> but a more realistic opinion is that they actually do matter, by warping how you think about the problem Yes, and this is a more general problem with tools.

> but a more realistic opinion is that they actually do matter, by warping how you think about the problem Yes, and this is a more general problem with tools. In some cases, the tool changes your attitude towards the activity in very subtle manner. A good example of this is the creation of the ballpoint pen and what it did to handwriting (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/08/ballpoint-pens-object-lesson-history-handwriting/402205/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/08/ballp...). > Fountain pens want to connect letters. Ballpoint pens need to be convinced to write. It takes serious effort at times to force a ballpoint pen to actually write. Which has the effect of turning off people to writing and ruining the quality of written material. I find it best to always acknowledge that there may be a better tool for the task you're trying to do at any moment, and realize the point at which you should go and search for that tool. But as Rumsfeld would say, the unknown unknowns are what you need to worry about. That is, the case where you don't know the tool you're using is limiting you, and in what ways.