| name | thinking-lindy-effect |
| description | Choosing a technology/framework/dependency and longevity matters. Use the heuristic that for non-perishable things, expected remaining life is proportional to current age — favor the proven. |
The Lindy Effect
Overview
The Lindy Effect, named after a New York deli where comedians discussed career longevity, states that for non-perishable things (ideas, technologies, books, practices), future life expectancy is proportional to current age. If a technology has survived 20 years, it's likely to survive another 20. If it's survived 2 years, expect another 2.
Core Principle: Time is the ultimate test. Old things that still exist have proven their value; new things are still being tested.
When to Use
- Technology selection (languages, frameworks, databases)
- Evaluating libraries and dependencies
- Predicting tool longevity
- Career skill investment
- Methodology and practice adoption
- Architectural patterns
- Vendor/product selection
Decision flow:
Choosing between options?
→ Are some options significantly older? → yes → APPLY LINDY HEURISTIC
→ Is longevity important for this choice? → yes → FAVOR OLDER, PROVEN OPTIONS
→ Is the new thing solving a new problem? → yes → NEW MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE
When NOT to Use
- Not for perishable things — specific SaaS vendors, individual products, hardware, fashion-driven choices. Age predicts survival only for non-perishable ideas/technologies/practices.
- Not when a paradigm shift is underway. Lindy holds within a stable paradigm; a discontinuity (cloud, LLMs) can make the old thing's age irrelevant. If the ground is moving, age is not evidence.
- Not as a tiebreaker for short-lived/experimental work where longevity doesn't matter — pick on fit, not age.
- Don't read Lindy as "old = best." Survival predicts further survival; it does not say the old option is optimal for a new requirement. The burden of proof is on the new — but the new can meet it.
Trigger Card
When choosing a technology, framework, or dependency and longevity matters:
- Check the age — how long has this option survived? For non-perishable things (ideas, technologies, institutions), expected remaining life is proportional to current age.
- Verify it's non-perishable — is the option subject to rapid obsolescence (JS framework) or cumulative knowledge (database, language, protocol)? Lindy only applies to the latter.
- Favor the proven over the new — let the new option carry the burden of proof. Pick the older option unless the new one demonstrates a clear, necessary advantage.
Skip for short-lived/experimental work where longevity doesn't matter. "Old" isn't automatically "best" — survival predicts further survival, not optimality for a new requirement.
Understanding Lindy
What Lindy Applies To (Non-Perishable)
- Technologies: Languages, databases, protocols
- Ideas: Mathematical concepts, design patterns, algorithms
- Practices: Testing, version control, code review
- Books: Technical references, foundational texts
- Institutions: Standards bodies, open source foundations
What Lindy Doesn't Apply To (Perishable)
- Hardware: Physical degradation limits life
- Individual careers: Humans have biological limits
- Specific products: Companies can fail, be acquired
- Fashion-driven choices: Popularity cycles aren't Lindy
The Math
Expected remaining life ≈ Current age
If survived 10 years → Expected to survive another ~10
If survived 50 years → Expected to survive another ~50
If survived 2 years → Expected to survive another ~2
Applying Lindy to Technology
Programming Languages
| Language | Age | Lindy Expectation | Evidence |
|---|
| C | 50+ years | 50+ more years | Powers OS, embedded, will outlive us |
| Java | 30 years | 30+ more years | Enterprise backbone, not going away |
| Python | 30 years | 30+ more years | Scientific computing, ML, scripting |
| Go | 15 years | 15+ more years | Proven for infra, backed by Google |
| Rust | 10 years | 10+ more years | Growing, solving real problems |
| New hotness | 2 years | 2-5 years | Unproven, might disappear |
Databases
| Database | Age | Lindy Expectation | Notes |
|---|
| PostgreSQL | 35+ years | 35+ more years | SQL is 50+ years old |
| MySQL | 30 years | 30+ more years | LAMP stack foundation |
| MongoDB | 15 years | 15+ more years | Survived NoSQL hype cycle |
| CockroachDB | 10 years | 10+ more years | NewSQL, still proving itself |
| Latest DB | 2 years | Unknown | High risk for production use |
Frameworks
| Framework | Age | Lindy Expectation | Notes |
|---|
| React | 10+ years | 10+ more years | Dominant, ecosystem mature |
| Rails | 20 years | 20+ more years | Productive, battle-tested |
| Django | 18 years | 18+ more years | Python's Rails, stable |
| Express | 14 years | 14+ more years | Node.js standard |
| Newest framework | 1 year | 1-3 years | Likely to be replaced |
Patterns and Practices
| Practice | Age | Lindy Expectation |
|---|
| Version control | 50+ years | Permanent |
| Automated testing | 40+ years | Permanent |
| Code review | 40+ years | Permanent |
| Agile (core ideas) | 30+ years | Very long |
| CI/CD | 20+ years | Very long |
| Microservices | 10 years | Moderate |
| Latest methodology | 2 years | Unknown |
The Lindy Decision Process
Step 1: Assess Age of Options
For each option, determine how long it's been in significant use:
Options for message queue:
- RabbitMQ: 17 years (2007)
- Kafka: 13 years (2011)
- NATS: 11 years (2013)
- NewQueue: 2 years (2022)
Step 2: Apply Lindy Heuristic
Lindy expectation:
- RabbitMQ: 17+ more years
- Kafka: 13+ more years
- NATS: 11+ more years
- NewQueue: 2-5 more years (high uncertainty)
Step 3: Consider Context
Lindy is a heuristic, not a law. Consider:
When older is better:
- Long-term production systems
- Core infrastructure
- Skills investment
- Dependencies with many consumers
When newer might be appropriate:
- Solving genuinely new problems
- Performance-critical new workloads
- Specific capability older tools lack
- Temporary/experimental projects
Step 4: Calibrate by Ecosystem Age
A 5-year-old tool in a 5-year-old ecosystem is "old" for that ecosystem:
Kubernetes ecosystem: ~10 years old
- Helm: 8 years → "Lindy" for K8s
- ArgoCD: 7 years → "Lindy" for K8s
- New tool: 1 year → Not Lindy yet
Node.js ecosystem: 14 years old
- Express: 14 years → Maximally Lindy for Node
- Fastify: 8 years → Moderately Lindy
- New framework: 1 year → Unproven
Lindy Failure Modes
Survivor Bias Confusion
Lindy predicts future survival given current survival. It doesn't say all old things are good:
Correct: "COBOL has survived 60 years, will survive 60 more"
Incorrect: "COBOL is the best choice for new projects"
(Survival ≠ Optimal for new use cases)
Ignoring Paradigm Shifts
Lindy works within stable paradigms. Paradigm shifts create discontinuities:
- Pre-cloud: On-premise databases were Lindy
- Post-cloud: Managed databases emerged
- But: Core database concepts (SQL, ACID) remained Lindy
Confusing Perishable and Non-Perishable
Perishable: Specific SaaS vendor → Can be acquired, pivoted, shut down
Non-perishable: The practice the vendor enables → Likely Lindy
E.g., Heroku might change, but "platform-as-a-service" concept is Lindy
Lindy in Practice
Technology Selection
## Lindy Analysis: Database for New Product
Requirements: ACID transactions, relational data, long-term stability
Options:
| Option | Age | Lindy Score | Fit for Requirements |
|--------|-----|-------------|---------------------|
| PostgreSQL | 35 years | Excellent | Excellent |
| MySQL | 30 years | Excellent | Good |
| CockroachDB | 10 years | Good | Excellent |
| PlanetScale | 5 years | Moderate | Good |
Decision: PostgreSQL (Lindy + excellent fit)
Consider CockroachDB for scale needs (worth the Lindy tax)
Skill Investment
## Lindy Career Analysis
Which skills to invest in?
Lindy skills (high confidence in future value):
- SQL (50+ years)
- Unix/Linux (50+ years)
- Git/version control (40+ years)
- Testing fundamentals (40+ years)
Moderate Lindy (good bet):
- Python (30+ years)
- JavaScript (28 years)
- Docker/containers (12 years)
- Kubernetes (10 years)
Low Lindy (speculative):
- Latest framework (1-3 years)
- Trending language (variable)
Investment strategy: Core in Lindy skills, experiments in new
Dependency Selection
## Lindy Dependency Audit
For each critical dependency:
| Dependency | Age | Last Update | Contributors | Lindy Risk |
|------------|-----|-------------|--------------|------------|
| lodash | 12 years | Active | Many | Low |
| express | 14 years | Active | Many | Low |
| new-lib | 1 year | Active | 3 | High |
Policy: Critical path requires 5+ year Lindy
Experimental features can use newer dependencies
Lindy Template
# Lindy Analysis: [Decision]
## Options with Age
| Option | First Stable | Age | Category |
|--------|--------------|-----|----------|
| | | | Proven/Moderate/New |
## Lindy Expectations
| Option | Expected Longevity | Confidence |
|--------|-------------------|------------|
| | | High/Medium/Low |
## Context Adjustments
- Is this a new problem domain? [Yes/No]
- Is the ecosystem mature? [Yes/No]
- Do newer options solve critical gaps? [Yes/No]
## Lindy-Adjusted Decision
Primary choice: [Option with best Lindy + fit]
Rationale: [Why this balances Lindy with requirements]
## Risk if Lindy is Wrong
[What happens if the non-Lindy option outlasts expectations?]
Verification Checklist
Key Questions
- "How long has this technology/practice existed?"
- "Is this Lindy (non-perishable) or perishable?"
- "What's the Lindy expectation for each option?"
- "Is the newer option solving a problem that didn't exist before?"
- "Am I betting against Lindy? If so, why?"
- "What's proven vs. what's hyped?"
Taleb's Wisdom
"If a book has been in print for forty years, I can expect it to be in print for another forty years. But, and that is the main difference, if it survives another decade, then it will be expected to be in print another fifty years."
"Technology is at its best when it is invisible."
The technologies you don't think about—TCP/IP, Unix, SQL—are the most Lindy. The technologies that demand constant attention are still being tested.
"The old is to be respected; the new is to be examined."
Lindy doesn't mean reject the new. It means: the burden of proof is on the new. New must demonstrate value; old has already demonstrated survival.
