Ryan Peterman

Maybe I can overlay it for people who want to see.

And then later you kind of liken that to your career and how, I guess maybe we can imagine the hobby is actually coding and maybe the gear is, let's just say it's like your dev setup or something like that.

You talked about these two aspects of being in, depending on which quadrant you are, which is there's this trade-off between expertise and visibility where you're

imagine you're really into coding and you're really into doing, you're going to be phenomenal in terms of expertise, but maybe not as visible because you're not talking with everyone about how cool your setup is and all of that.

And on the flip side, if you're really into the gear, or maybe your setup in this case, and you're really into discussing, you're

You're on all the messaging posts and that.

You might not actually be that good at coding, but you're very visible and you have this apparent competence.

And I thought that trade-off was really interesting because I've seen that so much in software engineering too.

There might be someone who's a really quiet coder.

They never write anything, but they know everything because they've just been in the weeds all the time.

And then there are people on the complete opposite end of the spectrum that...

writing all the time, speaking all the time, but maybe not actually practicing as much.

And my question to you is, how do you strike that balance?

Because obviously too far in either direction is not optimal.

So how do you strike that balance?

On the doing versus discussing axis, I kind of view the doing one as if you were too far.

you would be underrated.

And if you were too far on the discussing, you would be overrated.

And if for someone who's structuring their career, would you say it's better to be overrated or underrated?

So people who walk the walk, not necessarily talk the talk.