职业与工作方法calnewport.com
如果你很忙，说明你做错了什么（2011）
If you're busy, you're doing something wrong (2011)
2011 — 2019，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是 Cal Newport 2011 年的一篇博客文章，讨论精英表现者为何常常看起来并不忙碌：他们倾向于高强度专注地工作或练习，然后充分休息，而不是长时间低效地忙个不停。文章引用了一项关于小提琴手的研究，主张刻意练习与恢复的节奏比单纯堆时间更重要。
为什么经久不衰：它把“忙碌”和“有效产出”拆开，提出专注加恢复的节奏；即使对研究证据有争议，这个反直觉视角仍让知识工作者反复讨论。
HN 评论精选
质疑因果方向，强调天赋与机会，盲目努力不够。
这有点像尾巴摇狗。我们怎么知道更放松、更有条理的日程带来成功，而不是成功带来更放松、更有条理的日程？这让我想起另一条建议：任何程度的努力或组织都不能替代天赋和机会，几乎所有相反的成功故事都缺少关键事实。比如乔丹被高中篮球队裁掉是迷思，实际是被放到同龄、同体型的少年队以获得更多上场时间；盖茨从大学辍学靠个人能力成功也是迷思，他的私立高中让他比哈佛有更多接触计算机的机会。教训是：你要弄清自己擅长什么、机会在哪，然后在那些领域努力。对多数人来说，只是拼命努力是失败的配方。
caseymarquis查看英文原文
Seems like a bit of a tail wagging the dog situation. How do we know the more relaxed/organized schedule leads to success, and not that success leads to a more relaxed/organized schedule? This reminds me of some other advice I remember reading: No level of hard work or organization will substitute for talent and opportunity, and nearly all success stories to the contrary are missing key facts. ie Myth: Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team. Reality: Michael Jordan was put onto the junior team with players his own age/size so he could get more play time, instead of being prematurely promoted to the highest level of play. Myth: Bill Gates is a college drop out who found success in a technical field purely based on personal merit. Reality: Gates' private high school gave him more access to computers than Harvard, and continuing at Harvard would have been a waste of time given his level of experience in the field. The lesson is that you need to figure out what you're good at and where you have opportunity, and then work hard in those areas. Just working hard is a recipe for failure for most people.
批评文章混淆相关与因果，且用教师评价代替真实能力测量。
我喜欢文章提出的假设：专注地努力工作，然后放松，你会表现更好。这是我愿意相信的。但我觉得他的分析有点可疑。它似乎混淆了相关和因果：注意到“优秀”和“普通”之间的行为差异，就假设这些差异导致能力差异，却忽略了行为差异可能由能力差异造成。另一个问题是学生分类基于教师意见；具有某类行为的学生往往更受老师喜欢，这反映的是老师，不是学生。它不衡量音乐能力，而衡量被音乐教授正面看待的能力。我希望看到真正衡量音乐能力的研究：设定学习时间、用不熟悉的曲目、双盲评估样本。如果那与行为相关，才有意义。这项研究最多只能说：如果你想让柏林音乐教师给你高评价，就这样做。
scottdw2查看英文原文
I like the hypothesis the article presents: focusing on working intently hard, followed by relaxation and you will perform better. It's something I would want to beleive. But, I find his analysis a little suspect. It appears to confuse corellation and causation. It notices a difference in behavior between the "great" and the "average" and assumes those differences to cause the difference in ability. It completely ignores the possibility that the behavioral difference might be caused by a difference in ability, rather than the behavior changing the ability. Also, another problem is that student classification is based on faculty opinion. The fact that students with a class of behavior tend to be liked more by their instructors implies something about the instructors, not the students. It does not measure music ability. It measures the ability to be perceived positively by music professors. I would be interested to see a study that actually measures music ability, using set learning time frames with unfamiliar pieces and double blind assessment of music samples. If that was correlated with behavior, then it might mean something. The best the study can say is "if you want music teachers in Berlin to rate you highly, then behave this way".
批评样本小、领域不适用，且时间日志难以衡量刻意练习。
Cal 仅凭一项 6 名小提琴手的研究，就做出推广到音乐领域之外的宽泛结论？1. 音乐尤其是小提琴是技术性、身体动作的练习；不放松、肌肉效率低、因过度劳累而紧张，都会拉得不好。所以忙碌者可能只是因残余紧张而表现较差，而这与编码或纯脑力工作关系小得多，后者只需打字，不需要肌肉流畅。2. 刻意练习很难通过时间日志衡量；时间日志不会记录你是否在练最难的技能、分析弱点。3. 有潜力的学生不同于真正的专业人士；很多学生起初不被看好，后来却成就很大。
WhompingWindows查看英文原文
Cal honestly looks at a study of 6 violinists and makes sweeping generalizations to outside the musical realm? 1. Music is inherently a technical, movement exercise, especially violin with the bowing. If you are not relaxed, if you are not muscularly efficient, if you're tense from overwork, you're going to play less well. So, those who are busy may simply be less good due to that residual tension and stress....and this is much less relevant to coding or purely intellectual work, which simply requires typing and not muscular fluidity. 2. Deliberate practice is extremely hard to measure by looking at someone's time journal...it's a modality of practice, a time journal is not going to gather that information. Just because the talented ones practiced in huge chunks of time, versus spaced out shorter chunks, how do we know they were drilling the hardest skills and analyzing their weaknesses? 3. Looking at students who have promise (according to their professors) is vastly different than looking at actual professionals. Many pupils were not esteemed or had mixed reviews from their professors, and then went on to great things. I'm thinking Debussy and Valentina Lisistsa, both of who did not succeed initially but whose great talent was revealed later on.
认为专注加休息对学习成立，但不适用于多数工作，很多工作仍需大量忙碌。
我写了一长串批评又删了。底线是：这对学习是有效观点，也就是博客主题。每天学 10 小时并不高效，短时间高强度学习确实有用。但要注意，这不能推广到一般世界。很多工作就是要做大量事情。高效学习存储技术可能让你成为精英专家，但不会让你成为 Dropbox 创始人。那需要大量“难做”的工作，你肯定会忙。多数工作更接近后者，而不是大学里的小提琴手。
dpark查看英文原文
I wrote up a long critical response and then deleted it. The bottom line is that this is a valid point for studying, which is what the blog is about. Studying 10 hours a day is not productive. Shorter bursts of intense study is indeed very useful. However, it's important to note that this doesn't extrapolate to the general world. A lot of jobs simply involve doing a lot of stuff. Efficient study of storage technologies might make you an elite expert, but it won't make you the founder of DropBox. That takes a lot of "hard to do" work, and you most definitely will be busy. Most jobs are closer to this than they are to the violinist in a university.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
用十年时间自学编程（1998）
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years (1998)
Peter Norvig 1998 年的经典文章，回应“21天/24小时学会编程”一类速成书，主张真正精通编程需要约十年持续、有意识的练习。
职业与工作方法上首页 11 次 · 2007–2025norvig.com编辑精选如何成为一名程序员：简短、全面而个人的总结
How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary
一篇广为流传的程序员成长指南，作者以个人经验系统总结了成为优秀程序员所需的各项技能——从调试、测试、沟通到团队协作与身心健康。
职业与工作方法上首页 6 次 · 2008–2015samizdat.mines.edu编辑精选不要自称程序员
Don't Call Yourself a Programmer
经典职业建议文章劝软件工程师不要把自己局限在“程序员”这个标签上，而要从公司业务角度说明自己创造的价值；文中讨论了成本中心与利润中心、头衔、求职与职业选择，也顺带批评了学术界的价…
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021kalzumeus.com编辑精选创作者的日程与经理的日程
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (2009)
Paul Graham 在这篇文章里把时间表分成两类：管理者的日程以小时为单位，会议可以填满一天；创作者（程序员、写作者等）的日程则以半天为单位，需要长时间不被打断的连续块。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选为什么程序员的薪酬不与生产力成正比
Why programmers are not paid in proportion to their productivity
讨论为什么程序员的薪酬往往不随其生产力成比例增长：生产力难以客观量化，薪酬更多受组织预算、岗位定价和个人议价能力影响。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022johndcook.com