I am playing around with a different LLM today. Today I am asking Google’s Gemini (nee Bard) to generate questions for me. I am working on my ability to generate prompts. So this is the first prompt I gave Gemini.

“Can you provide me 20 questions on random subjects that are slightly humorous in nature and not just trivia questions, but could allow for more philosophical answers.”

Gemini gave me some interesting questions, but I used them to catapult me to the topic of “Talent.” It is interesting thinking about an LLM generating a set of questions concerning something that technology should have no aspect of. Technology cannot be talented. So I modified my first prompt with this one:

“I want to narrow down the scope of the questions you provided to focus on the topic of ‘talent,’ keeping in mind all the various definitions of talent. Can you provide me with a second set of 20 questions focused on the topic ‘Talent?’”

Here come the questions:

1. If animals could hold talent shows, what unique "talents" do you think different species might showcase?

Cats would not participate. Dogs would be all about the show though. There would be so many dogs doing so many different things. The winner of the talent show would be a goldfish who can add simple sums, because no one could believe it.

2. Is raw talent more important than hard work, or vice versa? Can you have one without the other?

You can have raw talent without hard work… but raw talent will only get you so far. Raw talent without hard work is merely talent, hard work is what will hone a talent into being something truly special. You can develop a skill without having raw talent, so I would lean towards hard work being more important overall.

3. If you could combine two existing talents into a "super-talent," what unique skill would you create?

Drawing and dance. Creating artistic sculptures in VR.

4. Is it better to be a master of one specific talent or a jack-of-all-trades with various moderate skills?

A little of Column A and a little of Column B. Both have merit. I think the in between is even better. Not a singular amazing talent, or moderate skills across a wide variety of tasks, but high levels of talent for 4 things.

5. Should talent shows be judged solely on skill, or should entertainment value and stage presence also play a role?

Talent shows are always judged by entertainment value and stage presence. Many people can play the piano, but only a few can play the piano and hold a crown in the palm of their hand. Put it this way… I should have gotten second in my 6th grade talent show because I had better presence than that girl who sang “The Rose” but no where near the presence that the guy who won did dancing. He was magnetic and electric.

Me doing Stand-up at 11 years old in 1986…. I was robbed of my 2nd place finish… ROBBED!

6. Do you think everyone has some kind of hidden talent, waiting to be discovered?

No. Some of y’all are just seat fillers.

7. Can you "teach" talent, or is it something solely innate and unlearnable?

You can teach skill, but talent in innate and unlearnable. Skill can sometimes (and often does) eclipse talent.

8. Is there a difference between a "natural" talent and a "developed" talent? If so, how does that impact their value?

Developed talent is talent married to hard work. Developed talent is often much better.

9. Should we celebrate "untapped" talent, even if it hasn't been refined or honed yet?

We should celebrate talent when it is shown.

10. Can technology ever truly replace or replicate human talent in certain fields?

Like I said before, skill is something that is trainable and replicable. We are already seeing applications of skill by LLM’s and generative image AI that is really good, but it is not talent. It is replicable sklill.

11. Is the fear of failing to live up to one's potential a bigger hurdle than the actual difficulty of mastering a talent?

Failing to live up to one’s talent potential is the fear of everyone who has intrinsic talents. It is a constant fear.

12. Does having a "natural talent" for something make it less impressive, or are all achievements noteworthy regardless of ease?

All achievements should be noteworthy.

13. When does a hobby become a genuine talent, and what are the key factors that differentiate them?

A talent and a hobby do not have to be associated at all. One can be talented at singing and never do it. One can enjoy a hobby and not be talented at it at all. If you get enjoyment from a task and make it your hobby, you do not have to be talented at it to enjoy it.

14. Can someone be talented in something they dislike, or is passion a necessary ingredient for true talent to flourish?

Yes, one can be very talented in something they dislike. Passion is necessary for that talent to flourish though.

15. Should schools focus on identifying and nurturing individual talents, or should they prioritize a more generalized education for all?

School should focus on general education, while giving the opportunity to allow people to get some training and practice for talents they have. You have to have a history class, and you can take art.

16. In a world where everyone has access to vast information and resources, is it becoming easier or harder to discover and develop one's true talents?

I think people are able to find very specific talents that they have now in ways that they couldn’t before. Before someone might know that they are talented musically, but now they may be able to find out that they are talented specifically at playing the melodica.

17. Is being "talented" a privilege, or should everyone have equal access to resources and opportunities to develop their potential?

There is no privilege to the existence of talent. Privilege comes to play when you are talking about access to resources surrounding the nurturing of that talent. Someone with the best singing voice ever might be too poor to have access to any operatic training since they have to work 60 hours a week in a no-talent job.

18. Can someone be talented in unethical or destructive pursuits? If so, how does that influence the perception of their "talent"?

Someone can be talented at unsavory pursuits. I think some people have a talent for inflicting emotional pain with a simple phrase. That is a talent, and not a great one.

19. When people say they "wish they had your talent," what does that reveal about their own self-perception and societal pressures around achievement?

I think many people conflate talent with status and importance. I think it also smacks of people’s inherent feelings of inadequacy. Take it from those of us who are talented and still have imposter syndrome. Having a talent is not the end all, be all that one might hope.

20. Is the pursuit of talent ultimately about individual fulfillment, recognition from others, or something else entirely?

It should be about individual fulfillment, but I think it often goes towards legitimacy and recognition.

To recap:

Now, imma have to interview Gemini in the same way I did ChatGPT
Guess that will be next week?
An interview with Gemini
Not the American Gladiator though

That would be AMAZING
Getting anyone interested in doing interviews right now is difficult
Crowdsourcing the questions from, well… the crowd is difficult as well
It isn’t 2010 anymore
In many ways, LLMs have helped this blog out immeasurably
I miss some of the nuance that comes with people asking questions vs an LLM
But getting questions generated by some kind of LLM, that is easy as pie
Imma need to start getting some kind of prompt engineering certification
I don’t think this exercise of interacting with AI/LLM’s will count as professional experience
I need a job
Have a great week everyone