I’ve been having somewhat on and off relationship with Beeminder. I’m not going to waste time explaining
what it is as if it wasn’t done
and again all over the internet, but for the sake of keeping you on this page: it is a service that keeps you
motivated, using commitment contracts and a bit of money pledging. On one side I’m convinced this is absurd model and
we are rational enough to achieve our goals without pledging money on the progress. On the other side though: I can’t
stop procrastinating on my rationally chosen goals and somehow this relatively simple behavioral trick does wonders. I
can tell the difference in productivity between the time I’m actively using Beeminder and the time I’m off, and this
difference is as problematic as this is great: there is no long term effect to it all. It goes back to square one the
moment you decide to archive your goal or stop using the service altogether. Before I go into detail, a little
disclosure is due: I’m no psychologist or economist and my understanding is based on pretty anecdotal evidence. I’m not
going to pretend this all is somewhat objective and smartass, at least I don’t want you to have that impression.
So let’s start and create a goal. Actually, let’s create two goals: a Do More (steps done) and a Do Less (cups of
coffee). We’re tracking them for some time and we walk a lot and are extremely decaffeinated. After a couple of months
we decide we don’t need Beeminder anymore. We’ve grown over it. However, the next couple of days we suddenly notice
that we just don’t do as much walking as before and drink a lot of coffee, probably even more than we used too. What
happened? In my understanding Beeminder goal is a little economy in itself, an equivalent of Monopoly money. You have a
commodity (cups of coffee, day of sedentary lifestyle, etc) that you attempt to limit artificially through placing a
price on that. Thus the economy is born. Especially if you never retroratchet your goals it may get a little silly, as
you start accumulating your buffer and making spending decisions. For example: one cup of coffee costs 1 step of
Beeminder graph, you can accumulate steps available to you by saving, you can also inflate and deflate your Beeminder
step, or you can get some buffer in exchange for money. You always have the price for your negligence, so that the
negligence becomes a commodity in itself.
When you occasionally deflate the step too much by removing the goal or making it too easy — you create a situation
where the consumer (you) is subconsciously driven towards increase in consumption. You’re creating an economical
situation that has psychological consequences. In my opinion the problem is that eventually you remove your authentic
self from the loop: “I don’t drink this much coffee because it’s unhealthy” becomes “I don’t drink coffee
because I don’t have enough magic or real coins for that”. This substitution may be effective at first, but in the
long run it eventually comes to catching up on coffee when the artificial limitation drops. When you suddenly
have all the money in the world can you find enough willpower not to buy as much as you can carry? I noticed this
effect with various goals: not only it all returned to the original level, it got worse for some time. You may have
noticed similar problem with diets, as soon as you get off, all the weight is back and sometimes it gets even worse.
Beeminder treats the symptoms without fixing the underlying problem and that is the greatest limitation of this model.
What’s most troubling about all that, I don’t really have a solution in mind, only a hint of it. In his book
Irvin Yalom suggests a near death experience as a method of becoming a more motivated and authentic self. Of course
it’s a bit extreme, although there are exercises to emulate this effect to some degree. Somehow this idea also
correlates with Tim Urban’s
brilliant Ted talk on procrastination which makes me think there is something about this idea. In my opinion if
there is really somewhat universal key to finding your real authentic goals and sticking to them in the long run, it is
somewhere in the area of realizing our finitness and creating a short feedback circuit to review every day in the
perspective of the time we still have. Making every day the first day of the rest of your life. But there is still no
clear methodology, that would help you avoid being lulled into the mundane, the comfort zone of seemingly endless life,
full of mindless routine and the ensuing procrastination. Until we are there, let’s Beemind our way through.
Full disclaimer: the title is a total clickbait. Still I’m very concerned about
the current state of Instagram and the direction the site has taken. Here are
some of my grievances:
I haven't seen anyone but bots in a while. Sure, that's a gross
exaggeration, but it certainly feels like actual people are in the minority
on the site. Most accounts that like or follow me are
spambots or some low-tier SMM guys from developing world.
My major grievance is lack of posting in official API. Sure, there are unofficial private API wrappers, but why should users jump through the hoops? Limiting access to CRUD operations in public API is walled garden approach at its finest.
No links. Instagram prohibits adding clickable links and copying in both descriptions and comments. I understand they're doing it to minimize spam, but it's like getting rid of intestines to avoid diarrhea. Also, see the first point. How much should it take before ineffectiveness of this approach is evident? In the meanwhile there is no way for the regular user to share a link to a bigger story.
It doesn't cater towards its original target audience - the amateur photographers. Instagram is no longer a network for good phone photography (or attempts at that), most pics one sees today are selfies, which says a lot about the current target audience of the service. Introduction of Stories (which is 100% Snapchat rip-off) cemented this trend.
I’m still using the service for sharing what I deem interesting shots and occasional videos, but I’m also using Flickr as some kind of mirror feed and to be honest Instagram starts to feel like dead weight.
MongoDB $nin and $ne and $exists: false queries are super expensive. I mean there is a point at which they are basically unusable. And I learned it the hard way, having developed a service, that relies heavily on this kind of queries to emulate queue-like workflow. 5+ million documents later and I’m hurriedly adding indexes for all flags that take more than 60 seconds to query for.
Information on this issue is limited to a short FAQ entry at Mongo docs and a couple StackOverflow answers. That’s it. Come on, it should be the first thing people see, when they open Mongo docs - a huge dialog you should scroll through three times before you can click accept.
Let's play a game here. What HTTP code is this exception:
"message": "The browser (or proxy) sent a request that this server could not understand."
No no, you don't look at the code in response! That's cheating! This is actually a default Werkzeug description for 400 code. No shit. I thought something is bad with my headers or encryption, but I would never guess simple Bad request from this message. You could use a custom exception of course, the problem is, that the very useful abort(400) object (it's an Aborter in disguise) would stick with the default exception anyway.
Let's fix it, shall we?
There may be several possible ways of fixing that, but what I'm gonna do is just update abort.mapping. Create a separate module for your custom HTTP exceptions custom_http_exceptions.py and put a couple of overridden exceptions there (don't forget to import abort we'll be needing that in a moment):
from flask import abort
from werkzeug.exceptions import HTTPException
code = 400
description = 'Bad request.'
code = 404
description = 'Resource not found.'
These are perfectly functional, but we still need to add it to the default abort mapping:
I'm working in a project now, that requires a certain (server) environment to run, hence it is developed on my local machine and then gets deployed on remote server. I thought I'm gonna say bye bye to my favorite PyCharm feature, namely the debugger, but to my surprise remote debugging has been supported for years now. It took some time to figure out (tutorials online are a bit ambiguous), so here is a short report on my findings.
For the sake of this tutorial let's assume the following:
Remote host: foo_host.io
Remote user: foo_usr (/home/foo_usr/)
Local user: bar_usr (/home/bar_usr/)
Path to the project on the local machine: /home/bar_usr/proj
Here goes the step-by-step how-to:
First we need to set up remote deploy, if you haven't done so already. Go to Tools → Deployment → Configuration. And set up access to your remote server via SSH. I'd use:
SFTP host:foo_host.io (don't forget to test the connection before applying)
Port: 22 (obvously)
Auth type: Key pair (OpenSSH or PyTTY)
Private key file:/home/bar_usr/.ssh/id_rsa (you'd need to generate the key and ssh-copy-id it to the remote machine, which is outside of the scope of this tutorial).
Go to Mappings tab and add Deployment path on server (pehaps, the name of your project)
Now under Tools → Deployment you have an option to deploy your code to remote server. These first three steps could be replaced with simple Git repository on the side of the server, however I sometimes prefer this way.
Now when you have the deployment set up you can go Tools → Deployment → Upload to ..., note however, that it deploys only the file you have opened or the directory you selected in the project view, so if you need to sync the whole project just select your project root.
I use virtualenv, so at this step I need to ssh into the remote machine and set up virtualenv in your project directory (/home/foo_usr/test/.env), which is outside of the scope of this tutorial. If you're planning on using the global Pyhton interpreter, just skip this step.
Now let's go File → Settings → Project ... → Project Interpreter. Using gear button select Add Remote. The following dialog window would let you set up a remote interpreter over SSH (including remote .env), Vagrant or using deployment configuration you have set up previously. For the sake of this tutorial I'm going to put something like that there (using SSH of course):
If you set up everything correctly, it should list all the packages installed in your remote environment (if any) and select this interpreter for your project.
Now let's do the last, but the most important step: configure debugging. Go to Edit Configurations... menu and set things up accordingly. For our hypothetical project I will use the following:
Script: proj/run.py (or something along these lines)
Python interpreter: just select the remote interpreter you have set up earlier.
Working directory: /home/bar_usr/proj/ (note that this is working directory on local machine)
Path mapping: create a mapping along the lines of /home/bar_usr/proj = /home/foo_usr/proj (although this seems pretty easy, it may get tricky sometimes, when you forget about mappings and move the projects around, be careful).
That's it. Now we should have a more or less working configuration that you could use both for debugging and running your project. Don't forget to update/redeploy your project before running as the versions may get async and PyCharm would get all whiny about missing files.