The author makes a good point, but I don't think it's even the main part of the problem. In e.g. notifications cause people to open the app, they are optimizing the wrong objective function. Getting people to open the app isn't your objective. If you just want people to open your app as many times as possible, you should actually close the app so that they can open it again.
E.g. when an app sends me an unwanted notification, I open the app so that I can turn off notifications.
Similar to the p=0.05 issue in science, for every bad product decision someone wants to make, there is another bad objective function that it appears to optimize. Just because someone provides a justification doesn't mean it's justified. You need to make sure that changes are improvements in the things that actually matter.
That reminds me when I installed Tik Tok to see how it was. You could disable notifications for likes/comments on your videos, but not the trending videos notifications. I uninstalled it to get rid of the notifications
I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a friend about installing solar panels. When I asked how to aim the panels to optimize for the most electricity, he quickly pointed out it optimized for the wrong thing. "You point the panels for the power company, not for electricity".
And that's true. And the power company is doing the same thing, so peak power keeps shifting not for efficient electric use, but to get more revenue.
On the subject of notifications, people are being bombarded these days. I've found that turning off most notifications helps me focus. Even Messages is turned off so that I only see them if look at the badge or go into the app.
For emails I've switched off the badge even, and I need to actively go in and look for emails in order to see if there's something new. I wholeheartedly recommend this approach.
It allows you to work or do something calmly for an hour or two without being interrupted.
Then it turns into everyone turning off all their notifications. What was originally a reasonable amount of notifications on a smartphone 5 or 7 years ago has now grown to such ridiculous amounts (often notifications for things I don't even care about) that the apps competing for my attention are cannibalize each other and consequently they've collectively destroyed the market for my attention, by me choosing to turn off all notifications.
Notifications have essentially become a "tragedy of the commons" problem. Everyone optimizing for their self interest ended up creating all losers.
I have done the same for a few years now. No work on my phone either. I am not out of the loop, the loop is there whether I check for it now or at the end of the day, and got over the "Fear of Missing Out" pretty quickly.
I really enjoy this article, because as simple as the point is, there's something a bit novel taking what we've discovered in Machine Learning and applying it to general life outlook strategies. I've often had this intuition about the best strategy through life is having a dynamic shifting goal/feedback horizon between 'long shots' and 'short-term heads-down' life focus, but the article far better articulates the form of this strategy.
Another ML metaphor is this: don't just start from one point and do gradient descent. Try starting at many different points and working your way through the descent logic. It may be more trial and error and more dead ends, but you might indeed find your global minimum.
To speak like a human: try new things and don't give up on them immediately.
Another ML metaphor: I wonder if the concept of an identity crisis is a way to dislodge yourself from a local minimum? You know something better is out there, but you haven't done enough exploration so eventually you rebel and give up your comfortable little basin.
[+] [-] singron|6 years ago|reply
E.g. when an app sends me an unwanted notification, I open the app so that I can turn off notifications.
Similar to the p=0.05 issue in science, for every bad product decision someone wants to make, there is another bad objective function that it appears to optimize. Just because someone provides a justification doesn't mean it's justified. You need to make sure that changes are improvements in the things that actually matter.
[+] [-] thiagomgd|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m463|6 years ago|reply
I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a friend about installing solar panels. When I asked how to aim the panels to optimize for the most electricity, he quickly pointed out it optimized for the wrong thing. "You point the panels for the power company, not for electricity".
And that's true. And the power company is doing the same thing, so peak power keeps shifting not for efficient electric use, but to get more revenue.
[+] [-] rohan1024|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kevinmgranger|6 years ago|reply
Please don't give them any ideas.
[+] [-] sgt|6 years ago|reply
For emails I've switched off the badge even, and I need to actively go in and look for emails in order to see if there's something new. I wholeheartedly recommend this approach.
It allows you to work or do something calmly for an hour or two without being interrupted.
[+] [-] JMTQp8lwXL|6 years ago|reply
Notifications have essentially become a "tragedy of the commons" problem. Everyone optimizing for their self interest ended up creating all losers.
[+] [-] ehnto|6 years ago|reply
One of my finest decisions.
[+] [-] jadbox|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asdfman123|6 years ago|reply
To speak like a human: try new things and don't give up on them immediately.
Another ML metaphor: I wonder if the concept of an identity crisis is a way to dislodge yourself from a local minimum? You know something better is out there, but you haven't done enough exploration so eventually you rebel and give up your comfortable little basin.
[+] [-] icandoit|6 years ago|reply
Imagine a job board that maximized its users income over time.
These would become essential services, right? Let's line up these incentives :).
[+] [-] jacques_chester|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] proc0|6 years ago|reply