>>33789197
>>33789482
The 10,000 rule comes from ((Malcolm Gladwell’s)) book “Outliers”. He may have based this number off someone else, but his example is The Beatles and their Hamburg days being the catalyst for their mastery - which is ridiculous because he ignores the massive team around them to produce their work. Not to mention there’s a ton of bum notes in their early work. They are nowhere near virtuosity.
>How do I know this?
I am a former touring musician and I busked from 18 - 35, doing four hour sets in 16 countries. My friends are all world touring musicians and have played at Carnegie Hall/Bard College/Lincoln Center, recording sessions with SNL personnel, and more. I can keep up with them all in jam sessions and I can assure you 10,000 hours is a ridiculous number. This is after years of practicing and playing in bands, and still I don’t think I’m even halfway to 10,000.
Similarly, I have a career as a writer and have written thousands of pieces for celebrities, businesses, Fortune 100 (including #1, Walmart), and 11 ebooks—all pre-AI. STILL NOT 10,000 hours, even though I had a MySpace blog at 450,000 words.
Last, I have a joke premise that I always wanted to fashion into some standup or something. Anyways, the idea is that I’ve probably spent 10,000 hours shitting by now and I still have not attained mastery over releasing it bowels. Hell, I almost shit myself today.
>how many hours
It isn’t quantity. It’s quality and repetition. I used the 20 hours from Derek Sivers, and it has yielded serious results.
The other idea to realize that, for example, every talent is a series of subtasks. Each of these subtasks builds, and you can take these “adjacent skill sets” to create mastery. For example, I learned how to program macros and use AI, so now my writing 10x’d. I knew guitar alternate tunings, so picking up the violin is a cinch.
If this thread is still up tmrw, I’ll share my charts so you can see how it’s done
