The idea: I want to become incredibly skilled in a vast array of areas. As an example, I might benefit from making less crappy designs.
Will it work? I have absolutely no idea.
I’ve been reading atomic habits. While I think it’s not as good an exposition as it could have been (gotta hit that word count range if you want to publish a book!), and I dont think a fair bit of it is necessarily true…
one point I got from it seems almost like a mathematical tautology but also extremely powerful.
Imagine for a second that I’m a N-dimensional space with each dimension limited to the (0, 1) range, each describing a particular skill or knowledge or experience or behavior that I care about - 0 is worst and 1 is best.
I can trivially improve a component by 0.1% every day. Expanding my trumpet range by 0.1%?
That’s 0.025 semi tones. I can do that with 10 minutes of exercise.
Improving my fitness by 0.1%? A literal 10 minutes of walking are more than enough.
Improving my Japanese vocabulary knowledge by 0.1%? I already have stats, and with suboptimal parameters I can definitely do it in a day.
The book talks about 1% improvements, but the math is still powerful even if the improvements are an order of magnitude less.
Let’s define f(I) as the sum of the N components divided by N. Then trivially, if I improve something even by 0.01% every day, as long as i dont have on average worsening days, f(I) is going to be kind of monotonically increasing over my life.
I can read 5 pages of a psych 101 book tomorrow - I’ll be very slightly more knowledgeable about something, and f(I) will go up.
I can even estimate f(I) by self grading myself on a number of dimensions and seeing how the score evolves over time.
It seems a mathematical inevitability that if I apply an iterative approach to small improvements every day instead of following goals or targets, no matter how small the improvements, my score is going to tend to 1, no matter where i start from. Sure, i only have another 70 years to live if I’m lucky. But 1 would mean being the greatest polymath in the world and I dont need to go that far.
If i improve my vocabulary by 5 words a day, which believe me, is trivial and takes minutes to do, I can EASILY die fluent in 10 languages.
If I improve my range by half a semi tone per month for a while, I’ll be screaming triple Cs in a matter of a few years.
If I improve my staccato speed and cleanliness by 0.05% a day, I’ll be able to play the first brandt trumpet concerto in a similar amount of time.
If I write 500 words a day (takes me 20 minutes), I’ll have written several thick fantasy book every year.
Sounds too good to be true. But I cant see how it could be false.
I also have programming as a tool most of the population doesn’t have. I’m now taking private japanese lessons, and the incredible thing is I know almost every single word that comes up. Why? Because I was able to fine tune a language learning SRS to my strength and weaknesses.
I thought of how to further maximize the impact of time spent using a better heuristic for scheduling work and visualizing what needs to be done.
You cant do that on duolingo.
I plan to remove beeminder from my productivity systems - I think I have an idea that would better motivate me, and tomorrow I’ll code web and android apps.
Coding is like a superpower for this project. Want to make youtube less enjoyable? Randomly pause videos once every 5 minutes, show a picture of someone I hate laughing at me, then resume. I can still watch all the youtube I want. I just have to also take the loss from someone I want to “beat” rightly laughing at my waste of time while they’re more successful than me.
That ought to make it slightly less enjoyable. Or maybe not! Who cares. I can code it in 15 minutes and if it doesn’t work I can try something else.
Speaking of code, why does my autocorrect not correct cant? Is “cant” an actual word?
I’ll better organize my thoughts and post progress here.