There is a myth, but the myth propels reality. Take this line in the article as a reason:
> That leads people to be working crazy hours at work, to be constantly studying programming topics on their own time, and so on.
This attitude will create ninjas/rockstars/whatever, even if the original notion isn't true. Folks who spend every waking hour thinking about and learning about something are going to be better than the folks who don't do that level of effort.
I agree that programming skill is going to shape itself into a bell curve, but I would also argue that a bump exists in the 3rd or 4th standard deviation, with all the folks who've been driven (for good or bad reasons) to eat/drink/breathe programming.
The thrust of the article is that it's okay to be mediocre, and I agree, but I don't think it's healthy to be satisfied with where you are in any skill-based craft. It's more healthy to be okay that you're not already better (I'm not a rockstar yet), but being okay with not getting better is a toxic thought.
> That leads people to be working crazy hours at work, to be constantly studying programming topics on their own time, and so on.
This attitude will create ninjas/rockstars/whatever, even if the original notion isn't true. Folks who spend every waking hour thinking about and learning about something are going to be better than the folks who don't do that level of effort.
I agree that programming skill is going to shape itself into a bell curve, but I would also argue that a bump exists in the 3rd or 4th standard deviation, with all the folks who've been driven (for good or bad reasons) to eat/drink/breathe programming.
The thrust of the article is that it's okay to be mediocre, and I agree, but I don't think it's healthy to be satisfied with where you are in any skill-based craft. It's more healthy to be okay that you're not already better (I'm not a rockstar yet), but being okay with not getting better is a toxic thought.