I have a real self-esteem problem as I tend to belittle my theoretical and low-level technical strength. CHENG, Shi was the first to point out “你就是比别人强”.
- eg: my grasp of middle-school physics was #1 strongest across my entire school (a top Beijing middle school) but I often told myself that math was more valuable and more important
- eg: my core-java and c++ knowledge (QQ++) is stronger than most candidates (largely due to absorbency++) but i often say that project GTD is more relevant. Actually, to a technical expert, knowledge is more important than GTD.
- eg: I gave my dad an illustration — medical professor vs GP. The Professor has more knowledge but GP is more productive at treating “common” cases. Who is a more trusted expert?
- How about pure algo? I’m rated “A-” stronger than most, but pure algo has far lower practical value than low-level or theoretical knowledge. Well, this skill is highly sought-after by many world-leading employers.
- Q: Do you dismiss pure algo expertise as worthless?
- How about quant expertise? Most of the math has limited and questionable practical value, though the quants are smart individuals.
Nowadays I routinely trivialize my academic strength/trec relative to my sister’s professional success. To be fair, I should say my success was more admirable if measured against an objective standard.
Q: do you feel any IQ-measured intelligence is overvalued?
Q: do you feel anything intellectual (including everything theoretical) is overvalued?
Q: do you feel entire engineering education is too theoretical and overvalued? This system has evolved for a century in all successful nations.
The merit-based immigration process focus on expertise. Teaching positions require expertise. When laymen know you are a professional they expect you to have expertise. What kind of knowledge? Not GTD but published body of jargon and “bookish” knowledge based on verifiable facts.