Out of curiosity do you have a lower bar (standard) for things which are harder?

[rj144]

The title might be a little confusing, but what I'm asking is do you have a lower bar for what you consider to be good for things that come difficult to you?

For instance, believe it or not, I actually have very good hand eye coordination and anything that involves mostly this (catching, shooting, aiming) I can do pretty well. In order for me to be impressed, anything someone does with hand eye coordination has to be spectacular. In a less interesting way, I'm also good at science and math, so the same implies there.

But, I'm not a natural at music or arts. So, if I, myself, do something halfway decent at music, I think it's great. I think I have a self bias in over estimating that, but I'm not sure. I play guitar for fun and I just jammed with a few friends a few days ago and recorded it. They have a much better ear than I do and when I sent them some clips, they said it was kind of ok. I thought a lot of it was pretty decent though.

Do you do the same?

 

[Captain Sausage]

I would rather hit myself in the balls with a hammer than dance in public, so yes I find anyone with teh riddum impressive.

 

[Provocateur]

I set the bar extremely low on people doing astrophotography. Anything shared at all no matter how bad gets a positive review.

 

[Chesten_Hesten]

Yes.

Sort've

Maybe.

Thanks for Asking.

 

[rj144]

I set the bar extremely low on people doing astrophotography. Anything shared at all no matter how bad gets a positive review.

Obviously I know you're being a dick. But, that's an interesting one. I actually think normal photography for me is kind of easy as I have a decent eye, but astrophotography is super hard. So, most shots I get I like.

 

[Rygu]

If I find something difficult, I just don't do it.

Why would I want to waste time and effort on shit that is hard?

 

[rj144]

If I find something difficult, I just don't do it.

Why would I want to waste time and effort on shit that is hard?

Umm... because it's hard or you like it?

 

[A.S. Deep]

The title might be a little confusing, but what I'm asking is do you have a lower bar for what you consider to be good for things that come difficult to you?

For instance, believe it or not, I actually have very good hand eye coordination and anything that involves mostly this (catching, shooting, aiming) I can do pretty well. In order for me to be impressed, anything someone does with hand eye coordination has to be spectacular. In a less interesting way, I'm also good at science and math, so the same implies there.

But, I'm not a natural at music or arts. So, if I, myself, do something halfway decent at music, I think it's great. I think I have a self bias in over estimating that, but I'm not sure. I play guitar for fun and I just jammed with a few friends a few days ago and recorded it. They have a much better ear than I do and when I sent them some clips, they said it was kind of ok. I thought a lot of it was pretty decent though.

Do you do the same?

I'm the opposite haha.

I have genetic joint hypermobility that kept me from light exercise from age 19ish to 26ish. I couldn't even hike, do wall push ups, or hold a TV remote in front of my body without pain and instability.

Since I'm a spiteful bitch, I won't be content until I'm doing stuff like front squatting 600 for reps and power cleaning 405. The fact that I'm objectively genetically inferior makes me want to supercompensate.

On the flipside, I've always been good at academics, so I don't care much about performing at a high level there anymore lol.

 

[Rygu]

Umm... because it's hard or you like it?

 

[mb23100]

Yes it's all relative.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

The title might be a little confusing, but what I'm asking is do you have a lower bar for what you consider to be good for things that come difficult to you?

For instance, believe it or not, I actually have very good hand eye coordination and anything that involves mostly this (catching, shooting, aiming) I can do pretty well. In order for me to be impressed, anything someone does with hand eye coordination has to be spectacular. In a less interesting way, I'm also good at science and math, so the same implies there.

But, I'm not a natural at music or arts. So, if I, myself, do something halfway decent at music, I think it's great. I think I have a self bias in over estimating that, but I'm not sure. I play guitar for fun and I just jammed with a few friends a few days ago and recorded it. They have a much better ear than I do and when I sent them some clips, they said it was kind of ok. I thought a lot of it was pretty decent though.

Do you do the same?

No, never. Only you do this and it makes you a bad person.

Spoiler

When I finally get the laundry done I allow myself to eat a whole pizza in celebration [\Spoiler]

 

[STRYDG]

Yes.

Sort've

Maybe.

Thanks for Asking.

 

[heavyarms21]

The title might be a little confusing, but what I'm asking is do you have a lower bar for what you consider to be good for things that come difficult to you?

For instance, believe it or not, I actually have very good hand eye coordination and anything that involves mostly this (catching, shooting, aiming) I can do pretty well. In order for me to be impressed, anything someone does with hand eye coordination has to be spectacular. In a less interesting way, I'm also good at science and math, so the same implies there.

But, I'm not a natural at music or arts. So, if I, myself, do something halfway decent at music, I think it's great. I think I have a self bias in over estimating that, but I'm not sure. I play guitar for fun and I just jammed with a few friends a few days ago and recorded it. They have a much better ear than I do and when I sent them some clips, they said it was kind of ok. I thought a lot of it was pretty decent though.

Do you do the same?

I'm pretty fit. I'm able to deadlift and squat 2x my bodyweight and also do 25 dead hang pull ups and run 20 min 5ks . I got to this level because of being in the Military but it also helped me cope with mental issues from a lot off personal loss . So from a fitness standpoint I judge people with a high bar.

 

[Otto!]

 

[crabmeat]

Yes it's all relative.

Yeah, they sez we all cousins or sumthin'. 'Cept dem folks in the otha' neighborhood, if youz know what I mean.

 

[IloveTHIS]

I cant draw worth a goddam, so even modest painting/drawings just absolutely blow my mind

then when I see hyper-realism drawings it just completely breaks my brain. simply cant come to grasp that someones brain is that talented at drawing

^that is not a photo

 

[TheTickG]

The title might be a little confusing, but what I'm asking is do you have a lower bar for what you consider to be good for things that come difficult to you?

For instance, believe it or not, I actually have very good hand eye coordination and anything that involves mostly this (catching, shooting, aiming) I can do pretty well. In order for me to be impressed, anything someone does with hand eye coordination has to be spectacular. In a less interesting way, I'm also good at science and math, so the same implies there.

But, I'm not a natural at music or arts. So, if I, myself, do something halfway decent at music, I think it's great. I think I have a self bias in over estimating that, but I'm not sure. I play guitar for fun and I just jammed with a few friends a few days ago and recorded it. They have a much better ear than I do and when I sent them some clips, they said it was kind of ok. I thought a lot of it was pretty decent though.

Do you do the same?

For viewing myself, I view things from three perspectives:

1. Ideal of how good I would like to be. This is the most strict.

2. Progress. How good I do something vs. how good I used to do it.

3. Do I enjoy it. I might paint or cook something that isn't good based on the first two criteria, but still find it aestheticly pleasing and enjoy it.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr]

I cant draw worth a goddam, so even modest painting/drawings just absolutely blow my mind

then when I see hyper-realism drawings it just completely breaks my brain. simply cant come to grasp that someones brain is that talented at drawing

^that is not a photo

The amazing part of this for me is that there doesn't seem to be a correlation between being an amazing artist, and intelligence. I could never understand how a person with the ability to visualize something so clearly, and reproduce it so accurately, could not posess an extremely high intellect. I myself have no ability to draw and have always been envious of those who have such ability. It is truly remarkable.

 

[therealdope]

I don't know about harder. But you can't have a high bar for everything. if you do, then your 'high bar' probably isn't all that high.

For example my company is building a new tech that has not been turned into a product by anyone previously. I have to know as much about the tech (and often more) than just about anyone else related to this technology.

OTOH - we are building machine learning and a trained a training network to replace the physics model of computation in our product. I am studying machine and deep learning along with classification networks because i need to understand how these tools can help us but there is no way I can have te the same standard. of knowledge for AI that i do for the base technology in our product(s).

TL/DR: You cannot have the same high bar for everything you do, or even multiple things, because it is just to impractical/impossible to achieve.

 

[therealdope]

I took up rock climbing at an older age. I love it, but i have to be realistic about how good I can get. Routinely being able to do V5 problems is probably a pretty good level for me to target. It's unrealistic for me to to have the same goals or expectation for rock climbing as i do fora sport that I've been doing since i was 11.