Unquantified

I think I largely agree with his reflection(s): easily obtainable metrics to track physical fitness / health often do more harm than good.

But I can't help but think that partial quantification of the self could still be extremely useful, it's just that virtually all diet/fitness applications are focused on calorie counting and weight-loss. They should be focused on increasing bodily awareness. How long does it take for food to pass through? How often do you poop? What are those poops like? When you eat X, how do you feel an hour later, two hours later, three hours later?

If you begin tracking _these_ kinds of metrics, then you could become aware of how different foods, sleep patterns, etc, affect your mood, and subjective energy levels.

This kind of self knowledge -- whose discovery could be aided by some good UX, is fantastic. The only kinds of health applications that seem to take this moderately serious are period tracking apps.

I actually disagree with this heavily. It's feel good, for sure, but if you are looking for measurable results in almost any endeavor, then keeping metrics is almost textbook in increasing the chance of success. "That which gets measured gets improved". Human beings are inherently flawed and subject to natural impulses, adding in objective metrics is a way of taming that. Intuition is not going to help you make linear progress in small increments over a long period of time. Studies of weight loss for example repeatedly show you need to be keeping some metric such as weight or measuring body inches etc to keep on track and be able to guide your decisions each week. "intuitive eating" is a new fad but there is virtually no data to back up that it works at all.

EDIT: To add,I speak as somebody who lost 160lbs over two years after years of yo-yoing. I find it very unlikely you would be able to do this without tracking progress and having metrics to guide you.

I think none of this matters except one change: going from fours hours of sleep to eight.

I'm interested in QS, but the metrics aren't the ends they are the means. Increased subjective satisfaction is always my goal.

When I run I don't track pace but I do track time and I start each run with an idea of what my RPE for that run will be. My goal is to decrease time when RPE is fixed. So some days I run hard and some I don't because I'm not always trying to set a PB.

If metrics are guardrails that you are gonna crash into over and over while attempting to change behavior then you won't like QS. Not tracking your bad behavior doesn't make it go away. It just makes you ignorant.

Wow, I was always worried that I was missing out on all the benefits of quantifying the self. Now it seems that things have come full-circle and my lifestyle is in fact cutting-edge.

I don't mean this in a negative way, but measuring something, be it weight, sleep whatever is useless without a goal metric and analysis of how behaviors impact the measurements.

The written account linked here is surely incomplete, however anecdotally I find that people use these systems expecting some kind of emergent property to reveal itself and wham bam just like that, you can take steps to fix it.

In fact it's the reverse. Set a goal, begin measuring as much as you can, tinker with the inputs, determine how input changes result in measured outputs, iterate to vector measurement toward desired goal, repeat.

What I do get from this account is that, in agreement with most anecdotes I have seen, they viewed this measurement system in the same "quick fix" category as other things. Maybe not to such a degree as "24 hour Holywood weight loss" drink but from a similar place.

I'm a firm believer in the quantified self concept, but I think it's incredibly hard to actually do. It takes serious discipline and you need to structure your life around it - the same way professional athletes or others do. However if you have clear goals with measurable inputs and really do the work required, it's incredibly powerful.

There's really two big issues with 'quant' mindsets. The first one is a 'if I can't measure it, it doesn't exist' logic. Where people will mistake metrics that are easily accessible with metrics that are meaningful. People who like to take quantified approaches tend to drift towards methods that allow for easy quantification regardless if they're appropriate or not.

The second one is, as the saying goes, that 'life is not lived in the aggregate'. Quantified approaches give us general, macro ideas but may easily be less appropriate than subjective or individual experiences if you only care about specific cases (like your own well-being) to begin with. It's not always appropriate to trade case-specific knowledge for general knowledge if all you care about is one case.

Related to this is a loss of resolution. Aggregation ignores internal dynamics. The national GDP or corporate performance might mask huge internal divergence which again can result in instability, which then causes second order effects. Those dynamics only really show up in qualitative models, not data.

A lot of unaccounted for psycological effects show themselves from underneath the veil of unknown unknown factors once you shift the tools engineers have developed, like logging and testing, into a different domain, an ecological environment different from the one they evolved out of. The fact that there's a stigma to mentioning that things that are hyped up cause you discomfort only exacerbate the problem. Not everything that worked in engineering is necessarily a good solution to problems in physiology.

I also got rid of analytics on my websites as well. I figure if I make something people like, someone will tell me thanks or maybe something wrong with it that they want improved

I agree with this post. Rationalizing based only on data can lead to flawed conclusions and bias. Obviously, quantification is useful in many domains, but when it comes to your health then the worst thing you can do is ignore your intuition on the basis of data.

I also don’t keep any metrics of my website, not even page hits. It’s a hard sell to other webmasters, but I personally don’t want to start writing for the wrong reasons. I think quantification is responsible for a lot of evils in our world today — and a lot of good too. I’m focusing a lot on where quantification can be applied for the benefit of one’s spirit, rather than one’s greed.

This puts in to words something I've been struggling with. My Apple Watch gives me enough information that I've gone to see my PCP twice for non problems.

However.

I've had good reason to pay attention the last few years.

I think I'll let go now.

https://blog.ryjones.org/2018/05/04/half-the-person-i-was-be...

https://blog.ryjones.org/2018/05/07/fully-quantified-self-2/

The author also chose to emigrate to a minimally quantified society with abundant warmth, natural light balanced with natural dark. "Pura Vida" isn't just a marketing expression in Costa Rica.

I used to be utterly obsessed with QS. I strongly believe that you can only manage what you measure. With that said, I've also found that quantification can have an emotional downside for individuals, especially when the stakes are low. However, this can be controlled or avoided. My suggestion is to passively track these things without using them as a target. That is, I recommend using only derived metrics as decision making aids. It also avoids Goodhart's Law [0]. Measures that become targets lose their value as measures. I also think that it's easy to start fetishizing the data, like becoming obsessed with small changes in weight or contributions on Github. Metrics descend to "mindless dopamine fixes" but this need not be the case. Metrics should inform decisions like "do I quit this expensive gym membership or stick it out?" or "Does a third cup of coffee in the afternoon improve my performance enough to justify the caffeine jitters?"

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

"The removal of the alarm clock was also a big change for me. In Austin, I would get up early, go workout, or get up early and work before work (I spent most of my last 2 years in Austin as the CTO at a Series A funded startup and the quiet hours of the morning before my wife and daughter woke up were the only real quiet ours I had all day)... Now I get around eight hours of sleep per night because I prioritize sleep. The sun sets very early here, currently around 18:00, so I’m typically in bed by 21:30 and asleep by 22:00-22:30 and I wake-up between 6-7 the next morning."

---

This is someone who no longer lives with his daughter it seems?

I don't want to diagnose strangers over five blog posts on the internet, but much of this blog reads like my last few weeks before a mental breakdown. I hope the author is ok/remains ok in the short term.

Perhaps the author feels comfortable with their new minimalist approach becasue of his history of quantification—not in spite of it.

Data begets intuition. He doesn't need to see the data because he understands the related symptoms of his goals.

These guys thoughts resonate 100% with me. I did the same things (including his previous blog posts that he links) over the past 6-12months and I am very happy with it.

It is difficult at first to break hard-wired patterns, but after you do it you feel more alive and in control. Also, you start to see how people live 90% of their lives on autopilot consuming content and stuff that the most competent (and competent is really a very nice word for what they really are) producer put in front of them.

I agree the following two items have made me happier:

1. Removing my alarm clock and all electronic devices when I sleep 2. Stop measuring all exercise

One can get an idea of how many views the blogpost have depending on the HN thread upvotes (no need for js or analytics) :D

I'd say perhaps limit quantification to say 15 minutes a day. That way you can have the positive effects, and also prevent the negative effects.

> There is a secondary benefit that I’ve addressed in the post nonparticipation in that I also no longer share those intimate details of myself to startups and third parties who are pressured to monetize that data. By going unquantified I’m in complete alignment with nonparticipation in toxic adTech driven panopticon of surveillance capitalism

I wonder what epiphany the author had to start/change his opinion on the ad-driven model.

I tried to infect a quantified self company with the same gist about 7y ago. They did quite well at first, but failed to continue innovating in my point of view. Anyway, whenever my ideas were gaining traction the marketing head would convince the CEO that my ideas would be bad for the company. Now I'll never know :P