We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We also set performance and functionality cookies that help us make
improvements by measuring traffic on our site. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, please see our
privacy policy.
✖
Some basic ideas to consider:
There are way too many conflicting and understructured advice that can even be considered "Lindy", on the grounds of intermediary causes and relevance on the iteration-irreversibility continuum (rust-fire continuum for entropy) https://rogersbacon.substack.com/p/eponymous-laws-part-i-laws-of-the?s=r https://rogersbacon.substack.com/p/eponymous-laws-part-1-laws-of-the/comments?s=r
There are also counterfactuals and heresies that should be considered. A major clue is that certain taboo "stereotypes" are consistent, valid, and also useful. https://rogersbacon.substack.com/p/20-modern-heresies https://rogersbacon.substack.com/p/20-modern-heresies/comments https://desystemize.substack.com/p/desystemize-8?s=r
The last one is this: It is possible that influencers (even the justly successful ones) can make random irrelevant pseudo-Lindy advice, and they can make others miserable through forced replication. https://hardfork.substack.com/p/why-most-founders-dont-take-good https://swellandcut.com/2016/07/02/adam-grant-brene-brown-and-the-world-we-live-in-right-now/ https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/why-not-take-weightlifting-advice