Priority queues, not todo lists

Whether it's pushpin, poetry or neither, you can discuss it here.

Priority queues, not todo lists

Postby Brian Tomasik on 2012-08-14T13:59:00

It's common for people, including myself, to think of their tasks in a todo-list fashion: "Items I1, I2, and I3 are important, so let me put them on my todo list and get them done."

But what happens when you have to much to do -- when your list grows to I1, ..., I50? The situation can feel stressful, because it seems like "I have to get all the things on my list done. How am I ever going to do it? Maybe I'll just have to push myself really hard and use my adrenaline?" That's how a perfectionist might approach the situation. If you don't get everything on your list done, things won't be "perfect." This may lead you to overwork yourself and burn out. Or it might lead you to feel that the situation is hopeless and lose motivation to start on anything.

I've been keeping a personal utilitarian todo list for at least ~5 years now, and it's literally a 30-page Google Docs document with somewhere in the range of 500 to 1000 items (some big, some small). In addition to this, I have extra todo lists scattered across other Google Docs targeted to specific projects. As time goes on, the list only grows rather than shrinking, and given this trend, I have no hope of finishing everything on it before the rapture.

But this is okay. In fact, this is how todo lists are supposed to be. It's an illusion to imagine that the tasks you need to do are exactly as big or as small as a set of items written down somewhere. That list may reflect a random assortment of ideas that happened to come into your head at various times. But if you sat down and thought about other things you could do, you could add to that list, and you might be able to do so indefinitely.

Instead, as utilitarianism itself shows us, life's tasks are a series of calls to the pull_highest_priority_element function on a priority queue, where the priority of each task is roughly its expected benefit divided by its cost, with intelligent consideration of temporal ordering. (For example, if X is really valuable, such that its benefit would far exceed the cost of doing it now, but if you could do X at much lower cost by waiting until next week without much less benefit, then you should probably wait until next week. This is similar to the reason for doing the items in the upper left quadrant of Stephen Covey's important-urgent matrix before those in the upper right: The opportunity cost of doing an important-but-not-urgent task is higher when you have other important-and-urgent tasks than when you're less busy with urgent things.)

So todo lists should really be priority queues. This means that when it feels like "you have too much to do," you don't have to feel stressed out about it. Sort the items by priority, do the most important ones, and don't worry too much when you don't get to everything. "Work smarter, not harder." Conversely, if you finish your todo list, you're not really done: Go off and think of more items to add to the queue. :) But realize that tasks can include things like sleep, talking with friends, taking an hour off for a mindless activity, or whatever else keeps you sane.

P.S., if I don't reply to this thread immediately, it's because I've put other things higher on my priority queue. ;)
User avatar
Brian Tomasik
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:10 am
Location: USA

Re: Priority queues, not todo lists

Postby peterhurford on 2012-08-14T19:40:00

I like the priority queue idea. I've had a long to-do list, and usually put forth a "if I accomplish all of this, I'll have had a productive day" sub-queue. Inevitably, I've never had a fully productive day, but I've come close.

Can you tell me a bit more about what's on your priority queue? I'd love to know what are high value tasks for other utilitarians.

Also, nitpick:

where the priority of each task is roughly its expected benefit divided by its cost


Shouldn't this be minus its cost?
Felicifia Head Admin | Ruling Felicifia with an iron fist since 2012.

Personal Site: www.peterhurford.com
Utilitarian Blog: Everyday Utilitarian

Direct Influencer Scoreboard: 2 Meatless Monday-ers, 1 Vegetarian, and 2 Giving What We Can 10% pledges.
User avatar
peterhurford
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 11:19 pm
Location: Denison University

Re: Priority queues, not todo lists

Postby Nap on 2012-08-14T20:13:00

Hmmm good post, but I don't think of to-do lists like this.

To me a to-do list are mostly things I "need" to do. Things I want to do I leave off the list and just choose on a whim which I want or don't want to do. So to me a to-do list tends to be things I don't want to do that I feel like I need to do. i.e. I need to study for my next exam so I don't fail. I would never really consider putting "spending time with friends" on it.

I guess I should call it a "need to-do list".

I think an important difference between a to-do list and a need to-do list is that a need to do list are more finite. Once you are living a perfect (in your eyes) life there isn't really any thing you view as being some thing you need to do. To a utilitarian this is so much harder to get to though, because to us, we wont be living our idea of a perfect (or close to perfect) life until others are living in their idea of one.

I also think that with a bit a creative problem solving one could make that list considerable shorter.

Off the top of my head I can only think of one example, I can't remember who said the quote but it was some thing alone the lines of, every problem caused by humans could be fixed if we get rid of humans. This was taken out of context for obvious reasons, but it does serve to make a certain point.

If your to-do list is very long you could cut it down to just one item on the list, kill your self. Obviously this doesn't seem like a good idea, but it is a different approach one could have to shorten a list.

A less extreme way of stating this idea would be to say that some times a solution to a problem might not be to fix the problem but to make the problem not a problem any more (if this makes sense to you).

I think this can lead to good and bad ideas though.

Example of a good one:

I live in an area affected by drought, my problem is my grass is dying, I need to add watering my lawn to the list of things I need to do. OR you can add "I need to replace my lawn with some thing that doesn't need as much regular watering." Maybe a flower bed with flowers resistant to drought in addition to other items that fill space so you don't have as much grass to water.

It might take a bit more time to do this than watering your lawn once, but from then on you wont be adding "watering the lawn" to your list which cuts back on things you need to do in the future.

An example of a bad one:

We have a problem with pollution. Solution, ignore it.
When did empathy become a mental illness?
User avatar
Nap
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:25 am

Re: Priority queues, not todo lists

Postby Pablo Stafforini on 2012-08-18T01:13:00

I keep my to-do list on Toodledo, which allows one to associate a priority to each item. Because I sort tasks by priority, my own to-do list is what Brian would call a "priority queue."

Incidentally, I have tried many to-do apps over the years, and Toodledo is, by a wide margin, the one I liked the most. I highly recommend it.

Added December 2014: I no longer use ToodleDo; my preferred task-management app is Asana.
"‘Méchanique Sociale’ may one day take her place along with ‘Mécanique Celeste’, throned each upon the double-sided height of one maximum principle, the supreme pinnacle of moral as of physical science." -- Francis Ysidro Edgeworth
User avatar
Pablo Stafforini
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 2:07 am
Location: Oxford

Re: Priority queues, not todo lists

Postby Brian Tomasik on 2012-08-19T18:52:00

peterhurford wrote:
where the priority of each task is roughly its expected benefit divided by its cost

Shouldn't this be minus its cost?

Yeah, so there are two ways to use terminology here.

The first is to regard costs as resources to be expended. For example, if you have $5K to donate, you pick the charity that does the most good per dollar and donate there. If you have 5 hours left before you die, you pick the thing that will do the most good per hour. This is how I was using the phrase.

The second way is to turn resources into "opportunity costs" as economists do by saying that the cost of using resource X is the value of the next-best thing you could have done with resource X. At this point, the cost has been converted to the utility scale and so can be subtracted. By definition, only the best option will have a benefit exceeding its opportunity costs.

peterhurford wrote:Can you tell me a bit more about what's on your priority queue? I'd love to know what are high value tasks for other utilitarians.

Some random examples:
  • Remember to add donations to my donor-advised fund.
  • Ask some animal charities if they're using Google Grants yet. Follow up on the status of The Humane League's application.
  • Set the beneficiary for my 401k and insurance.
  • Increase the allowances on my W4.
  • Give more feedback on the Effective Animal Activism site.
  • Ask more friends if I should update the formatting of my website along the lines described here.
  • Discuss earmarking with the Center for Effective Altruism.
  • Write a Felicifia post on "Utilitarianism to SIA" eventually.
  • Add some quotes to "Do Insects Feel Pain?"
  • Remind friends at work to match their Vegan Outreach donations.
  • Review, edit, and add to Cost-effectiveness of animal charities write-up.
  • Skype with a friend about careers.
  • Write to professors to ask their thoughts on humane insecticides.
  • ...and pages and pages more.

Nap wrote:I think an important difference between a to-do list and a need to-do list is that a need to do list are more finite.

I've found that my "need to-do list" has become shorter now that I'm not in school, while my "good to-do list" has if anything become longer. It may be that the thinking behind the opening post was brought to my mind by the school-to-work transition.

That said, there's only a difference in degree rather than kind between "need to-do" and "good to-do." The value of not failing your courses is large but finite, so it theoretically could be compared with the other "good to-do" items. Indeed, you make such comparisons when you decide when you've done 'enough' studying; if you studied harder, your (remote) chance of failing could decrease further.

Nap wrote:A less extreme way of stating this idea would be to say that some times a solution to a problem might not be to fix the problem but to make the problem not a problem any more (if this makes sense to you).

Yep! For example, because I don't mind a messy apartment, I don't have to put "clean the apartment" on my todo list.

Thanks for the Toodledo recommendation, Pablo!
User avatar
Brian Tomasik
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:10 am
Location: USA


Return to General discussion