You know that example that Eliezer gives in the Fun Theory sequence; about how solving a rubik’s cube will be fun a few times, and then you might move onto to solving the general formula for a rubik’s cube of nxnxn… and once you’ve solved that formula, then solving a specific rubik’s cube will be boring.
Although of course actual observation of humans seems to disagree. People move on to practising for speed, competing and solving the cube blindfolded after making a brief glance.
Sure, but you’re getting a different, mostly unrelated kind of fun out of it. Solving a Rubik’s cube is a challenge in puzzle-solving and a little math; speed-solving and blind-solving are challenges in manual dexterity and spatial memorisation. In many ways you’re playing two different games, just using the same tool.
It’s like winning at Civilization versus recreating as accurate a copy of a given historical empire as possible.
It seems learning follows the pattern more strongly than rubik’s cube-solving does. People (generally) don’t practice the same solution to a problem over and over again to get faster at it; they tend to learn more general methods that include the specific problem. Idea is only nebulous, need to think it over more.
It seems learning follows the pattern more strongly than rubik’s cube-solving does.
Definitely. And when it comes to the Rubik’s cube I personally tackled it as a learning problem more than a practical skill—so closer to how Eliezer used it in the example. I learned how to solve the cube in general then moved on. I saved my competitive skill acquisition for martial arts and laser tag. :)
Although of course actual observation of humans seems to disagree. People move on to practising for speed, competing and solving the cube blindfolded after making a brief glance.
Sure, but you’re getting a different, mostly unrelated kind of fun out of it. Solving a Rubik’s cube is a challenge in puzzle-solving and a little math; speed-solving and blind-solving are challenges in manual dexterity and spatial memorisation. In many ways you’re playing two different games, just using the same tool.
It’s like winning at Civilization versus recreating as accurate a copy of a given historical empire as possible.
It seems learning follows the pattern more strongly than rubik’s cube-solving does. People (generally) don’t practice the same solution to a problem over and over again to get faster at it; they tend to learn more general methods that include the specific problem. Idea is only nebulous, need to think it over more.
Definitely. And when it comes to the Rubik’s cube I personally tackled it as a learning problem more than a practical skill—so closer to how Eliezer used it in the example. I learned how to solve the cube in general then moved on. I saved my competitive skill acquisition for martial arts and laser tag. :)