3 ms·

Interesting idea! I suspect I'd need to use shell far more often than I do currently to get anything conclusive though. But I guess it's possible to infer erro

Interesting idea! I suspect I'd need to use shell far more often than I do currently to get anything conclusive though. But I guess it's possible to infer error rate even from past data by looking at closely spaced commands wish short Levenshtein distance.

1996 6y ago
It depends on your workflow. I'd say your approach is interesting, but it's mostly driven by availability of the data ("searching under a streetlight") except for your sleep monitor (however, being an under pillow solution, it's not essentially different from the accelerometer data from a smart watch) I would suggest you invert the logic: design objective (ex: mental acuity), conclude on what things you want to track (ex: time slept, cups of coffee per day, time you drink it, errors in shell) and get the data accordingly, spending as necessary (ex: smart coffee maker? or maybe a smart plug that can let you infer when the machine is being used from the wattage drawn) As for data tricks, L distance is a good one, yet not applicable for shell, as it's sensitive to the string length so you would need correction. Also, it's missing the essential metric: did the command work? Only the error return code will give you that. TLDR: think about what you want, but before that think about why you want it. Collecting useless metrics is another form of data hoarding.
- karlicoss 6y ago
  Yeah, it's a good point, and I'm indeed a bit guilty of hoarding data I can't immediately process. However, the problem with the 'objective first' approach is that it's gonna require a lot of data to draw meaningful rigorous conclusions from small interventions, so I'm making sure to 'secure' the data first, and then gradually process it. But also, it's a challenge in itself -- I'm automating a lot, sharing my system and trying to interoperate with existing tools, in the hope that my work can be useful to other people and make quantified self easier for them.
  - 1996 6y ago
    > in the hope that my work can be useful to other people and make quantified self easier for them Careful, you risk making a mistake driven by "warm-fuzzy-feelings"! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26045256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26045256 Anything you do, do it only for yourself.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

1996 6y ago

It depends on your workflow. I'd say your approach is interesting, but it's mostly driven by availability of the data ("searching under a streetlight") except for your sleep monitor (however, being an under pillow solution, it's not essentially different from the accelerometer data from a smart watch) I would suggest you invert the logic: design objective (ex: mental acuity), conclude on what things you want to track (ex: time slept, cups of coffee per day, time you drink it, errors in shell) and get the data accordingly, spending as necessary (ex: smart coffee maker? or maybe a smart plug that can let you infer when the machine is being used from the wattage drawn) As for data tricks, L distance is a good one, yet not applicable for shell, as it's sensitive to the string length so you would need correction. Also, it's missing the essential metric: did the command work? Only the error return code will give you that. TLDR: think about what you want, but before that think about why you want it. Collecting useless metrics is another form of data hoarding.

karlicoss 6y ago
Yeah, it's a good point, and I'm indeed a bit guilty of hoarding data I can't immediately process. However, the problem with the 'objective first' approach is that it's gonna require a lot of data to draw meaningful rigorous conclusions from small interventions, so I'm making sure to 'secure' the data first, and then gradually process it. But also, it's a challenge in itself -- I'm automating a lot, sharing my system and trying to interoperate with existing tools, in the hope that my work can be useful to other people and make quantified self easier for them.
- 1996 6y ago
  > in the hope that my work can be useful to other people and make quantified self easier for them Careful, you risk making a mistake driven by "warm-fuzzy-feelings"! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26045256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26045256 Anything you do, do it only for yourself.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]