the only way to get better at something is by doing it. - Naval

what do i mean?

when it comes to getting good at something worthwhile, the “applying” part of it is much more valuable in the face of specifically just learning.

the best way to get better at something is:

1. learn the basics (tutorial, article, etc)
2. apply it obsessively: apply once, take feedback, iterate, repeat

why that is?

this is true because the details are too hard to convey; they cannot be conveyed via “non-applied learning”. the application part reveals these intricacies and patches them.

verbally conveying all the nuances & intricacies is impossible. hell knowing all the nuances is impossible! all the silicon valley multi-millionaire tech entrepreneurs have gone through all the nuances, however, make them sit in a room and they’ll only be able to recite/know a few collectively.

examples

1. you get better at building tech products by building tech products
2. you get better at stock/crypto trading/investing starting trading/investing, losing some money, learning from your mistakes, being in the market long enough.
3. getting good at bug bounty hunting starts when u start hacking your first target; by actually bug bounty hunting
4. you get good at open source contributions by starting with small contributions then iterating
5. you don’t get good startup ideas by sitting around and thinking, the come by doing. building random shit, posting about it online, taking feedback, iterating, talking to users, etc. the curious case about startups is that no one knows (for sure) what’s gonna work. therefore, the best way of getting a real insight and building muscle is actually applying in the field.
6. you don’t remember what you watched (learned) a 1000 times in a tutorial, you remember something that you applied 7 times

start small & iterate RAPIDLY

if you want to start something new, (you have to) start small. this is because, unless you don’t start, your mind isn’t going to understand what it actually is, and unless you don’t get a sense of what it actually is, you can’t think about improvisation. therefore, start small and iterate.

learner via learning vs learner via applying

1. learner via learning
   • read a bunch of books / watch bunch of tutorials (tutorial hell) about that topic
   • do a bunch of research in detail about a topic and learn hard about all it’s intricate details
   • learning bias as opposed to a doing bias
2. learner via applying
   • do a bit of research to understand the fundamentals of the game
     • an entrepreneur interested in a specific niche would analyze markets, products, fundraising landscape, target customers, ticket size, etc for that market.
   • apply the fundamentals to build a shabby v1
   • try to get as much feedback as possible on the v1
   • learn from the feedback the iterate; apply again with the new feedback
   • repeat the last 2 steps

iterations is the only way to improve

iterations

if you’re not a prodigy, the only way for you to succeed is through iterations.

iterations meaning literally putting in a bunch of tries repeatedly, learning from the shortcomings of the previous and fixing them in the next until you achieve your goal.

and to be able to be good at something, you have to be humble with the fact that you’ll suck at it in the beginning.

leverage ∝ 1/iterations

sucking in the beginning depends on your leverages and what you’ve chosen to work on. if there is a large congruence of the 2 (like say you are a prodigy in something and decide to do something in that), you can do little work to gain success performing it.

but if what you’ve chosen to do and your leverages have little to no congruence, you have to start small, bad, maybe embarrassing small and iterate a 10000 times to succeed.

a large reason why it is said that it takes years to build a career in something is the little congruence between your leverage, and choosing what to work on.

here’s how the 18 y o you envy got rich

people who make it when they’re super young are either:

1. prodigies (crrracked), or
2. won at an earlier iteration. that’s all.

nobody knows what is gonna work. nobody is a visionary of that level. everybody is just fumbling. taking bets on the future.

prodigy

the kid is just cracked. the “talented” or “gifted” as we like to call it. everyone knows the specimen i’m talking about. scott wu, the harvard kids, the MIT kids, george hotz, etc.

they did something unlike anyone else because their brains were naturally wired for greatness in their own particular field. u can certainly spend time finding out your unique gifts and talents, but do u really wanna bet your life on it?

early iteration win

you learn by doing 10000 iterations, because the details are too hard to convey. for the kid, the early iteration caught on mystically by a demand in the market. there could be n number of reasons for why that might have happened; each case deserving a unique case study.

real talk

most of us are not prodigies. talent is literally written in our DNA. yes the DNA is completely random, but the fact that how well it maps one to one to to real world in demand skills is completely out of your control. think cracked developers/hackers (John Carmack, Notch, George Hotz).

therefore, the only way that remains for us to succeed is: 10000 iterations