Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Practice vs. Innate Talent (Score 1) 192

by Scroatzilla (#48028405) Attached to: New Research Casts Doubt On the "10,000 Hour Rule" of Expertise

As a musician, I've been in situations where someone tries out for my band. He has really nice gear, and can play some neat licks. But when it comes to playing an actual song, or even writing a part, it becomes clear that he doesn't really have any talent. He has definitely practiced and acquired some skill (and I'm not claiming to be some kind of prodigy), but I can detect that he isn't "feeling the music" and won't be invited back. TFA seems to summarize a scientific explanation for this type of "band tryout" story.
As a parent, I'm mindful of the balance between nurturing my child's perceived innate talent and getting her to try new activities until she can figure out what she likes. Hopefully, what she likes will relate to her innate talent so that she'll thrive rather than struggle.

+ - Practice Does Not Make Perfect->

Submitted by Scroatzilla
Scroatzilla (672804) writes "What makes someone rise to the top in music, games, sports, business, or science? This question is the subject of one of psychology’s oldest debates. Malcolm Gladwell's "10,000 hours" rule probably isn't the answer. Recent research has demonstrated that deliberate practice, while undeniably important, is only one piece of the expertise puzzle—and not necessarily the biggest piece."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Legally Available? (Score 1) 284

by Scroatzilla (#44501943) Attached to: Comcast Working On 'Helpful' Copyright Violation Pop-ups

I have shelled out ~$140 to legally watch the first few seasons of a Showtime series which is currently in its last season. I would *gladly* pay to legally obtain access to the current season. Unfortunately, it is not available for me to do so. Therefore, I have to comb the internet every single week to find the new episode. This is becoming more and more time consuming and complex.

I'm curious about where the link to the legally available episode would point to? I assume that it would point to Showtime.com where I would be advised to contact my local cable company to purchase service and subsequently subscribe to Showtime. Suddenly legally purchasing one episode of a tv show becomes a several-hundred-dollar affair.

This seems wrong. Having cut the cable several years ago, this is the kind of punishment that I have been subject to repeatedly.

Comment: What industry is your company in? (Score 1) 515

by Scroatzilla (#40574951) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Old Dogs vs. New Technology?

That's the first thing I wondered. Until I got my current job with a software company, I was around the same type of IT people. The big difference was that the IT department in my other companies was seen as a necessary expense in order to keep everything running. This tends to shape the attitudes of IT folks, who only get yelled at when stuff doesn't work but who otherwise are relatively invisible. The IT department in my current company absolutely must work in concern with developers, customer support, and executives because our infrastructure simply must support a complex, secure, and ever-changing environment.

Some of the wisdom that you will probably gain if you stick with it is that change in any IT infrastructure is absolutely frightening, be it hardware or software. Veterans understand that each and every piece of hardware and software is tweaked to meet the business requirements of your company, and any small change to anything can bring the whole thing down. Even an OEM-recommended upgrade to a server that has been tested thoroughly can have unexpected and disastrous results. An enterprise level OS upgrade is "nontrivial" and, if your system was already working with XP and there was no compelling reason to upgrade, their attitude is completely understandable.

As you learn how to coexist more peacefully with your IT co-workers, you will notice that everyone has specialized knowledge that everyone else relies on and respects. It is that specialized knowledge that makes them good co-workers. If you respect that and understand that--like you-- they are just doing their jobs, you will understand that the "pat on the back" you seem to desire will come in the form of their mutual respect.

Lastly, as someone you would consider an "older" co-worker, I would say that the any new workers who don't know The System have the potential to be relatively dangerous. They landed their respective jobs because they have lots of knowledge, but don't know enough about The System to understand why things are the way they are. So if you feel coddled or treated in some way that makes you feel under appreciated, I'm guessing it is because you haven't made any impression otherwise yet. You were just doing your job.

Comment: Re:Wow, what a stupid post (Score 1) 417

by Scroatzilla (#38424476) Attached to: How To Thwart the High Priests In IT

"not getting the job done."

If there is anything impeding your ability to get your job done-- AND you wait until your performance review to say something-- I do not want you to work for me. That shows a complete misunderstanding of what it is to be an employee of a company.

If you inform your immediate supervisor that you are having trouble getting your work done, and s/he doesn't take action, then you need to go up the chain until you can find someone who will listen. However, you must also realize that it is perfectly legitimate for them to tell you to work within the constraints that you are given or get the hell out. You must also realize that the tool you "need" to get your job done might not actually be necessary or warrant an expense for the company.

If your company *truly* cripples employees' ability to get the job done, then you should jump ship anyway because it won't be long until they're out of business.

Comment: Re:Sokal Affair (Score 1) 254

by Scroatzilla (#37924824) Attached to: Dutch Psychologist Faked Data In At Least 30 Scientific Papers

This looks like an example of the blind acceptance of perceived authority, like this guy's experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Milgram
Of course there is an element of danger in publishing false facts under the guise of authority, because most human beings have no ability to objectively weigh facts and opinions against their own viewpoint to inform and evolve their own positions on various subjects.

Comment: Re:what, are you high? (Score 1) 477

by Scroatzilla (#34822086) Attached to: Pot Grower's Privacy Challenged

Ah, you are outlining how you were victimized by a difficult childhood marked by irresponsible "adults," substance abuse, and the illegality of that substance. This is not-so-subtly similar to problems that exists in many other households where "pharmaceuticals" or "intoxicants" are readily available and abused by others.

Many of these substances have equally devastating results on children, even though they are legal. So, singling out marijuana, based on your singular experience, and arguing that it is any different, is simply misunderstanding the larger issues.

Comment: Roku (Score 2) 202

by Scroatzilla (#34641972) Attached to: Google TV Suffers Setback

You have pretty much described a Roku box. I have it and it does a lot of that; there are currently a few different home media solutions. The one I am using is only in its development stage, and you have to know how to encode stuff to work on it. Once you figure that out, it's a really nice piece.

There are never any bugs you haven't found yet.

Working...