tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

thinking-lindy-effect

Use when longevity of a non-perishable option matters. Treat survival duration as a remaining-life prior, then check domain drift before favoring the proven.

First seen Mar 12, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-lindy-effect

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills · top by installs.

npx skills add tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

Browse all from tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 1.3K
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 2
Status Active

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 2,605 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 186 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 357 installs

SKILL.md

Lindy Effect

For non-perishable ideas, technologies, and practices, expected remaining life scales with current survival age. Prefer proven survivors unless the new option clears a burden of proof or the domain has drifted.

When to Use

  • Choosing languages, frameworks, databases, protocols, patterns, or dependencies where long-term survival matters.
  • Skill or architecture bets whose value depends on lasting relevance.
  • Ranking options when ages differ materially and the choice outlives a short experiment.

When NOT to Use

  • Perishable targets: specific SaaS vendors, hardware, fashion, or products that can shut down regardless of concept age.
  • Active paradigm discontinuity where age in the old regime is weak evidence.
  • Throwaway work where longevity is irrelevant — optimize for fit and speed.
  • Treating "older" as "optimal for a new requirement"; survival predicts further survival, not best fit.

Procedure

  1. Confirm non-perishable scope. Concept/tech/practice continues; vendor/device → score fit/risk only and stop.
  2. Record survival age. First significant production use and current age (ecosystem-relative if the ecosystem is young).
  3. Form the Lindy prior. Expected remaining life ≈ current age; mark confidence from age and continued active use.
  4. Run domain-drift checks. Problem class changed? Paradigm shift invalidating old assumptions? New option uniquely closes a real present gap?
  5. Assign burden of proof. Default to the older adequate option. Accept newer only for a stated necessary advantage the Lindy option cannot meet at acceptable cost.
  6. Decide with residual risk. Pick primary; note impact if the prior is wrong and any fallback.

Stop condition: Primary chosen with age prior, drift check, and why new did or did not meet burden of proof.

Output

Options: <name, age, Lindy prior>
Drift: stable | discontinuous — <note>
Burden: on new | waived because <gap>
Decision: <primary>
Rejected: <one line each>
If Lindy wrong: <impact + fallback>

Verification

  • Falsify if age was used without non-perishable scope, or a paradigm shift was ignored.
  • Falsify if a new option was rejected solely for youth despite a documented necessary gap.
  • Over-application guard: skip throwaway prototypes and perishable vendor bets where fit and exit cost dominate.