3 ms·
You can't apply it endlessly in reverse though. Say you have a piece of software that's been around for 25 years - assuming that it's halfway though its life is
by skykooler 4y ago
You can't apply it endlessly in reverse though. Say you have a piece of software that's been around for 25 years - assuming that it's halfway though its life is reasonable. If something was just released 25 minutes ago, assuming that it will be abandoned in another 25 minutes is preposterous, since products tend to have a minimum amount of time for which they stay relevant. You could use this argument to create an "ultraviolet catastrophe"[1] for the Lindy effect and argue that virtually all software should be abandoned microseconds after being released.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe
- esrauch 4y agoI'd actually assume most GitHub repos get exactly one commit and are effectively abandoned in actual zero time.
- bee_rider 4y agoIf software is only 25 minutes old, you probably aren't using it.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 4y agoIt's a statement about probability. You can't assume that that specific piece of software will be abandoned in 25 minutes. But, if you had to guess which was 'more likely' to be around at some future time, then the Lindy effect would suggest its the software that's been around for 25 years over the one that was just released.