I read Jay Yang’s “You Can Just Do Things”. Good book, good stories, and good reminder. Importantly, I purchased a physical copy for my eldest. I’m hoping it inspires him. And, it is a good reminder to keep buying him books along these lines. Something will hit.

Thinking more about “Useful Not True”. It occurs to me that this idea is known by many different names across many different fields. I was thinking about instrumentalism and the placebo effect. But chatting with chatgpt shows many more (obvious in retrospect). Here are some: 🧠 Psychology & Cognitive Science Cognitive Reframing / Cognitive Restructuring Changing the way you interpret events so your emotional and behavioral responses are more helpful. (CBT uses this heavily.) Placebo Effect A belief that isn’t objectively true (“this sugar pill heals me”) still triggers real, measurable benefits. Positive Illusions Term from psychology for mildly inaccurate self-beliefs (“I’m more capable than average”) that improve motivation, health, and resilience. Adaptive Denial Temporarily refusing to believe a discouraging truth to maintain hope and action (often studied in trauma and recovery). Self-Deception as Strategy Evolutionary psychology suggests humans deceive themselves so they can more convincingly influence others. 📚 Philosophy Pragmatism (William James, John Dewey, Richard Rorty) A belief is “true” if it works in practice — if it leads to successful action. James explicitly said: “Truth is what is useful to believe.” Instrumentalism From philosophy of science: theories don’t need to be true, only useful for prediction (e.g., Newtonian physics is “wrong” but incredibly useful). Fictionalism We act as if certain things exist (numbers, morals, nations) even if they don’t, because the fiction organizes life productively. Noble Lie (Plato, Republic) Myths or beliefs that may not be literally true but hold society together and motivate virtue. 📖 Literature, Religion & Myth Myth as Metaphor Stories in religion/mythology are not “true” literally but serve moral, cultural, or existential functions. Suspension of Disbelief (Coleridge) Temporarily accepting something you know isn’t true so you can immerse and benefit from the story. Similar to adopting useful beliefs. Faith as Pragmatic In some religious traditions, belief is valuable not for truth claims but for shaping conduct and community. 💼 Business & Performance Visionary Fictions Entrepreneurs hold “unrealistic” beliefs about what’s possible — beliefs not objectively true yet — which motivate innovation. Growth Mindset (Carol Dweck) Believing “ability can always improve” may not be objectively true in every domain, but it drives persistence and better outcomes. Fake It Till You Make It Acting as if you already are something (confident, disciplined, skilled) even if it’s not true — until it becomes closer to true. 🎲 Game Theory & Evolution Credible Commitment Through Self-Deception Sometimes it’s useful not to know the truth so your actions are more convincing to others (e.g., bluffing in poker, signaling in negotiations). Evolutionary Adaptive Illusions Some inaccurate perceptions (e.g., overestimating control, optimism bias) improve survival and reproduction. 🌱 Modern Self-Development Useful Beliefs (Chris Helder) — literally a motivational framework named after the same principle. Affirmations — self-statements you may not believe yet, repeated until they shape behavior and identity. “As If” Principle (Richard Wiseman) — act as if you already feel/are something, and your psychology often follows. I’ve done enough marketing to not dismiss all this out of hand. ...

Yesterday I read Derek Sivers’ “Useful No True”. Should there be a comma in that title? Anyway, good book. I think the thesis is something like: Actions over beliefs. Hack your beliefs to achieve desired actions. Gaslight oneself? This is not bad. We all do this anyway, just take the reigns. Via chatgpt5: The book argues that we should adopt beliefs, perspectives, and thoughts not because they are absolutely true, but because they are useful. Its central idea is reframing: deliberately shifting the way we interpret reality in order to act more effectively, feel more at peace, or achieve our goals. ...

I read Florian Ernotte’s “Writing with LLM is not a shame. An essay about transparency on AI use.” Something like: The demands for AI disclosure often represent “empty vigilance” and conformity rather than genuine ethics, that ethical standards for such new technology are still being developed and shouldn’t be rigidly enforced yet and the AI disclosure is only relevant when content is good and valuable I was then reading HN comments on the post and read this: ...

I have been thinking a lot about Gian Segato’s post, see Probabilistic Era. The job of building software for people, i.e. software engineering is about taking an open problem, making it closed so we can build it and verify we have built it with tests (of various sorts). The problem is open because it is for humans or involves humans. We’re not building a bridge, we’re solving some vague business problem with semi-automation, or something. ...

I just read Gian Segato’s “Building AI Products In The Probabilistic Era”. Good read. Good take. But, it makes sense. He’s a data scientist and we (as a community) have had to think this way for 10-15 years when working with narrow probabilistic models. But, the scope has changed. Inputs and outputs are open-ended. His examples around replit are good, e.g. constraining the use case to code gen for websites would prevent other use cases like code gen for games. ...

It would be nice to have a tiny store online that could just sit there for decades. Focus on one tiny and useful need and do it well, world class. Sell one or a few tiny products or services for that one thing. Not a full time thing, free content, self-serve product sales with on-demand support. I guess SuperFastPython fits the bill, but even it’s scope is too large. Ideally one thing. One algorithm, or one data structure, or one library/module. ...

I was listening to an Acquired episode and the guest mentioned the role of computers (people) being replaced by electronic computers, and how programming/coding will/is seeing the same fate. Here’s the episode: How is AI Different Than Other Technology Waves? (With Bret Taylor and Clay Bavor) And here on YouTube where I got the transcript. Here’s the quote: I self-identify as a computer programmer. It’s like the thing I like to do the most. And I’m like, man, that’s sort of like saying I’m—do remember like the calculators, people who like calculated things before we had calculators? I’m like, am I that? ...

Among Ronald Fisher’s many contributions to statistics, genetics, and evolutionary theory at large was his “fundamental theorem of natural selection”: “The rate of increase in fitness of any organism at any time is equal to its genetic variance in fitness at that time.” See: Fisher’s fundamental theorem of natural selection, Wikipedia. In plain language (with llm help): “The rate at which a population becomes better adapted (its average fitness increases) is directly proportional to the amount of genetic variation for fitness it already has.” ...

Machine Learning Street Talk is a YouTube channel and podcast by Tim Scarfe and sometimes Keith Duggar. I’m a fan of the podcast, and have been for some time. Follow them on X here: Machine Learning Street Talk Recently, like this northern hemisphere summer, they have been releasing fantastic episodes. Both the quality of the guests and the quality of the questions/discussion. Riveting stuff. Specifically: The Secret Ingredient for AI Creativity A chat with Kenneth Stanley. Did a 7 Year Old Really Solve the Universe? A chat with Guillaume Verdon. Mutually Assured AI Malfunction (Superintelligence Strategy) A chat with Dan Hendrycks. All three had be sitting and staring into space for a long time, thinking through things. Not sure I’m smart enough to keep up at double speed, a few listens are required. ...