# the road dial and the akrasia horizon **URL:** \ **Category:** uncategorized\ **Created:** [September 1, 2011, 6:52am UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335 "2011-09-01T06:52:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Daniel\_Reeves](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.beeminder.com/daniel_reeves/32/707_2.png) [@Daniel\_Reeves](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/Daniel_Reeves)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 6:52am UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/1 "2011-09-01T06:52:11Z")
Here, finally, is our write-up on the akrasia horizon and road dial: [blog.beeminder.com/dial](http://blog.beeminder.com/dial) – [http://dreev.es](http://dreev.es) – search://"Daniel Reeves" Follow the Yellow Brick Road – [http://beeminder.com](http://beeminder.com) ---
**Author:** ![Johnicholas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/48db29/32.png) [@Johnicholas](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/Johnicholas)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 8:04pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/2 "2011-09-07T20:04:43Z")
I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated parameter. Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast simplicity to the winds, and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on hyperbolic discounting, prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road forever. Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of adjustment? Johnicholas ---
**Author:** ![David\_Reiley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@David\_Reiley](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/David_Reiley)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 8:17pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/3 "2011-09-07T20:17:01Z")
I like one week. It seems about right for the designated purposes. And I’m one of the people who complained most loudly that I wanted to be able to change my slope once my metabolism slowed down and I didn’t realize how much it would suck to be hungry enough to stay on my YBR. If we were to derive something theoretically, it would totally depend on the parameters you chose for your hyperbolic discounting function (How much do you discount tomorrow versus today, over and above how much you discount the day after versus tomorrow? And also, what is the actual length of “today,” for akratic purposes? The right timescale might be a minute or an hour or a week rather than a day.) I see no reason why we know these “fundamental” parameters (or, indeed, that they truly mean anything more fundamental, as opposed to being a convenient theoretical modeling device) than the parameter of a week that’s been chosen here. David On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Johnicholas wrote: > I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, > but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), > the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated > parameter. > > Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast > simplicity to the winds, > and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? > For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on > hyperbolic discounting, > prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, > and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road > forever. > > Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, > that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of > adjustment? > > Johnicholas – My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln ---
**Author:** ![mirolabs](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.beeminder.com/mirolabs/32/2458_2.png) [@mirolabs](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/mirolabs)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 8:35pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/4 "2011-09-07T20:35:25Z")
I second that. One week (or anything between 5 and 10 days) works fine and is well enough, to my mind. And I think that the akratic horizon is about more than hyperbolic discounting. Wait, “think” is not the right term. - I feel it. It’s a kinesthetic reference. (If that doesn’t make sense to you, never mind. 😉 Alex Wednesday, September 7, 2011, 10:17:01 PM, you wrote: > I like one week. It seems about right for the designated purposes. > And I’m one of the people who complained most loudly that I wanted > to be able to change my slope once my metabolism slowed down and I > didn’t realize how much it would suck to be hungry enough to stay on my YBR. > If we were to derive something theoretically, it would totally > depend on the parameters you chose for your hyperbolic discounting > function (How much do you discount tomorrow versus today, over and > above how much you discount the day after versus tomorrow? And > also, what is the actual length of “today,” for akratic purposes? > The right timescale might be a minute or an hour or a week rather > than a day.) I see no reason why we know these “fundamental” > parameters (or, indeed, that they truly mean anything more > fundamental, as opposed to being a convenient theoretical modeling > device) than the parameter of a week that’s been chosen here. > David > On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Johnicholas wrote: > > I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, > > but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), > > the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated > > parameter. > > > > Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast > > simplicity to the winds, > > and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? > > For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on > > hyperbolic discounting, > > prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, > > and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road > > forever. > > > > Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, > > that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of > > adjustment? > > > > Johnicholas > – > My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) > “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln – Best regards, Alexander [mailto:miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) ---
**Author:** ![Robbie\_Clarken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d07c76/32.png) [@Robbie\_Clarken](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/Robbie_Clarken)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 10:32pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/5 "2011-09-07T22:32:19Z")
One week is good for decreasing the slope but I think it would be good for slope increases to happen instantly (with the ability to undo should you make a mistake entering the new value). It is currently a big problem that when you reset your goal you need to wait 1 week before the YBR starts to slope at all. Robbie On 08/09/2011, at 6:35 AM, Alexander Schwarz [miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) wrote: > I second that. > > One week (or anything between 5 and 10 days) works fine and is well > enough, to my mind. > > And I think that the akratic horizon is about more than hyperbolic > discounting. Wait, “think” is not the right term. - I feel it. It’s a > kinesthetic reference. (If that doesn’t make sense to you, never mind. 😉 > > Alex > > Wednesday, September 7, 2011, 10:17:01 PM, you wrote: > > > I like one week. It seems about right for the designated purposes. > > And I’m one of the people who complained most loudly that I wanted > > to be able to change my slope once my metabolism slowed down and I > > didn’t realize how much it would suck to be hungry enough to stay on my YBR. > > > If we were to derive something theoretically, it would totally > > depend on the parameters you chose for your hyperbolic discounting > > function (How much do you discount tomorrow versus today, over and > > above how much you discount the day after versus tomorrow? And > > also, what is the actual length of “today,” for akratic purposes? > > The right timescale might be a minute or an hour or a week rather > > than a day.) I see no reason why we know these “fundamental” > > parameters (or, indeed, that they truly mean anything more > > fundamental, as opposed to being a convenient theoretical modeling > > device) than the parameter of a week that’s been chosen here. > > > David > > > On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Johnicholas wrote: > > > > I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, > > > but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), > > > the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated > > > parameter. > > > > > > Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast > > > simplicity to the winds, > > > and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? > > > For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on > > > hyperbolic discounting, > > > prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, > > > and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road > > > forever. > > > > > > Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, > > > that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of > > > adjustment? > > > > > > Johnicholas > > > – > > My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) > > > “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln > > – > Best regards, > Alexander [mailto:miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) ---
**Author:** ![Daniel\_Reeves](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.beeminder.com/daniel_reeves/32/707_2.png) [@Daniel\_Reeves](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/Daniel_Reeves)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 11:19pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/6 "2011-09-07T23:19:18Z")
Yeah, we recently decided that imposing that week of flat road is no good. Cf [http://groups.google.com/group/akratics/browse\_frm/thread/d5152fc470f7b3b6](http://groups.google.com/group/akratics/browse_frm/thread/d5152fc470f7b3b6) I like your proposal that you can make it harder immediately but making it easier has the one-week delay. That’s actually what we originally envisioned but thought a universal one-week delay would be simpler (don’t have to deal with the undo problem, for one thing – see the footnote in the above link). Maybe you’re right though… We’ll hurry and get this version deployed where the initial flat spot is not imposed on you and then decide about the more general solution. Johnicholas: I think I agree with David Reiley but still very interested in seeing what a more principled model would suggest (even if that involves equally arbitrary parameter choices). On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 17:32, Robbie Clarken [robbie.clarken@gmail.com](mailto:robbie.clarken@gmail.com) wrote: > One week is good for decreasing the slope but I think it would be good > for slope increases to happen instantly (with the ability to undo > should you make a mistake entering the new value). > > It is currently a big problem that when you reset your goal you need > to wait 1 week before the YBR starts to slope at all. > > Robbie > > On 08/09/2011, at 6:35 AM, Alexander Schwarz [miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) wrote: > > > I second that. > > > > One week (or anything between 5 and 10 days) works fine and is well > > enough, to my mind. > > > > And I think that the akratic horizon is about more than hyperbolic > > discounting. Wait, “think” is not the right term. - I feel it. It’s a > > kinesthetic reference. (If that doesn’t make sense to you, never mind. 😉 > > > > Alex > > > > Wednesday, September 7, 2011, 10:17:01 PM, you wrote: > > > > > I like one week. It seems about right for the designated purposes. > > > And I’m one of the people who complained most loudly that I wanted > > > to be able to change my slope once my metabolism slowed down and I > > > didn’t realize how much it would suck to be hungry enough to stay on my YBR. > > > > > If we were to derive something theoretically, it would totally > > > depend on the parameters you chose for your hyperbolic discounting > > > function (How much do you discount tomorrow versus today, over and > > > above how much you discount the day after versus tomorrow? And > > > also, what is the actual length of “today,” for akratic purposes? > > > The right timescale might be a minute or an hour or a week rather > > > than a day.) I see no reason why we know these “fundamental” > > > parameters (or, indeed, that they truly mean anything more > > > fundamental, as opposed to being a convenient theoretical modeling > > > device) than the parameter of a week that’s been chosen here. > > > > > David > > > > > On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Johnicholas wrote: > > > > > > I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, > > > > but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), > > > > the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated > > > > parameter. > > > > > > > > Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast > > > > simplicity to the winds, > > > > and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? > > > > For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on > > > > hyperbolic discounting, > > > > prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, > > > > and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road > > > > forever. > > > > > > > > Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, > > > > that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of > > > > adjustment? > > > > > > > > Johnicholas > > > > > – > > > My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) > > > > > “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln > > > > – > > Best regards, > > Alexander [mailto:miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) – [http://dreev.es](http://dreev.es) – search://“Daniel Reeves” Follow the Yellow Brick Road – [http://beeminder.com](http://beeminder.com) ---
**Author:** ![David\_Reiley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@David\_Reiley](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/David_Reiley)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2011, 11:37pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/the-road-dial-and-the-akrasia-horizon/1335/7 "2011-09-07T23:37:00Z")
I think getting rid of the imposed flat week will probably fix Robbie’s problem to first order. I’ll be curious to see if it doesn’t. David On Sep 7, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Daniel Reeves wrote: > Yeah, we recently decided that imposing that week of flat road is no good. > Cf [http://groups.google.com/group/akratics/browse\_frm/thread/d5152fc470f7b3b6](http://groups.google.com/group/akratics/browse_frm/thread/d5152fc470f7b3b6) > > I like your proposal that you can make it harder immediately but > making it easier has the one-week delay. > That’s actually what we originally envisioned but thought a universal > one-week delay would be simpler (don’t have to deal with the undo > problem, for one thing – see the footnote in the above link). Maybe > you’re right though… > > We’ll hurry and get this version deployed where the initial flat spot > is not imposed on you and then decide about the more general solution. > > Johnicholas: I think I agree with David Reiley but still very > interested in seeing what a more principled model would suggest (even > if that involves equally arbitrary parameter choices). > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 17:32, Robbie Clarken [robbie.clarken@gmail.com](mailto:robbie.clarken@gmail.com) wrote: > > > One week is good for decreasing the slope but I think it would be good > > for slope increases to happen instantly (with the ability to undo > > should you make a mistake entering the new value). > > > > It is currently a big problem that when you reset your goal you need > > to wait 1 week before the YBR starts to slope at all. > > > > Robbie > > > > On 08/09/2011, at 6:35 AM, Alexander Schwarz [miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > > I second that. > > > > > > One week (or anything between 5 and 10 days) works fine and is well > > > enough, to my mind. > > > > > > And I think that the akratic horizon is about more than hyperbolic > > > discounting. Wait, “think” is not the right term. - I feel it. It’s a > > > kinesthetic reference. (If that doesn’t make sense to you, never mind. 😉 > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > Wednesday, September 7, 2011, 10:17:01 PM, you wrote: > > > > > > > I like one week. It seems about right for the designated purposes. > > > > And I’m one of the people who complained most loudly that I wanted > > > > to be able to change my slope once my metabolism slowed down and I > > > > didn’t realize how much it would suck to be hungry enough to stay on my YBR. > > > > > > > If we were to derive something theoretically, it would totally > > > > depend on the parameters you chose for your hyperbolic discounting > > > > function (How much do you discount tomorrow versus today, over and > > > > above how much you discount the day after versus tomorrow? And > > > > also, what is the actual length of “today,” for akratic purposes? > > > > The right timescale might be a minute or an hour or a week rather > > > > than a day.) I see no reason why we know these “fundamental” > > > > parameters (or, indeed, that they truly mean anything more > > > > fundamental, as opposed to being a convenient theoretical modeling > > > > device) than the parameter of a week that’s been chosen here. > > > > > > > David > > > > > > > On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Johnicholas wrote: > > > > > > > > I understand the value of simple, comprehensible user interfaces, > > > > > but speaking purely theoretically (and therefore impractically), > > > > > the “one week” aspect is obviously not a theoretically-motivated > > > > > parameter. > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have ideas of what the “dial” would look like if we cast > > > > > simplicity to the winds, > > > > > and try to get a theoretically-motivated number? > > > > > For example, we might assume that the user is acting based on > > > > > hyperbolic discounting, > > > > > prefers to go off the road rather than stay on the road today, > > > > > and prefers to stay on the road forever rather than go off the road > > > > > forever. > > > > > > > > > > Can we use that, and some algebra and get, for example, > > > > > that the horizon ought to be some specific function of the degree of > > > > > adjustment? > > > > > > > > > > Johnicholas > > > > > > > – > > > > My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) > > > > > > > “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln > > > > > > – > > > Best regards, > > > Alexander [mailto:miro23@gmail.com](mailto:miro23@gmail.com) > > – > [http://dreev.es](http://dreev.es) – search://“Daniel Reeves” > Follow the Yellow Brick Road – [http://beeminder.com](http://beeminder.com) – My home page: [http://www.davidreiley.com](http://www.davidreiley.com) “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” – Abraham Lincoln