

High Anxiety (raganwald on Go and learning new things) - ColinWright
https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2009-10-20/high_anxiety.md

======
temp7654
According to a recent theory[1], there are _three_ affect systems in the human
brain: \- Threat/protection (Safety seeking) \- Drive/Excitement (incentive,
resource focussed) \- Soothing/Comforting (Affiliative)

Anxiety problems are caused by the first one. The theory holds that problems
with the first system are best tackled using the _third_ one (whereas I
imagine that most HN readers are more likely to assume that everything should
be done using the second one).

[1]<http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/15/3/199.full>

NB I can't claim that I have any evidence for this theory, as I have only know
about it for a short time. Anxiety has ruined my life so far; this is merely
the first thing that looks like it might really help.

~~~
raganwald
thank you for sharing this.

------
dwc
So I recently decided to learn Go myself, after _decades_ of hearing about it
from fellow techies. It's incredibly difficult. I read, downloaded apps, and
then signed up on DGS as 30kyu (the lowest rank) and have lost every game
except for one I won on timeout. I stink. Playing Go is a paradigm shift.
Knowing (and being good at) other games is almost irrelevant at my level. This
is a little like coming to pure functional programming after decades of
kicking ass in the imperative programming world. And like that, smarts and
experience _will_ give me a leg up. But later.

So many times, as a smart and capable person, I can see the light at the end
of the tunnel in a new endeavor. Even when I don't really see it I trust it's
there if I can grasp even a little. But with some things you just feel lost,
and that's very difficult for smart people.

This is so different from learning a game like backgammon. One summer in my
mid-teens, a friend and I played many times daily over a summer. I've rarely
played since, but the strategy is easy enough for a smart person that I can
hold my own against anyone except world class players. That's a bit to one
extreme, but it's closer to the average experience of a smart developer.

Finding things that I just can't grok after a few minutes of thinking about
them (and there are many) has made me more accepting of my limits, and raised
my awareness that some things take a mental shift and/or really are complex.

~~~
ewanmcteagle
I don't think it's that strange. Ultimately you have to play in order to read
ahead in the game. People who think they can sit down and learn to read ahead
will struggle. But if you start actually playing, a lot of the basic reading
ahead will become second nature and then it's on to harder/deeper reading. The
same is true of chess. Someone given the rules and a set can't hope to get it
in any meaningful way though it is theoretically possible. For Go, if you can
find people better than you to play against and keep it up for a year you'll
look back and realize that even your initial worries were just a
misunderstanding. DGS is not a good place to start. You need to play in
volume. Bulk practice.

~~~
dwc
I'll take your advice regarding volume/bulk. It seems sound to me. I took up
chess a bit more than a year ago, and tactics practice and non-stop playing
have done more for my game than any reading.

~~~
ewanmcteagle
sorry, by 'read' I meant calculate. Calculation is the chess term, reading is
the Go equivalent.

------
cageface
Go is a fascinating game but it requires a lot of effort to learn to play
well.

I've found that after a hard day of programming the last thing I usually want
to do with my free time is solve what is essentially another set of logic
problems. I'm much happier if I can do something that lets me turn off and
rest that part of my brain for a while.

------
njharman
Many won't get/grok the following statement and I suspect those who don't will
have a hard time with go.

You cant learn go, you need to feel go.

It's not a coincidence that some eastern philosophy Tao, Zen, others have
similar concepts at their core. You can't learn enlightenment. You shed the
unenlighted until you are. Approach go with an empty mind. Think not of moves.
Look for flows, patterns, feelings. The OA had some of this, "her position
looked strong, mine weak an isolated". Seeing that _is go_. Attempting to
formalize why you feel that is not go, at least not until you are a master.

Many hackers are optimizes. They want to learn all the parameters and
rationally arrive at the optimal solution. Go is highly resistant to this.

Go is indeed like functional programming in that it's a paradigm shift. It
will teach you a new way of thinking, a new way to see and understand the
world. I highly recommend playing go. Just don't try to learn it.

~~~
raganwald
I’ve heard this many times, but it’s orthogonal to the point of the essay. If
we take the words “know” and “learn” and replace them with “feel,” I can write
the same essay. I felt anxiety because I didn’t have any feeling for the game.
Every time I did something, I felt punished for having the wrong feeling, but
I didn’t have any feeling, much less a wrong feeling.

You can say there are no wrong feelings, yet the game has a winner and a loser
and is very much scored like there are right and wrong feelings. My problem
then was what it is now: I have no feeling for the game, and there is no
feedback loop to help me feel what is going on.

Which is not to say that you aren’t wrong about how to approach the game, but
my essay isn’t really about not being able to become a good player, it’s about
not being able to do anything because I had no “feeling” for what to do.

~~~
Jazear
I've been there. It's easy for me to ignore the "right and wrong, win or lose"
mentality of certain situations, but there are some times when I feel
disengaged or nauseous about being in a situation where I am not expected to
perform well.

The solution, IMO, is to remember that you aren't the feelings in your head.
There was a time you would have had a feedback loop for the game regardless of
winning or losing, and you've lost touch with it due to age. Your remedy,
which is the correct one, is to persevere beyond your banal mental fortress
until a new feedback loop is created.

By the way, I'm a huge fan of your work. Good job!

------
raganwald
Previous discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=904765>

~~~
ColinWright
Indeed, and I searched for and found that, but discussion there is closed, it
was nearly three years ago, and HN has a _lot_ of new users since then who may
choose to share their experiences.

I have now edited this title to be more descriptive, and to match that
previous submission.

 _Added in edit: I also see that this has been flagged, so I guess it won't
last long, which is a shame. I think there's a lot to learn from this article,
but you need to find the lessons for yourself, so many might not see them._

------
btilly
If you want to teach someone go, give them an insane handicap to start with. I
am only a mediocre player, but I'll play on a 9x9 board and hand out a 9 stone
handicap. More than half the time I'll win, then I'll give them a couple of
tips. (Unless you're connecting your stones in a solid wall, play 1 space away
from me to avoid tactical tricks. Also don't try to kill my stones, just try
to build a wall that I can't get through.) Then they usually win.

People often resist accepting the handicap. So I point out that the game has a
more complex strategy than anything they have ever seen. The handicap is a
necessary part of the game. If they can't accept this fact, then they will
never learn or enjoy the game.

Once they are beating me easily with a 9 stone handicap, we start dropping the
handicap down one stone per game. Somewhere about 5-6 stones they will hit a
wall again. Then I can give more tips and we go to the "adjust the handicap
after 3 victories in a row". Over time they start seeing more of what is going
on.

Once they get down to a 3 stone handicap on a 9x9 board, then I give them a 9
stone handicap on a 13x13 board. Now they can feel that they are really
playing, and start to see how varied it is.

If you're trying to teach yourself, I recommend taking a game like GNU go and
doing it yourself. Crank up the handicap to 9 on a 9x9 board, and try to win.
Slowly drop the handicap. If you can get someone to give you tips, do. You
will improve and can see it in the handicaps you need.

~~~
dwc
In chess there's usually a reluctance for strong players to play weak players,
unless it's for mentoring. That Go encourages people of different skills to
play a somewhat even game through handicaps seems very sociable and healthy to
me.

