Hacker News Reader

Comment by LyndsySimon | Hacker News Reader

My introduction to the world of professional software development was meeting one of the idols and hanging out with him for two days before realizing who he was. We've kept in touch since then and I now consider him one of my best friends.

I agree about putting people on pedestals, and my own experiences speak to that. The person I once saw in a very idealized way I now see as fully a person, complete with faults and failures.

I would argue that there are no "masters" - or rather, that there are very few of them, and those that I might consider such are "just people" too.

View on HN

> I would argue that there are no "masters" - or rather, that there are very few of them, and those that I might consider such are "just people" too.

Mastery does not obviate humanity.

The most gifted (which I define as the cross-section between talented and practiced) people I know tend to care more about the content of your character than your technical prowess.

>The most gifted (which I define as the cross-section between talented and practiced) people I know tend to care more about the content of your character than your technical prowess.

Odd choice of words, wouldn't it make more sense to switch the meaning of 'talented' and 'gifted'? A 'gift' is something you receive without sacrifice, while a 'talent' needs to be honed.

Talent is innate.

Skill is practiced.

If you're passionate enough about something that you happen to have a natural affinity for in order to hone your skills, I call that a gift.

Not a native speaker but I also find that odd: I always thought talented referred to the parable about the servants who were given talents, and as such I would expect that talented and gifted would be almost the same.

I assume you are referring to Jesus' "parable of the talents". If so, it is dealing with money, not skills. https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talent_(weight)

Disclaimer: I shouldn't be regarded as any sort of authority on the English language.

I sort of decide what words mean to me, publish them, and then stick to those definitions (while pointing anyone confused towards the published definitions).

There's probably a better way to classify these ideas without tripping over other peoples' lexicographic pedantry, but this is the Internet and you're always going to find a contrary opinion no matter what you do. The winning move is to not play.

Thus:

  talent: natural affinity
  skill:  aptitude gained through effort
  gifted: a person who is both talented and skilled in an area

I just found it weird that you chose the word 'gift' as something less innate than a 'talent'. It's also interesting that 'talent' used to have the meaning 'A desire or inclination for something', which is similar to your use of the word gift.

Anyway, I won't say the way you're using those words is wrong, language is after all pretty flexible, it just didn't seem like the most obvious choice.

This. +1+1

Reply on news.ycombinator.com