Weekly Review — Sep 28–Oct 4, 2026

Sun, 04 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000

TL;DR: Five posts this week, and four of them circle the same uncomfortable pattern: people often judge what they can see rather than what is there. Visible effort can count for more than equally valuable work nobody sees. Your bargaining power depends on the alternatives you actually have, not on how cool you act. A brand that sounds like everyone else’s might as well not exist. And a multi-agent run that lasts 88 hours is only as good as what you decided to measure before it started. The fifth post is about the sky, which turns out to be a fair metaphor: the blue you see is light knocked sideways by air, not something the sky reflects back at you. If you only click one link, make it The Iceberg Problem, because it ends with the one question every manager should ask more often.

Every week has a few posts that were written separately and still end up arguing with each other. This week it was legibility: the gap between what someone actually does, wants, or is, and the part of it that reaches the person on the other side. Two entries in the asymmetry series (commitment and effort visibility) look at that gap at work and at home. A post on personal branding treats it as a design problem you can solve on purpose. A post on evaluating very long agent runs asks how you would even see whether one worked. And the third Lunch Break Physics explains why the colour above your head comes from light scattered by the air, not from anything the sky reflects.

schristoph.online

Weekly Review — Sep 28–Oct 4, 2026