Skip to main content

Nortals...

A few weeks ago I was having an IM chat with an old friend and as is usually the case, I started talking about some aspect of my work and off hand mentioned the fact that to me , fun is working on a hard problem. It can also be incredibly frustrating when a problem evades solution but that only makes me want to solve it more. I realized that this way of looking at problems is very rare, this was something I noticed not in software engineering but in art. When I was a child I had a bit more talent than my peers when it came to line rendering, it was something I enjoyed and practiced by reading comic books and then drawing the characters in them by eye. As I got into my teens and entered HS I became more interested in under standing the mechanics of drawing. As I've mentioned in past posts , skill at any thing can be learned, it is only a matter of figuring out the necessary object interactions and mastering them to the point that we can visualize and create arbitrary configurations of them. Around this time of growing interest in art technique I was learning about the master of art illusions, MC Escher. I had perused one of his books in my HS library (go Brooklyn Tech!) and was stunned by his ability to not only create the incredible illusions and tessellations but to render them as an expert illustrator. I set myself the task of studying and practiced rendering the human figure using construction methods of my own design, these were partially successful in improving my free rendering capability and kept my confidence strong that I was getting better, and then I met Bernard...

In my second year of HS, I was introduced to a fellow student Bernard. We met one day in the school lunch room, I immediately noticed the open drawing pad he was doodling in. In the pad was a partial rendering of Batman and Robin colored with colored pencils. The instant I saw the rendering I knew that Bernard was better than me and the feeling of mixed anguish and envy that went through my body is hard to describe but this feeling is one I've had only a few times since that day over 20 years ago. The anguish came from the fact that in that moment I felt all my work to get better (for an instant) was nothing. It may not have been true, since I did improve greatly but the fact that I felt it was not a good feeling. The envy of course was an expression of how far I felt I was from the talent I saw being expressed by Bernard in that pad. I sat down and looked at his work, I observed his style to understand his "mechanism" and I noticed important differences in his approach that I saw could contribute to my getting better. I left his lunch table not sad but angry, angry that I had not been as good as him. I know it sounds nuts, how could I possibly expect to be as good as every one who does what I do even if I've never met them?, but that is I think, a distinguishing characteristic of those with a rage to master a given subject. The anger was not a destructive anger, it had no target in Bernard...it's target was in me.

As I walked away from the table I resolved myself to redouble my efforts, to continue to study, to spend more time learning construction techniques. I bought an excellent art anatomy handbook, the classic by Stephen Rogers Peck "Human Anatomy for the Artist" (today I have both my old tattered soft cover and the bound hard cover version) I spent the next few years focused on learning human anatomy so as to render human and non human characters more convincingly. In 1989 I graduated and aside from seeing Bernard in the days leading up to the graduation ceremony I never saw him again, but he was always in my mind when I drew. I kept in mind the possibility I would see him again so we could compare skills (though he never even knew that I was making such a comparison) this drove me to continue learning and perfecting my craft. To this day I have a bit of a paranoia about it...so if you are out there Bernard, let me see what you can do. The piece below is sketch I did in digital circuit design class, over 10 years ago:



Since that early experience, I noticed that most people do not thrive on implied competition in the same way that I do, I've only met a few other individuals that compete with themselves or with others even when , well those others don't even realize it. I coined the phrase Nortal ("normal - mortal") to describe the mindset that many have that they are unable to do a given task and on the basis of the belief , fail to even try. The minute I tell myself I can't do something I use that as a goal to prove myself wrong. I know that had I not had the rage to master I would have never improved as I did, never derived the benefits. Since then I've applied the same rage to master various topics and through out have encountered Nortals that are easily beaten by a problem into being convinced that they can't solve it. The difference between Nortals and those with a rage to master is not magical, it is simply desire, will , drive and hard work. It just so happens that a few weeks ago a paper was released that came to the same conclusion, the belief in ones ability to succeed coupled with the practice perfect the ability is the overriding determinant of ones success at a given endeavor, so I guess my crazy hyper competitive way of looking at things is not that far off after all. ;)

Comments

alex said…
Hey David,

I was just lookin through random blogs, and it looks like me and you have a lot in common, I love Steely Dan, I loves me some Lord of the Rings, and you seem to not only know what you are talking about, you have fervor and knowledge, which is a pretty awesome thing to have. Just wanted to leave a comment, and say hey. What Steely Dan songs do you like?
And what is your view on the book, the god delusion?

Classy
David said…
Alex, thanks for looking through I am glad you find my musings interesting. As for Steely Dan, the other day I was in the midst of my alternate day run when "hey 19" came on, and I have to say it is one of my favorite Dan cuts. I also love "reeling in the years", "do it again" pretty much all the cuts off the "Can't buy a thrill" Album, I have my eye on collecting more from their discography but I have slowed down my music collecting rate significantly from the wild 90's when I was a college student!

As for "The God Delusion", like several other books I've started in the last year, I haven't finished reading it. I am so busy with work (which you'll see written about a lot in this blog) that I haven't been able to finish it off. Suffice it to say, I found myself nodding in agreement with the always sharp Richard Dawkins so much that my neck started to hurt. *grin*

I also spend time posting to the richarddawkins.net website, it is an outstanding forum for civil, rational and bs free discussions on pretty much every thing. Join up and introduce yourself to the community, I should hope to see you there.

Regards,

David

Popular posts from this blog

On the idea of "world wide mush" resulting from "open" development models

A recent article posted in the Wall Street Journal posits that the collectivization of various types of goods or services created by the internet is long term a damaging trend for human societies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646402192953052.html

I think that the author misses truths that have been in place that show that collectivization is not a process that started with the internet but has been with us since we started inventing things.

It seems that Mr. Lanier is not properly defining the contexts under which different problems can benefit or suffer from collectivization. He speaks in general terms of the loss of the potential for creators to extract profit from their work but misses that this is and was true of human civilization since we first picked up a rock to use as a crude hammer. New things make old things obsolete and people MUST adapt to what is displaced (be it a former human performance of that task or use of an older product) so as to main…

Highly targeted Cpg vaccine immunotherapy for a range of cancer

Significance?


This will surely go down as a seminal advance in cancer therapy. It reads like magic:

So this new approach looks for the specific proteins that are associated with a given tumors resistance to attack by the body's T cells, it then adjusts those T cells to be hyper sensitive to the specific oncogenic proteins targeted. These cells become essentially The Terminator​ T cells in the specific tumor AND have the multiplied effect of traveling along the immune pathway of spreading that the cancer many have metastasized. This is huge squared because it means you can essentially use targeting one tumor to identify and eliminate distal tumors that you many not even realize exist.

This allows the therapy for treating cancer to, for the first time; end the "wack a mole" problem that has frustrated traditional shot gun methods of treatment involving radiation and chemotherapy ...which by their nature unfortunately damage parts of the body that are not cancer laden but …

Engineers versus Programmers

I have found as more non formally trained people enter the coding space, the quality of code that results varies in an interesting way.

The formalities of learning to code in a structured course at University involve often strong focus on "correctness" and efficiency in the form of big O representations for the algorithms created.

Much less focus tends to be placed on what I'll call practical programming, which is the type of code that engineers (note I didn't use "programmers" on purpose) must learn to write.

Programmers are what Universities create, students that can take a defined development environment and within in write an algorithm for computing some sequence or traversing a tree or encoding and decoding a string. Efficiency and invariant rules are guiding development missions. Execution time for creating the solution is often a week or more depending on the professor and their style of teaching code and giving out problems. This type of coding is devo…