3 ms·

The issue is it is hard to know whether the two (or more) choices are equally good. If you have no way of knowing which choice is better then you would flip th

The issue is it is hard to know whether the two (or more) choices are equally good. If you have no way of knowing which choice is better then you would flip the coin of course. The problem is there typically is a way to possibly learn more about which is better, AND HOW MUCH, by studying the choices. The "How much" -part is crucial. One choice might lead to core meltdown. Often such study does not provide any further information about which is better. But it might. You just don't know. Except if you are lucky and the answer is immediately obvious. So if it looks like you have two choices A and B, it is more typically the case that you in fact have THREE choices: 1. Choose A 2. Choose B 3. Spend more time studying which is better, and how much, A or B

Shorel 4y ago
My algorithmic approach: You spend a fixed amount of time, if no choice could be made during this period, then flip the coin. The fixed amount of time could be as short as five seconds. Or the amount that makes sense to you, and you feel comfortable with. If it's one week for you, then it is.
coldtea 4y ago
>The issue is it is hard to know whether the two (or more) choices are equally good. If the choice doesn't matter much, then both options are equally good. E.g. "should I get this pair of shoes or that? I like both". Just get one and get on with it. "Should I go to Paris or Vienna for a short trip?" Just pick one and get on with it. Still people obsess for these kind of choices for needlessly long... The case discussed, were people waste time they shouldn't, is (a) when the choice doesn't matter much or (b) when you do know that either option would be more or less fine (which is basically a variant of (a)). If (c) you can't tell if they're equally good AND chosing the right one does have a BIG impact, then this case doesn't fall under the advice of TFA or what we discuss here. Rather, it's an "ipportant choice" and people should think it over...
- galaxyLogic 4y ago
  Yes of course if you "know" that the choice doesn't matter and you still obsess with it then it is your fault. I don't know how much that happens in practice, and I wouldn't blame people much for doing that because maybe they enjoy doing it. Based on my own experience as a SW developer I have found that more often it is hard to know beforehand whether a design-choice matters much or not, and how much. I suppose that is also the reason for much of "Technical Debt". People make less than optimal design choices not because they are bad designers, but because trying to evaluate the benefits of each choice would be too time-consuming.

Shorel 4y ago

My algorithmic approach: You spend a fixed amount of time, if no choice could be made during this period, then flip the coin. The fixed amount of time could be as short as five seconds. Or the amount that makes sense to you, and you feel comfortable with. If it's one week for you, then it is.

coldtea 4y ago

>The issue is it is hard to know whether the two (or more) choices are equally good. If the choice doesn't matter much, then both options are equally good. E.g. "should I get this pair of shoes or that? I like both". Just get one and get on with it. "Should I go to Paris or Vienna for a short trip?" Just pick one and get on with it. Still people obsess for these kind of choices for needlessly long... The case discussed, were people waste time they shouldn't, is (a) when the choice doesn't matter much or (b) when you do know that either option would be more or less fine (which is basically a variant of (a)). If (c) you can't tell if they're equally good AND chosing the right one does have a BIG impact, then this case doesn't fall under the advice of TFA or what we discuss here. Rather, it's an "ipportant choice" and people should think it over...

galaxyLogic 4y ago
Yes of course if you "know" that the choice doesn't matter and you still obsess with it then it is your fault. I don't know how much that happens in practice, and I wouldn't blame people much for doing that because maybe they enjoy doing it. Based on my own experience as a SW developer I have found that more often it is hard to know beforehand whether a design-choice matters much or not, and how much. I suppose that is also the reason for much of "Technical Debt". People make less than optimal design choices not because they are bad designers, but because trying to evaluate the benefits of each choice would be too time-consuming.