Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by renaudg 3772 days ago
The problem is, doing more on some days to make up for others when you did nothing is well known not to be as effective as consistent daily progress : http://jonkarpman.blogspot.co.uk/
4 comments

It's unwise to extrapolate from one domain into another that doesn't follow the same models/rules.

If I walk 20 miles and my ultimate goal is to get to 10,000 miles, then 20 miles of effort translates into 20 miles of distance covered. It's a linear one-to-one no frills relationship. The units don't even change.

But if I'm doing push ups, my goal of 10,000 is actually a proxy goal for things like upper body strength and physical well being. In that context, the biological impact of 20 push ups x 3 days ≠ 60 push ups x 1 day, and no push ups the next two days.

You could plausibly resolve that by tracking an accumulated measure of consistency - ie: % of past N days that you did X, where X is the daily-stable goal.
The goal of reaching South Pole was time-limited. For my approach, it is _very important_ to not commit to deadlines.
You can spot your own fallacy in that one..