Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Nick Moore's avatar

Richard Hamming had a good bit on this in The Art of Doing Science and Engineering:

"Of the things you can choose to measure some are hard, firm measurements, such as height and weight, while some are soft, such as social attitudes. There is always a tendency to grab the hard, firm measurement, though it may be quite irrelevant as compared to the soft one, which in the long run may be much more relevant to your goals. Accuracy of measurement tends to get confused with relevance of measurement, much more than most people believe. That a measurement is accurate, reproducible, and easy to make does not mean it should be done; instead, a much poorer one which is more closely related to your goals may be much preferable. For example, in school it is easy to measure training and hard to measure education, and hence you tend to see on final exams an emphasis on the training part and a great neglect of the education part."

The idea of a poorer measurement nonetheless being the better one is so compelling and I feel like it applies here -- like "happiness" is much harder to measure than sleep but it might be the better metric anyway.

Expand full comment
Martin Prior's avatar

I recently purchased a “smart watch” mainly for running really as my old one broke.

But this one gives me a whole new level of stats. I now know my blood oxygen concentration at any point in the last two weeks. Great but I don’t have a clue what it means or whether I’m about to die.

The other thing it gives you is a sleep score. Last night I felt like I had a great sleep. 7 hrs 30 mins and didn’t wake up at all. But I only got a score of 75. Urghhh. Not enough REM sleep apparently.

So yeah, I get you point. Great article. Thanks.

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts