Hacker News Reader

I don’t have full context but why it does not make sense to invest in bringing down the error in measuring a very important metric ?

I used to barbecue using my experience(eyeballing it), and many times I was getting food cooked pretty well, but it was very unpredictable.

After I bought remote thermometer I consistently cook my food to perfect temperature.

View on HN

Because the measurement itself was noisy, and unless the operational metric was updated, it would never be stable. I’ve experienced this hell, where a client is “red” or “yellow” based on an a phone call with an account manager. That assessment is one of many inputs to a flawed operational metric that swings wildly.

To extend your metaphor, imagine if you were constrained to only visually asses the food. Your fancy new remote monitoring system is simply a camera that allows a stupidly expensive pitmaster view your food and make an expert assessment. The result might get a little better, but it’s (probably) never going to be as good as using an actual thermometer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com