vault backup: 2026-05-01 22:53:53

.obsidian/command-palette.json

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+{
+  "pinned": [
+    "editor:toggle-source"
+  ]
+}

.obsidian/hotkeys.json

@@ -69,5 +69,13 @@
       "key": "C"
     }
   ],
-  "table-editor-obsidian:table-control-bar": []
+  "table-editor-obsidian:table-control-bar": [],
+  "editor:toggle-source": [
+    {
+      "modifiers": [
+        "Alt"
+      ],
+      "key": "S"
+    }
+  ]
 }

orthodox-construction-estimating.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ Such methods lack the ability to intelligently express [[uncertainty]].
 
 ### Limitations of Orthodox Methods
 
-A hallmark of orthodox estimating methods is "Detailed Takeoff",
+A hallmark of orthodox estimating methods is "detailed takeoff",
 which seeks to [[estimate-decomposition|decompose]]
 an estimate to _all_ its constituent subcosts,
 including 100% itemized pricing by way of a **material extension**,

timestamped/2026-05-01_20-37-29.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+---
+id: 2026-05-01T20:37:29-0400
+title: 2026-05-01 20:37:29
+tags: []
+daily: "[[2026-05-01]]"
+---
+# 2026-05-01 20:37:29
+
+Earlier [[2026-05-01|today]]
+while editing [[orthodox-construction-estimating]]
+my frustration with the term "detailed takeoff" was reignited
+and I searched in vain for the term describing its type:
+
+> a name which presupposes some quality of the subject
+> which is not inherent to it.[^1]
+
+[^1]: "Detailed takeoff" is more a victim of the common positive connotation of "detailed",
+    which seems to exist for all adjectives synonymous in the same context like "precise".
+    The common connotation is what's frustrating, I suppose.
+    Surely everyone has seen the comparison of the targets
+    and knows that precision says nothing meaningful about performance.
+
+My search came up empty,
+which didn't surprise me,
+I've never cured a case of [lethologica](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tip_of_the_tongue)
+with Google or LLM's.
+(but I keep trying)
+
+Later I found the answer in [[merrow_2022_contract-strategies]]:
+Merrow regrets the relevance implied
+by the [_value-laden_](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/value-laden) term
+[[statistical-significance]].
+
+***
+
+It is said often
+that [[construction-estimating]] in some or all part art,
+not wholly science.
+This attitude is a coping mechanism
+excusing our acceptance of a deeply flawed status quo,
+and our unwillingness to look for answers
+to questions that our methods have begged for decades.
+
+Due to obstacles discussed in [[kahneman_2011_thinking]]
+repeated in [[hubbard_2020_failure]],
+construction estimating as a profession
+suffers from poor conditions for natural improvement of [[estimator-calibration]],
+namely delayed and uninformative feedback.
+As a consequence,
+decisions are made on [[gut-feel]] at best,
+and superstition at worst.
+The suitability of estimating methods
+is judged based on [value](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(ethics))[^2]
+and [aesthetic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics).
+rather than [empirical evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence).
+
+[^2]: [Value judgment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_judgment)
+
+***
+
+What makes a good estimator
+(besides their ability to click all the little circles on a drawing)
+is their judgement, the quality of their assumptions.
+Herein lies the paradox of [[orthodox-construction-estimating]]:
+_assumptions are only necessitated by its incompatibility with [[uncertainty]]._
+
+***
+
+Construction estimating is pure science,
+acceptability is the art.