I agree completely. I believe that this information is useless trivial unless it's (a) embedded in context and (b) consumed experimentally. By "embedded in con

I agree completely. I believe that this information is useless trivial unless it's (a) embedded in context and (b) consumed experimentally. By "embedded in context" I mean you need to not just know a larger constellation of interesting information (steps, tracks, mood, location, &c) but also have available information that connects the various data points meaningfully—"I'm blue so I listened to The Cure". By "consumed experimentally" I mean that you have to have a lever or action which you want to use conditioned on the information gathered. Simply knowing is possibly boring or creepy, but being able to change your own behavior using that information is power. For instance, the opposite causal pathway as above: "I'm listening to The Cure, so now I'm feeling blue" implies a lever you could pull to feel happier. This drives you to want to experiment. If you have both of those then you're driven to use data like this experimentally and that's pretty wonderful. To anyone who also agrees or is just interested in what you can do with data like this I suggest taking a look at Ian Eslick's "Personal Experiments" [0] which helps direct a user to collect data and invoke an N-of-1 experimental design atop the collection. [0] https://personalexperiments.org/ https://personalexperiments.org/