To get good, go after the metagame

726 点作者 shadowsun7大约 5 年前

49 条评论

Proziam大约 5 年前

Getting good in almost all games is based on understanding and mastering the fundamentals to the extent that you can make consistently correct (or at least a high degree of 'correctness') decisions based on them. This is true for all esports titles, and probably all games in general.Mastering the fundamentals will make you 'good' to a level that very few people ever reach. It's not until you reach a level where everyone around you has a mastery of the fundamentals, that the meta comes into play.source: coached and managed professional esports players, in multiple games, who have competed in the world championship of their respective titles.

评论 #22417744 未加载

评论 #22414121 未加载

评论 #22414795 未加载

评论 #22417761 未加载

评论 #22414798 未加载

评论 #22414828 未加载

评论 #22417226 未加载

评论 #22413794 未加载

评论 #22414562 未加载

评论 #22421631 未加载

评论 #22413846 未加载

评论 #22413976 未加载

评论 #22428503 未加载

评论 #22419672 未加载

评论 #22419593 未加载

评论 #22417482 未加载

评论 #22413871 未加载

评论 #22414348 未加载

评论 #22414312 未加载

scott_s大约 5 年前

A saying I have related to this is "Rules make sports." The skills and strategies that matter in a sport develop around the rules. Change the rules and you change the sport.The judo example the author presented is actually one of my go-to examples as well. Not only did disallowing grabbing the legs take out an entire suite of offensive options, it took out defensive options in judo. In judo, the main way to win is to throw your opponent such that they land on their back. Before, a judo player could grab their opponents legs as a way to counter a throw. Now grabbing the legs is a penalty. But allowing yourself to be thrown is going to at least result in your opponent getting a point, and has potential for you to lose the match. So the solution is, in some situations, judo players will just intentionally face-plant onto the mat to avoid the throw. It looks silly, no one would do it in a self-defense situation, but rules make sports.Note that just about all combat and grappling sports have this quirk: because they have rules, and are not just a free-form fight, you're going to encounter situations where the optimal thing to do in the sport would be terrible to do in a real fight.

评论 #22417722 未加载

评论 #22417693 未加载

评论 #22417784 未加载

评论 #22420168 未加载

euix大约 5 年前

There is also the ultimate version of the metagame i.e. your personal human condition. Blindly pursuing your career or chasing money without understanding the finite duration of your own physical existence, the scale of the universe, where you want to be in terms of life goals and family.

评论 #22414323 未加载

评论 #22417516 未加载

评论 #22424679 未加载

bukson大约 5 年前

The article is very good, but i dislike the word "meta" for this whole notion as it is simple a Nash Equilibrium (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium</a>) for some game. Changes of rules makes other equilibria, some equilibria are probabilistic (that makes the game balanced I think) some are just pure strategies (choose this hero if available). I think naming "meta" as "Nash Equilibrium" would popularize game theory more and add some good tools for balancing games.It is also very interesting that you can sometimes find Equilibrium by researching "counters" or using best response dynamic (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_response" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_response</a>)If someone is interested in this topic becuase of esports commitment or just by curiosity there are some nice youtube videos and papers about using game theory in games:<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miu3ldl-nY4" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miu3ldl-nY4</a><a href="https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/22797/Jaffe_washington_0250E_11528.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y" rel="nofollow">https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/h...</a>I don't want to nitpick the word meta, just maybe someone will find more info if he or she knew how to google it properly.ps I created account specially to write this comment :)

hvasilev大约 5 年前

Software development is a really funny example of this. The meta changes constantly and as a result "the technology is changing all the time". The thing is that the underlying principles and rules have barely changed in the last few decades. This is why I've never understood people that are enthusiastic about new programming languages and frameworks (among other things). It is just exploring the potential of a different meta. It doesn't necessarily make you a better programmer and probably your time is spent better elsewhere.I personally believe this is also the reason why in the last few decades we are seeing less and less 'good' new programmers. Turns out it is quite counter intuitive for a new player to understand why they should spent their time on underlying principles and not on constantly chasing the shinny.

评论 #22421551 未加载

评论 #22422675 未加载

seniorsassycat大约 5 年前

Donkeyspace is my favorite idea derived from metagames, but I can't find any good descriptions online.As any given meta becomes dominant, other playstyles become viable that would not be viable in a game against players unaware of the meta, or in a different meta. A counter-meta. Sometimes there's counter-counter-meta and then you're really in Donkeyspace.

评论 #22418399 未加载

gorpomon大约 5 年前

I am the worst (maybe best) person to play board games with because 5 minutes after learning the rules I loudly proclaim what I perceive the meta to be, and unashamedly telegraph my moves in regards to it. I lose almost all of the time, but it makes the night much more memorable and I enjoy the mental exercise of trying to quickly grok a meta. Sometimes for fun I loudly proclaim "I'm going to Moneyball this!", and then often we end up discussing baseball or movies for a fair bit too.Here are a few games and what their meta is not:The Climbers - Don't try and get as high as quickly as possible.Munchkin - Don't try and become a mercenary for hire defending anyone who needs it.

评论 #22419130 未加载

评论 #22419667 未加载

alasdair_大约 5 年前

“The metagame” in MTG was popularized by the game’s creator, Richard Garfield after playing a lot of Cosmic Encounter and other games.He wrote a great paper on it here: <a href="https://edt210gamestechsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/2000-garfield-metagame.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://edt210gamestechsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/2...</a>

评论 #22415200 未加载

asood123大约 5 年前

One of my favorite books of all times: The Art of Learning by Josh Waitzkin. He was the chess prodigy written about in Searching for Bobby Fisher. He quit chess shortly after and became a world champion in Tai Chi. The book is about learning two very different skills and how they are the same.Thesis that learning one thing deeply helps learn other (unrelated) things makes total sense to me.

评论 #22415013 未加载

_pastel大约 5 年前

Playing a game immediately after learning the rules is my favorite challenge - especially when the other players are all new too.At this stage, tactics are mostly about keeping all the rules in your head and thinking hard before each move. But strategy is really interesting. Everyone is guessing blindly, and you can often win by guessing slightly less blindly.I have two meta-strategies:(1) Game phasesWhile learning the rules, whenever possible, mentally categorize game mechanics as opening-related or endgame-related. For example, a lot of board games have some engine-building in the opening and some point maximization in the end.During the game, constantly estimate the distance to the end of the game. On the first playthrough, most people transition to endgame too late.(2) Mechanics comparisonWhenever a game has different types of mechanics or resources, search for reference points that compare them. For example, in Dominion, you must choose between buying treasure and action cards. So on the first playthrough, you should deduce that 1 silver is similar to an action with (+2 treasure, +1 action).The article talks about the metagame transition in Splendor, when players realize that a strategy with minimal engine-building is viable. I deduced that on the first playthrough by trying very hard to estimate the value of a 2-cost card vs taking resources.Of course, you need to continuously re-evaluate as you understand the game better. By I have a very high winrate on first playthroughs relative to my general ability.Does anyone else have meta-strategies for this situation?

评论 #22419033 未加载

评论 #22420007 未加载

评论 #22418470 未加载

评论 #22420016 未加载

mangoman大约 5 年前

Interesting. I'm familiar with the meta as it relates to gaming (I follow SC2 pretty closely, though I basically never play anymore). I am curious to explore what the meta is as it relates to building web apps, or building software systems. I guess in web apps, the meta has evolved away from stateful and towards stateless applications, rigid to ephemeral infrastructure, and away from big kitchen sink frameworks towards smaller tools built for specific purposes (here I'm thinking like netlify, react-cli / vue-cli, serverless and aws lambda compatible frameworks and languages). In database land, I think there's a bit of reversal towards a happy medium between Relational and No SQL with the whole NewSQL trend (though I think most people just end up using whatever they're comfortable with).I think the concept of 'covered ground' is especially fascinating when it comes to thinking about the meta of building web apps. Do you really appreciate the trade offs between MySQL and MongoDB, if you haven't ran into the scaling issues between the two? I don't think "running a bad migration" is covering enough ground to appreciate the differences. Is struggling to wrangle a bug in an Angular 1 directive enough 'covered ground' to understand the meta in building frontend applications?And I wonder if the meta is moving towards low code and no code frameworks. Dark Lang looks pretty cool, though I've never really used it. Retool proved really valuable for internal dashboards for managing customer support at my last company.You could explore the meta at a more fine grained level than just 'web apps', or zoom out to software in general and try to understand the meta (just like you could analyze why certain units in SC2 are just broken, or understand why the economies of the different races mean different opportunities for timing attacks for each race)

评论 #22415302 未加载

评论 #22414623 未加载

评论 #22415321 未加载

WhompingWindows大约 5 年前

The metagame is PARAMOUNT in Starcraft Brood War, which has had no patches in nearly 20 years. The only thing that's changed is the map pool and the players' skill/knowledge (finding some bugs, mapping out defense to rushes, etc.). Thus, players have years and thousands of hour to grind "standard" or "optimal" strategies, and someone who is less creative but more mechanically gifted can advance just by copying cookie-cutter strategies but executing them 5% better.However, the Brood War leagues know this tendency, so they often add crazy maps to the mix. This season, ASL added Inner Coven, which is a really bizarre island-ish map, and has created a totally new meta. Check out this TvT, it's one of the weirdest games I've seen in years, all due to a map prodding the meta game.<a href="https://youtu.be/yF6GczAXpJI?t=3185" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/yF6GczAXpJI?t=3185</a>

sergioro大约 5 年前

A somehow related quote from Paul Halmos (<a href="https://youtu.be/LwMcz1Yh8tc?t=1506" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/LwMcz1Yh8tc?t=1506</a>): "I would choose depth over breath of knowledge every time. I think if you know something very well and keep try to know it better, then you will expand to other subjects, and the deeper down you go the broader the near by becomes."

colonCapitalDee大约 5 年前

I see a lot of debate over what "meta" means, and I'd like to throw my own hat in the ring.I would argue that a playing a game at the base level (i.e. playing without meta) consists of (a) finding different strategies to use, (b) figuring when is appropriate to use each strategy, and (c) executing strategies optimally. When the game is first being played, most strategies haven't been discovered. At this stage strategic play consists of (without loss of generality) player A using a strategy they think is effective, player B devising and using a strategy that will be effective against the strategy used by player A, Player A adapting in response, and so on. This is strategic play, but it isn't a meta-game. The meta-game arrises when players A and B are both experienced enough at the game that they can debate which strategy is the objective best. The meta then becomes the agreed upon dominant strategy (or set of strategies). In the base game (i.e before the meta develops) strategies exist mostly independent of each other, while the meta-game consists of fitting strategies into a framework.The meta can change because of external or internal forces. An external force is a change to the base game, which is common to e-sports, and less common in actual sports. In e-sports, most games will tweak how the game is played (change the cooldown of abilities, change the size of a characters health pool, etc) every month or so. This will change which strategies are best, and therefore change the meta.Internal changes arise from the changing skill level of players. As players get better at the game, hard to execute strategies will become more viable, while easy to execute strategies will remain at about the same level of viability.This article shows a great example of what the pro Overwatch meta (the game I'm most familiar with) looks like and how it evolves, and it's (mostly) accessible to non-Overwatch players: <a href="https://overwatchleague.com/en-us/news/23053244/the-meta-report-stage-3" rel="nofollow">https://overwatchleague.com/en-us/news/23053244/the-meta-rep...</a> (WARNING: autoplay video).

评论 #22416584 未加载

Aardwolf大约 5 年前

> Judo — the sport that I am most familiar with — has a metagame that is shaped by rule changes from the International Judo Federation. A few years after I stopped competing, the IJF banned leg grabs, outlawing a whole class of throws that were part of classical Judo canonIt also has the metagame of carefully crafting your weight to optimally fit in your preferred weight class

评论 #22415677 未加载

zeveb大约 5 年前

Interesting point that one has to master the game first, before mastering the metagame. I am reminded that Warren Buffet & Bill Gates are reputed to enjoy the game of bridge, which comprises at least three games: the trick-taking game; the bidding game which is about how many tricks one thinks one can win; and the communication game which runs over the bids themselves. One could argue that outa-of-band communication is a third, cheating, game. One might also consider multi-table play to be a metagame, although it is a fairly simple one.

pretendscholar大约 5 年前

When did meta come to mean strategy? It can't really be 'meta' if its about one specific game or implementation.

评论 #22417922 未加载

评论 #22418770 未加载

评论 #22417353 未加载

评论 #22417354 未加载

gbasin大约 5 年前

I love this concept. I've been thinking about ways of "traversing skill trees" and identifying meta-games for some time. Collecting ideas here: <a href="https://garybasin.com/thinking-toys/" rel="nofollow">https://garybasin.com/thinking-toys/</a>I think this can be done systematically...

评论 #22417709 未加载

tylerjwilk00大约 5 年前

If you find metagame strategies interesting, you may enjoy Richard Dawkins book The Selfish Gene [1] and specifically Evolutionarily Stable Strategy (ESS)[2]. Of course ESS takes place over a much longer timeline. Summary of ESS in this video by Veritasium [3].[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene</a>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy</a>[3] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUxt--mMjwA" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUxt--mMjwA</a>

runawaybottle大约 5 年前

The meta game is a high level arena for people that hammered through the proven advantageous strategies. Once you beat everyone unwilling to do that, you are now in an arena with people that used your exact same strategy.A short example of this is a fighting game where the majority of people want to play the characters they enjoy playing. Unfortunately, like life, there is no perfect balance, and picking some specific characters will give you an advantage (even if you hate playing them). So long story short, play the character with the advantage, ride it to the top, everyone at the top got there doing the same shit you did —- and voila, the meta game, how do we all with the same strategy compete against each other.

ipython大约 5 年前

I may be simplifying but wouldn’t the ultimate “meta” move be to adapt the concepts behind John Boyd’s OODA (observe, orient, decide, act) loop[1] in your thinking? Basically you need to always adapt to changes in the game and get inside your opponents own loop.If you’re able to run your own OODA process faster than your opponent, you’re already acting before they have even realized the game has changed.[1] <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop" rel="nofollow">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop</a>

评论 #22422861 未加载

Balanceinfinity大约 5 年前

He writes "There seems to be something in getting good at a skill tree that helps in latter life. I’d like to think it is a function of exposure: once you see the competitive meta at the top of one skill tree, you begin looking for it everywhere else."Two things explain this phenom: 1) you learn how to learn - and if you pay attention you become better at learning, more efficient; 2) you develop the confidence that your time invested will pay off with expertise, so you don't begrudge the investment

F_J_H大约 5 年前

Re: playing the meta game, a great article on coyotes being "too clever by half" and missing the meta game to their detriment came up on HN awhile ago:<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17079369" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17079369</a>Basic idea - you can be too clever for your own good, and as a result, fail miserably at the meta game, which less clever people don't do.

评论 #22416804 未加载

shinryuu大约 5 年前

First time I ever understood what "the meta" refers to. Though I've definitely participated in the metagame without realizing it before.

评论 #22413917 未加载

mc3大约 5 年前

Yes there is a general trend that a new "market place" opens up. It could be adwords, or it could be udemy. There is then a race to the top/bottom where the marketplace becomes popular and crowded out. The "crowd" progressively gets a worse deal (except for the winners of the crowd) and the owner makes more money.For example adwords:1. Crowd gets worse deal: average bidder pays more for ads, hard to make a profit, might break even if you are lucky. Might be OK in a new niche if lucky.2. Winners: people with sharp marketing teams who can bid on the right keywords and have an excellent sales funnel to take advantage. They can outbid the crowd and make a profit.3. Owner: Google makes a tonne of money from ads of course:Udemy:1. Crowd gets worse deal: I saw a 80 hour course for $20 on there. Most are 20-30 hours course for $20. Course maker gets a fraction of that. 100's of similar course means the platform doesn't necessarily give you much traffic.2. Winners: Some people sells thousands of units of their course on these platforms. Again those with good funnels to get them to buy off the platform probably win (I am guessing).3. Owner: Udemy does well.Same applies to the app stores!

navane大约 5 年前

The meta game is like the bike shed. Everyone has an opinion about it. It is abstracted, full of analogies and therefore easy to talk about. It is the only way the experts can talk to the novices about the topic at hand. Note that the novice can't really talk back because they won't know when the analogies end.How do you distinguish one meta opinion about the other? By looking at the merits of the person behind the opinion, looking at other data that distinguishes the expert from the novice.If you then use the meta as a vehicle to find out which fundamentals are important, you better skip the meta all together and see what fundamentals the expert has.

takinola大约 5 年前

Poker is a great example where players can be playing very different "meta" levels. You can play the math ("given my cards, what is the probability I have the best hand on the table?"), play your cash ("are the other players willing to lose the equivalent of a month's income if they are wrong?") or play the other players ("I will let you win a couple low stakes games in order to build your confidence and then clean you out once you start to bet bigger?")

plinkplonk大约 5 年前

Does the author actually define "metagame" anywhere? He seems to use the term throughout the article to mean multiple subtly different things.

评论 #22414447 未加载

评论 #22414565 未加载

205guy大约 5 年前

I see what you did there:"for content marketing [...] now we do longer, more comprehensive guides, and we cross-launch those to Product Hunt and Hacker News"

Paddywack大约 5 年前

Would I be correct in the following examples of Meta-game:US Politics: - Stacking the supreme court Vs the court case strategy itself - Gerrymandering Vs Winning votes on merit - How you play the Caucus nominations Vs policyBusiness (internal to large companies): - Gaming how funding flows vs Getting funding on meritsBusiness (external market) - Finding the grey area in policy (e.g. Uber/ Airbnb) - LobbyingWould this be a correct understanding?

评论 #22418909 未加载

ph0rque大约 5 年前

This is a really great article, and something I've been slowly realizing over the last few months.I only wish he would explore the concept of playing your own meta in order to reach goals that are important to you (and maybe no-one else): hacking the system, so to speak. FIRE (financial independence/retire early) is an increasingly popular meta that does this.

artur_makly大约 5 年前

And for tennis.. I highly recommend the 'inner game' <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QEKR9TVQXk&t=13595s" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QEKR9TVQXk&t=13595s</a>you can apply this zen mastery to basically any physical game and always 'win'

K0SM0S大约 5 年前

I think the author is basically describing the "meta" as what is mathematically sort of a conformal space to the game space — loosely the idea that a conformal description of the game space lets you operate transformations on said space; and understand why it has the shape it has).I've personally always focused on the meta indeed; I'm the kinda guy who goes for the map first in dungeons, because I'm more about coordinates than superstition (I'll take a matrix over an oracle, thank you very much). That works when, in the meta, finding the map is an expected player move by the developers (it even becomes part of the storytelling of exploration; think Zelda or Bioshock).But in the real world, the developer's program is kinda like (maths \wedge physics)^chaos , so the meta is very much NOT clear-cut — there's no jury of life to rule that "this year, we'll outlaw dick moves in office politics", or that retribution for many comes next in the form of a #metoo. The players are anti-Shakespearian, they're chronically fuzzy and chaotic and non-trivial.There are thus, from our "game space" standpoint (unable to grasp the higher-dimensionality of our conformal space), an infinity of possible meta-games, possible descriptions of what's conformal to us. There are religious descriptions and beliefs about that, there are theoretical social-science accounts, there are witnesses in the thousands or millions even who gave their truth in some book or other long form, there's what your neighbor says, what your best friend says, etc. You, the player, get to make your own meaning.So we kinda perform "loops", from our game space and back, passing by the meta: we try to grasp at it, understand the "higher" or "deeper" mechanisms. How can I get this...?, Why is it that...?, "What is this...?" By trial and error, we manage to get our bearings, have a "feel of" or "sense for" this field / domain / situation / locality we're in. We kinda "know the ways" to think outside this box, after enough time contemplating it.A truly "superior intelligence" (like we're superior to ants) would probably solve our "meta" like it's basic dominos — but again it's not magic, nor categorial, but really just more of the same: computing power and specialized features devoted to analyzing patterns up to some order.

m3kw9大约 5 年前

So in the investing game the actual game is buying and selling and the Meta game is to do good diligence. I would say for most things the meta game is obvious. For programming, meta game is learn the API and different patterns as the language evolve.

mobjack大约 5 年前

The current meta strategy for getting a software engineering job is practicing leetcode.

cjmb大约 5 年前

Good article and a nice read :)You can apply the same analysis to the study of how "entire societies / nations generate Wealth" and get an interesting picture of the international econo-political metagame throughout history...

zrkrlc大约 5 年前

How much would people pay for an expertise development app? Been coding one as a side project for some time now and I'm thinking I have to put it in front of actual users as soon as possible.

jonas21大约 5 年前

So, is learning to identify and excel at metagames is the meta-metagame?

IndexPointer大约 5 年前

I'm not sure I understand what he means by meta game.Is it adapting to rule changes? Or simply focusing on abusing the rules instead of just being good at the fundamentals of the game?

netvarun大约 5 年前

[off-topic] Kinda late to the party, but always a pleasant surprise to see an article written by a former schoolmate you've lost touched with trending on HN :)Hi shadowsun7!

z3t4大约 5 年前

It's interesting that in the early days of Google Adsense it did cost 100x less to advertise, and publishers got 100x more. I'm not that good at math, but does that mean Google takes a 99.99% cut!? Or more likely they rigged the market in the beginning in order to gain publishers and advertisers, eg. they subsidized advertisers and over-compensated publishers. Making the market explode with advertisers and people looking to monetize web content...

mark_l_watson大约 5 年前

For me, the good part of the article started in the section “The Meta in Real Life.”I think President Obama played a meta game using technology to win election. President Trump played a meta game using skills developed as a TV host to win election.I think, in a way, that Peter Thiel’s thesis in the book “Zero to One” is also about playing a meta game to develop monopoly type businesses.I have always loved using Lisp languages and in a sense continually extending a language to “meet the problem to be solved” is another form of meta game. Rise above the fray, look at things from high altitude, be a good generalist, and win.Good article.

minusSeven大约 5 年前

I wonder if this applies to a game of Chess or Go? What would be meta for that?

aliswe大约 5 年前

Is management perhaps the "meta" of software development?

评论 #22419165 未加载

评论 #22416755 未加载

dillonmckay大约 5 年前

So any Tetris 99 training suggestions?

hi5eyes大约 5 年前

metagame with opponents within similar elo is the most important

jason46大约 5 年前

Git gud, is the correct term.

nr1throwaway大约 5 年前

I was #1 in a highly competitive game (with a lot of players). I was a top player (top 10, easily) in another game (highly competitive, but lower player count)I was #1 in another field for a short period of time (related to computers, but not games) and then I was top in a third field (nothing to do with computers).The third field has nothing to do with the first two.The approach is the same. There is no magic, and I don't even believe in "talent".You have to work, work hard and work concentrated and fix your weakest points. Everybody does the same and once you get sufficient mastery, you can see it for yourself. It's like lifting a veil. No magic, no geniuses, no special talents, only brute hard work with a lot of mistakes. If you are lucky, nobody will know you made them. If you are highly intelligent, you'll learn from the mistakes of others, so on average you'll stop making mistakes faster. That's the best you can hope for.I'll talk a little bit about esports, since I am most familiar with that. Being #1 is not easy at all. I would compare it to regular sports and say it's very close, in terms of competitiveness.Most people involved are objectively dumb, though, so I can't compare it to chess or something like math olympiad or math/physics PhD at a stacked university. So it's very similar to sports, where people are also generally dumb. So high intelligence is not a prerequisite for this thing.I've also met dumb people in chess and math, so it's not a guarantee. But they can't be dumb and top in chess/math/physics in the same time. That I haven't met yet.The approach to become #1 is the same for everyone in every field.Fix the areas you are weak at, re-evaluate where you are weak, keep working at it, don't repeat mistakes, try to learn from other people's mistakes. Work focused, don't waste time, be honest. I see people putting thousands of hours into games, for example, and still end up being newbies. That's time wasted, that's not productive at all.tldr once you become truly good, among the top, in any field, you will know the "secret" in how to become good/top in any other field. There are no special fields or even special people. People that are truly good in certain fields can become good in any other field, given enough time and assuming it makes sense for them (1.60m playing basketball will never be among the elite, that's just due to the nature of the game).If someone is #1 (or top 10 or whatever) in any field, I want to hear your thoughts anonymously, since apparently you cant say this out loud.

KaoruAoiShiho大约 5 年前

This article is really the same thing as Elon Musk's "think from first principles", except Musk's formulation is much better imo.

评论 #22415895 未加载