended up deciding to succeed in school after all, got my BS & MS in CS, and I've had boring, predictable jobs throughout my whole career. Neither fabulously wealthy nor destitute. Oh well!
Real happiness remains elusive. Even though I adore my wife & kids and have what the vast majority of the population would consider a pretty cushy job and lifestyle.
One must love the irony that those tests are mainly use as a way to pat yourself on the back (you and your dad) more than any possible actionable item out of it.
Funny how most people that take an IQ test come out as "geniuses"
Similar in concept to the German Abitur, which originally tracked students into Gymnasium or vocational tracks. Today it comes at the end of a secondary education (high-school) programme, and is comparable to British A-levels.
<https://www.verywellmind.com/history-of-intelligence-testing...>
I have met a couple people that were boasting to me they were in the top 0.01% intelligence wise (as proven by the IQ test! Geniuses!). None of them were particularly successful or looked particularly outliers on intelligence based on what they achieved.
This is by definition false.
But the only people I ever hear taking an IQ tests are people that already know they are smart. Why? Because it probably feels good. Because why else? Is there any actionable item out of that test?
Or you are so stupid someone else thinks its a good idea to have you tested to confirm you are challenged
As an adult the actionable item may be to adjust your expectations of yourself. For example if I'm 90IQ and beating myself up about not being a 10x dev despite my efforts, or if I'm 150IQ and feel too unqualified for some intellectual endeavor, I could make adjustments after knowing the truth.
I took one as an adult and my impetus was that I am contrarian about a lot of things, i.e. there are a lot of things I believe that most people don't believe. I wanted to know if I was just a midwit being an idiot contrarian or if there's at least some reason to believe I might have a better idea about things than average people. In the end I scored very highly, so I can now feel more comfortable trusting my own judgement. If I had scored much lower, I would accept I'm probably wrong about a lot more things and stop having such strong opinions.
And this is precisely why I took the test. The only 'official' IQ test I've taken in my life. Psychiatrist told my dad I didn't have enough grit to stick with things I found boring. Guilty as charged. Fortunately grit did eventually happen, about 5 years later.
So I’m one of his few remaining descendants and.. funny story, though likely for the best, despite knowing his professional history and subsequent legacy of “Doc Shock” I didn’t even consider to ride the coattails of our family name.
It wasn’t until a decade into my career when I found myself in a founding engineer role of a small database proxy startup, and presented with the problem of “how do I get a room full of engineers to hush up and listen” (as a conference speaker), did the idea to leverage the family name as a pseudo appeal-to-authority dawn on me.
I’m happy that I took the self-made route, rather than leveraging the family name earlier in my career (and to more direct effect). Though the dramatic irony of knowing it was through my own incompetence, not through some greater moral code, that I didn’t lean more into nepotism as a career advantage will never cease to get make me laugh at my own little inside joke at the self-schadenfrende of it.
But back to your quote, I can confidently say the “genius” apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in regard to Shockmeister’s sub-genius status. My only hope is that I can continue to avoid whatever apple gave him the eugenics bug.
Based on my relationship with intelligence, it’s not been my sheer intelligence that’s been my greatest asset. It’s actually the inverse! I can easily reform my mental model at different levels of resolution. This means I can be both an engineer’s engineer when building, while also being able to communicate the same ideas to hundreds of people in a conference context and achieve great sales funnel conversations from that.
I attribute whatever this latent predisposition to recognize potential applications of technologies strategically early to whatever led my former to his discovery. As a result, I have a great track record of spending ‘innovation tokens’ wisely, to quote Choose Boring Technologies.
Concretely, the latest investment I made was in standardizing my current startup around Mise. Not because it’s a great DX, but because I believe the primitives mise provides are a key enabler for agentic development in a distributed org and team context. I _may_ be productizing a public version of our organization’s agent runtime, since I believe my choices in technologies, conventions, onboarding flow, and most importantly - positioning within the organization - provide a turnkey solution to the problem every mid-size-and-up tier CTO has with their board: having a defined AI strategy where token spend justifies due to run costs scaling with respect to engineering & product deliverables produced.
Happy to answer any questions, though to be blunt, considering that Willie B (a.k.a. William Bradford) passed before I had the opportunity to meet him, I don’t have much tribal knowledge of his life to share. Though, to the credit of my immediate family’s character, he was already estranged leading up to his infamous public television appearances.
I’ve been considering writing a biography on what my experience with the duality of living ‘up’ to his (positive) professional legacy while navigating recognition of the harm he caused has done to affect me, both the headwinds & tailwinds.
So, how are you related to Mister Transistor?
> did the idea to leverage the family name as a pseudo appeal-to-authority dawn on me
Did it work? I have the opposite problem. It takes a room full of engineers to get me to stop talking. I've been told I am very charismatic (though Dyslexia hinders my writing severely). Though perhaps like Icarus, my strengths are my weaknesses. I am, let's say, not a very serious person. I like to have fun and I am goofy, hyperactive, immature, and obnoxious. It makes people love me, but makes me Hell to work with. ;)
Good for you for being a self-made man. I know very little about your ancestor, but he was likely self-made, so I imagine he would appreciate the same traits in you.
> I can confidently say the “genius” apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in regard to Shockmeister’s sub-genius status.
I am too asymptotically close to stupidly to understand what you are implying. I am confused because you use genius and sub-genius in the same sentence.
Also, the 'eugenics bug' doesn't work that. Shockley likely experienced something in his life that made him that way. I do not think it's some innate trait. I grew up 45 minutes away from where the KKK was founded. I have heard words out of people's mouths that would make Shockley sound like Mother Teresita. I did not acquire any of those wretched views.
> Based on my relationship with intelligence, it’s not been my sheer intelligence that’s been my greatest asset. It’s actually the inverse!
Say it louder for the people in that back. Real life is based on the game Dungeons & Dragons (except life is a much shitter, boring game). Everyone has various amounts of 'skill points' in their stats. Intelligence is one stat, and while necessary, it ain't enough on its own.
> spending ‘innovation tokens’ wisely, to quote Choose Boring Technologies. Concretely, the latest investment I made was in standardizing my current startup around Mise. Not because it’s a great DX, but because I believe the primitives mise provides are a key enabler for agentic development in a distributed org and team context
I am sorry, I have no idea what any of this means. I assume AI tokens? What is "Choose Boring Technology?" What is "Mise" and what does "DX" mean? In my world, DX means "diagnosis."
> he was already estranged leading up to his infamous public television appearances.
Why?
> while navigating recognition of the harm he caused has done to affect me
What harms? Is the harm not fulfilling his legacy or rather his eugenic views or something else? If so, may I offer some unsolicited advice? Well, you can't really respond in real-time, so I am just going to offer it anyway. I took me many years on this rock to understand that we are responsible for our own joy and suffering. The mind can easily poison itself via attachment. Or more aptly, as Zen Master Ts'ao-shan once said:
Student: Whenever there is any question, one's mind is confused. What is the matter?
Master Ts'ao-shan: Kill, kill!
In a similar vein, my grandfather was also a "genius." Definitely of no notoriety like your ancestor. However, he definitely held his own. He worked on the Manhattan Project (met Oppenheimer, Von Neumann, etc.). My grandfather also was an performed Opera at the NYC Metropolitan, was supposed to compete in the 1936 Olympics for weight lifting (pulled a hernia on his way to Germany, thus he couldn't compete), and helped program the computer system for the Apollo 13.
My cousin is the like the 4th or 5th highest rank in the U.S. Navy and a combat experienced Navy Seal. I am just some underpaid pawn wasting my life away building boring CRUD apps for my local government. To say I fell short of any legacy would be an understatement. However, I am not truly bothered by it.
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair..."
I learned in my young adulthood to appreciate and enjoy whatever it is that you have, because no matter what it is, you’re going to lose it one day. You might lose it in death, or like von Neumann, you might lose it in life.
The Wheel of Time turns and everything is crushed beneath it.
For me, I would count happiness as a meaningful reduction in anxiety and some ability to feel content. A full night's sleep that isn't interrupted by a couple hours at 2am of lying awake lamenting life choices, lack of achieving goals I had wanted when I was young, missed opportunities, etc. Worrying about the future, are the kids doing okay, are they happy, will they be successful, could I have done a better job raising them?
Objectively I have no justification for the strength of these worries. I am in a great place and I should be able to enjoy that. And yet. The demons have been chasing me since my earliest childhood memories. At best I have fought them to a draw.
I just never understood why the secondary education system is set up to make smart and lazy people succeed without effort while the hardworking, but less gifted kids struggle.
It just gives you an impression that life is much easier than it is, and you can BS your way through it.
It sends the wrong message both ways. Skills that are useful/meaningful IRL certainly are much harder to acquire. Being smart won't get you a date, wont get you fit, play an instrument, learn to draw, program, wont allow you to fix the crooked cabinet door etc.
It just sends the wrong message either way. The 'smart but lazy' adults who stayed that way, who I've encountered IRL have been maliciously manipulative work avoiders, or straight up losers with superiority complexes.
And “the hardworking but less gifted kids struggle” doesn’t ring particularly true, unless you mean something quite strong by “less gifted”.
I had a friend in my year, bright enough but where he excelled was in putting in the work, he studied harder for GCSE's (our secondary school educational qualifications) than basically anyone I've ever met studied for anything.
I still frequently outscored him on tests/coursework and did in final exam results and I did basically no work beyond reading the books and homework was an alien idea, the only real differences between us was I read for fun outside of what was assigned by school and I had a much better memory where he ground away at the assigned material but reading for fun would simply not have occurred to him.
Sadly an exam usually only captures a single metric, the final score - it in no way captures the effort put into that score and it's really not fair (in a general sense) that two people can get the same score and put in wildly disparate levels of effort.
But there isn't a Universal Law of Fairness, he had a stable loving home with two parents and I did not, that wasn't "fair" either but I realised early sometimes life simply isn't.
Though stepping out of structured education into post-secondary education where you had to actually study came as a spectacular shock to the system because I had no framework to build on - having coasted my entire way through school putting in minimum effort.
Good friend in most of the same classes as me would often ask me for help on questions, but he just worked so much harder. He has a very intense father who obviously was on top of him about stuff. But putting in the effort to be top 1% instead of top 5% while also being a varsity football player got him into an Ivy, which was great for him. In some sense the system worked.
> the hardworking but less gifted kids struggle
Sorry, I think I miscommunicated what I wanted to say, which is I know for a fact that there were people in my HS class that put in a lot more effort than I did, yet got worse grades, even in subjects (like literature) they cared about more than I did. In retrospect I kinda feel sorry for them and envious of them at the same - they got a lot more out of that class than I did by making effort.
> You say it allows smart but lazy people to succeed. In truth
I think this the issue of what they call the 'skills-based' education system. The 'Are you smarter than a 5th grader' type shows which translate well across cultures really show a trend - kids and teens are taught and tested on an immense breadth of subjects, most of which will be quite useless and forgotten, not only by adulthood, but by the time they graduate. The reason final exams tend to be 'skill-based' are to paper over this fact. Most kids don't really remember much about the composition of the water table, but can write an essay. Smart kids are usually better at writing essays, than not so smart ones given an equal amount of practice. So basically they force you to learn stuff you're not interested in, are liable to forget and won't matter in terms of your future, even in the scope of the narrowly defined schooling system.
> it allows many kinds of people to succeed.
This is what's not really true imo. It's essentially a 'Kid Job' where you have to blindly submit to authority, follow instructions, not seek meaning in what you do, and not act out. They're just conditioning you to the fact that your prime waking hours will be essentially thrown away for most of your adult life (for most people). If you can do that, and you live in an okayish country, you can get through life doing alright by doing that, so by that definition its true.
But the only people who are rewarded by the (academic) purpose of the schooling system, are the ones who excel at core subjects. If you're a gifted artist, but suck at math, you'll likely not enjoy being in the system.
Most people, dumb or smart, could likely end up in the same place in life playing video games in their youth, instead of going to school.
According to John Taylor Gatto's research, the US school system was explicitly designed from inception to be just that. I haven't looked into it beyond his words, but he seems to have actual quotes and notes from the people at the origin.
How about some tweaks, then?
Here's the problem as I see it. People seem designed to work together, but school isolates everyone. The people who are natural leaders, natural persuaders, natural consensus-distillers, natural "dig deep into a hard problem to solve it" people SHOULD NOT need to wait until 22 fucking years old to discover that "the hard way" at "real work"!!
There were SCANT FEW group projects when I grew up, but they all stick out in my memory because it was suddenly abundantly clear who was better at what and that we had to work together! And the best part is that riding coattails becomes immediately noticeable and socially punished.
We need MORE experiences in school where people actually NEED to use their gifts to succeed TOGETHER. Exactly like at a job in real life! But their parents apparently won't have that!
Counterpoint, the "I had to work twice as hard for my A" people are prudish buzzkills who think that working hard has inherent value.
"Being smart won't get you a date, wont get you fit, play an instrument, learn to draw, program, wont allow you to fix the crooked cabinet door etc." I mean...it could? The whole article is about how "intelligent" isn't exactly one thing.
Obvious Smart and Lazy here: Life is easy, and I've been BSing my way through it for over 40 years. I work at one of the largest companies in my field on the planet, I'm well respected by my supervisors and coworkers, I make enough money to keep the lights on (and my artist wife and I both fed). I have friends I see regularly, love an affection, and time to garden and play video games.
There's no "right" way so there can be no "wrong" way, only ways that don't work for your skillset. Also, understanding how to navigate society/hierarchy is a skill and a lot of the try-hards don't realize that so they just brute force for results.
I think it's just as simple as its designed for the average case not the extremities. If it's designed for any extremity, it's to ensure the least bad outcome for the bottom 25%. If you're doing well you are not a problem as far as most schools are concerned.
Unfortunately "smart but lazy" types kind of fall through the cracks. For me "smart but lazy" was more being smart enough to understand the rewards in the system, but not smart enough/having context for the long term rewards.
In a lot of ways I saw life as a game, and had no one around me who could explain the higher level games of elite school admissions/job funnel/etc.
In the end I don't know if my life would have been drastically better if I'd gone to MIT/Carnegie Mellon instead of a "a top 25 engineering program". I'd have had more options for sure.
My high school math teacher didn't subscribe to this idea, so for the first time in my life I had poor scores in math.
We took six previous years' math finals as part of our preparation. I recall scoring a humbling 33/50 on my first attempt.
My final result was 45/50 because there was a 3pt. problem I couldn't solve, but decided not to since I had like 15 minutes left and was confident that the rest was largely ok.
Lost 2pt. on some minor stuff I overlooked.
Of course I didn't learn my lesson just yet back then because I had years of being lazy under my belt, so I struggled through college.
Reading the material before the test/exam and then getting high enough marks that everyone leaves you alone so you can go play with computers/chess was not an effective long term strategy.
College (UK meaning not US) came as a brutal reality check.
Don't tell my boss, but yes it is.
In that, and many more regards, I am happy I fall into 'above-average' category and nothing more. Especially memorizing larger texts and poetry wasn't easy (good ol' crappy rota education system in 80s and 90s in eastern Europe). Grit and discipline got me much further in life than those just coasting on natural talents.
Humans really need a bit of struggle to get the best out of us. Not too much, but not too little. One of quiet ways why capitalism on long enough scale outperforms other systems. Sweeping obstacles from life is one of the worst things that parents can do for their kids, regardless if its motivated by pure parental love.
Now I am still called smart, and due to the sheer effect of having to get rid of the label, also called hard working, and I'm happy or at least quite content.
I went back to attempt to complete my CS degree on the basis that I figured I already had learnt most of what I would learn anyway and might as well both prove to myself I can do it, as well as get the credential for whatever it was worth. This was when I was ~27, and hadn't been diagnosed with ADHD yet. I discovered that I was absolutely capable in theory, but that the hard part wasn't the material, rather it was doing rote tasks to get the grade regardless of that grade's relevance in the field. I found myself completely capable of doing the homework and understanding, writing various persuasive essays, and intellectually applying myself, but failing horribly when it came to anything my brain identified as less interesting than any other subject matter, and I had effectively no control over that (unmedicated). I also had no ability to be on time, and once I realized that I was effectively wasting time and money trying to pass through the Type A Gen X career gate defined largely by the binary of having a degree/not having a degree, I opted to not continue. It wasn't about learning anything, it was about a checkmark, and I didn't and never have really internally care about checkmarks.
It would be the easiest material or courses that I'd bomb the hardest at, forget to do entirely, or simply not be stressed enough to do well; basic trivia, courses where 50% of the grade depended on labs where I'd be required to draw diagrams by hand, exams that required writing Java for 3 hours in pencil. When other students were anxiously scribbling away, I just flatout wasn't worried about it and just kind of spaced out for a while wondering why I was trying to bother. Exams require anxiety in some form or fashion, and in many cases I could not provoke that in myself. In some cases, I indeed didn't do so well on an exam either because I couldn't burn it into working memory well-enough (never having learned a study practice that worked for me) or I overslept... as a 27 year old adult.
Now, I'm once again out of work, considering going back to school for... something, but I have all that exposure in the back of my mind. Even now that I'm medicated and otherwise quite happy, I have doubts that I'd be able to succeed in any type of educational institute unless every facet was perfectly aligned for me. Having money on the line or an abstract incentive aren't sufficient rewards to have a functional impact; I need to find it intriguing throughout and believe it's useful, or be fighting my way out of a tangible corner, of which I'm not in and don't naturally panic about being in.
Over the years, I've come to the conclusion that stimulant ADHD medication isn't for me. It worked well as a child, but as an adult it's just unpleasant and jittery. I took strattera for a couple years and it seemed to help, but we swapped it for wellbutrin to help with seasonal depression, and it just doesn't have the same efficacy.
In the end I may need to come to the conclusion that I'm not temperamentally cut out for academic success, and my math bachelor's does seem to have been a decent enough entry point to a career in software.
Fwiw, I've been taking Concerta 27mg since being diagnosed. Haven't really felt much of a need to experiment with others, but full-on depression is a rarity for me, perhaps helped by investing heavily in my social and physical life. The only time I get jittery is when I accidentally drink as much coffee as I would on a non-medicated day, so I have to be a little careful with that. It's a very mellow, long-acting, subtle effect that is most noticeable when I'm trying to flow through a conversation or imagine things, which I think I'm better at on non-medicated days, but am okay with the temporary tradeoff. Overall, it's not magic, but it helps keep me on track. Higher doses have been slightly unpleasant and I've dropped back down.
I think what's become more clear to me over time is that I really shouldn't try to live like the stable careerists around me and on HN who have different kinds of parameters for success, yet have what I'd describe as immensely boring unhealthy or obsessive vanity-oriented lives. I'll never have a house, and I may never hold a job for 2 full years, but I can push myself to the top of a mountain, make friends and keep them in my thirties, and maintain a strong lean physique. The most difficult thing is figuring out how and where to apply myself when I have a blank slate professionally. I don't and will never speak like a manager, and yet my conduct with juniors in a recent role seemed to be welcomed and appreciated, before they threw me under the bus for some inane issue and fired me.
I say this mostly because although life is difficult, isolating, and ambiguous at times, to be comfortable in ones own skin means coming to terms with the things you do well, having humility, being open, ambitious, and authentically grateful for what that brings you (without depending on explicit praise or reciprocation, because it may never come from what you'd hope). You must be able to throw your own parade sometimes, be proud of the floats you can put together, and happy about whoever was able and willing to show up.
On this site there's constantly a vibe of "what should I be doing", but fuck that, do whatever you need to do and then let yourself do what you want to do; take some time, figure it out, let the nebulous sense of guilt subside, because it's not good for much.
It often helps people with ADHD because they have been prescribed this almost-stimulant to anxiety or depression (often caused directly or indirectly by ADHD symptoms and life), and it makes them better, because it's finally treating an actual cause rather than a downstream effect.
But most people running into that situation are way better off just taking a real ADHD stimulant.
It looks like Strattera is similar. It claims to be about as effective as Concerta, but being someone who has tried welbutrin, there is just no comparison to what a moderate dose of a real stimulant does.
The continued refusal for society to just let ADHD people take a tested, proven, safe, effective medication because if you smoke an entire bottle of it at once it will get you high (something that is less useful to someone with ADHD! Lots of people found out they were ADHD when they tried cocaine for the first time, and instead of being high, were suddenly normal ) is infuriating.
One other note, my family for multiple generations has massively struggled with "seasonal" depression, or chronic depression, or constant "Fatigue" where working a full 8 hour day leaves you feeling like you just ran a marathon and your brain screams out to just go lay down and not function. My mother continues to suffer from this. I was starting to suffer from this immensely, and was worried I also had Fibromyalgia like my mom.
Right up until I took the first, minimum dose, of concerta. I haven't had that fatigue since. Because it was ADHD. It was always ADHD. I no longer get Seasonal Affective Disorder. I recently went through a life event that in the past would have left me crying in bed for an entire year. I am sad, actually I am gutted. I am depressed. But I can still do my job right now, because I can focus on what I want to focus on, and process my feelings when it's healthier to do so.
Did you know one of the side effects of Concerta is "elevated mood"? Literally a happy pill. You know what's really effective for an ADHD person who has spent their entire life spiraling in anxiety and suffering from depressive episodes? Being able to focus on the here and now, rather than whatever anxiety your brain was stuck on.
I'm not going to tell you to try those stimulants since you might have already, but so many people are sandbagged with their ADHD diagnosis by people giving them a shittier medication just because it won't involve paperwork with the DEA, or some moral panic bullshit.
Strattera really did work well for me but my doc won't let me take both Strattera and Wellbutrin, and the depression is a much more pressing concern than focus.
I'm also very internationally mobile at this point, and it's much easier to get a walk in GP in a foreign country to refill Wellbutrin/Zyban than Concerta.
Those are all "me" problems - I definitely suggest everybody who gets an ADHD diagnosis does full trials of some kind of extended release adderall variant and an extended release ritalin variant at some point.
In hindsight, I realized it was b/c I hadn't found subjects in high school that really resonated with me (although HS science was cool).
When I got to college I majored in computer science (academics) and discovered paintball (physical/social) and threw myself into both with abandon. I would do my CS homework as soon as it was assigned b/c I just loved solving the problems so much that I couldn't stop myself.
For paintball, it became an obsession that eventually turned into a job after college. Again, it was something I loved so much that it just seemed like a natural thing to work really hard running big tournaments. Why wouldn't I work hard on something that resonated with me so deeply.
This reminds me of a quote from Joe Rogan (who I know is somewhat controversial) that encapsulates this perfectly:
"In high school I thought I couldn't focus. I realized I can't focus on things I don't care about. I can focus for hours on things I'm into."
My most frustrating experience was barely lazing my way through calculus I could not care about only to be working on a personal project years later where I really wish I paid attention.
One of the things I noticed was when people talk about "Sometimes you just have to knuckle down and do the thing you don't want to do". That was an ability that just came and went with me, the same task one day would be "Right I had better do that thing now" and I could do it, another day, even the idea of it seemed impossible. The fluctuations were clear enough to show that it wasn't a moral failing, or just me doing the things I wanted to do. The same thing in the same situation was just so radically different. I can see how people who have only experienced the easy side could fail to understand the difficulty, I don't think night and day would do it justice.
ADHD is quite highly correlated with depression, one of the main hypotheses of why is because people with ADHD have grown up being told that the thing that is intrinsically them is a bad thing to be. A hypothesis of why not everyone with a genetic predisposition for depression becomes depressed is because there might be a form of feedback loop that makes things that make you feel bad make you feel more bad. Being critical of ADHD behaviour is an easy on-ramp to that feedback loop.
I do think a lot of it was the attitude I took towards school. I know a lot of other people with ADHD who were less arrogant and approached school in a better way because of that.
On the other hand, I had so much free time as a child and I spend a lot of it reading or messing around with computers.
When I got to uni it was a bit of a shock to realise everyone was suddenly at least as intelligent as me. But I remained lazy. I still got top marks because I was doing computer science and enough of it interested me that I wanted to do well.
It all changed during my PhD, though. It's not enough just to be intelligent. You've got to actually deliver. That means doing a lot of writing and corrections I didn't particularly want to do. I became deeply unhappy and came close to giving up. But I persevered (which seems to be a family trait).
Post-PhD I'm a different person. I pride myself not on being intelligent but on being useful and actually getting things done. I meet loads of "smart but lazy" types all the time. They start 100x more things than they ever finish. I can't comment on their happiness, but I know I'm much more happy being able to tick things off and make other people happy rather than trying to wow people with my so-called intelligence.
If you give a smart one a task, he will look for a way to do it with lowest effort. Probably most would do it but the smart ones will find way more the shortcuts, automations and exploits.
Edit: also smart people will more often ask "why" if a task makes no sense to them.
Since thinking is not a visible effort, these people are taken to be believed to do less work, when the truth is anything but.
In my case I have a daughter that's showing already the same signs I had when I was her age and what I'm trying to do is to stay gently on top of her and create the habit of studying, because given the same brainpower, she will go farther if she learns to study well.
And coming back to you, I don't know you or your age but I think you can - maybe - still turn around the "miserable" part. What's miserable for you, now?
Nowadays I'm generally happy and living a great life in a New Zealand mountain town. But, whenever I talk to anybody back home who's more academically successful, I really have this jealousy and I tell myself that I could've done that if I'd just tried. It's this combo of ego and self hate that's really toxic.
I just don’t know what it is telling but it’s telling something.
And as other responses to you mentioned, the transition to college was thus absolutely brutal. I ended up having to take multiple leaves of absence from Cornell (the longest- 5 years, during which I enlisted for 4 years in the USAF in California- this actually helped me a lot), and despite entering in 1990 I only graduated in 2000. One of the shorter leaves left me so depressed that I think I was close to suicidal (the only way I can describe it is like wearing poop-shaded glasses that you cannot take off... I also noticed that I cared as little about other lives as I cared about my own, which is something I still think about whenever I hear about family annihilation/suicides, etc), but something kept me going and I pulled out of it.
On the bright side, I saw the potential of the Internet not only before my peers but before basically everyone (I was always a huge computer nerd), so that has aided my career.
For the action-RPG gamers out there, ADD is a hell of a rough minmax perk lol
Oh and I have a toddler son now- don't get me started on how much more difficult parenting seems to be
So in terms of raw brainpower it's there, but I've never really been able to apply it consistently for whatever reason and have ended up very average. Still haven't really come to terms with that in my late 20s.
I've got a perfectly good life but I have this vague "what if" about if I had applied myself more.
Asking because...
I guess, don't praise your kids for lucky talents, praise them for the work they put in. I also wish that there had been more focus on participating in sports as a young child and less focus on therapy/psychiatry. As an adult I have found staying active is a much better treatment for my distractible/hyperactive tendencies than meds/therapy ever were. My mom didn't sign me up for sports because my brothers and I had so many shrink appointments, and looking back, I think she had it the wrong way around.
It ingrained a sense that trying hard and working on things to get a result is less valuable than being able to simply achieve the result without effort. The problem is, nothing in the real world is really achievable without consistent applied effort. I could dunk on my peers by focusing for 45 minutes on a test, and this taught me that was all that's required to outperform.
Obviously I've gained a bit more self awareness to be able to see this now, but it's still my gut reaction - to take pride in "intelligence" and dismiss "effort".
After uni in the real world it was a brutal reckoning. Sit me down in an office with a task that requires more than 45 minutes of concentrated output, I'm useless. I got an ADHD diagnosis and the amphetamines help for sure, but I still don't know if I really have a condition, or I just grew up conditioned to be lazy.
It sounds like you have found useful tools in adulthood.