📦 deps(thirdparty): update snapshots

2026-05-29 08:33:53 +00:00
parent fdb52f1e96
commit 06e0d13d57
1615 changed files with 232858 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,173 @@
+# Common Pitfalls
+
+Cognitive biases and resistance patterns that derail root cause investigation.
+
+## Resistance Patterns
+
+Rationalizations that prevent finding root cause:
+
+| Thought | Why It's Wrong | Counter |
+|---------|----------------|---------|
+| "I already looked at that" | Memory is unreliable under pressure | Re-examine with fresh evidence |
+| "That can't be the issue" | Assumptions block investigation | Test anyway, let evidence decide |
+| "We need to fix this quickly" | Pressure leads to random changes | Methodical investigation is faster |
+| "The logs don't show anything" | Absence of evidence != evidence of absence | Consider what logs might be missing |
+| "It worked before" | Systems change constantly | Past behavior doesn't guarantee current |
+| "Let me just try this one thing" | Random trial without hypothesis wastes time | Form hypothesis first |
+
+### Warning Signs
+
+You're falling into resistance when:
+- Same thoughts recurring without new evidence
+- Feeling defensive about previous conclusions
+- Avoiding re-testing areas you "already checked"
+- Making changes without understanding why they might work
+
+### Recovery
+
+When you catch yourself:
+1. Pause the investigation
+2. Write down current assumptions
+3. Challenge each assumption with "how do I know this?"
+4. Return to methodology
+
+## Confirmation Bias
+
+Tendency to see evidence supporting existing beliefs.
+
+### Manifestations
+
+- Seeing only evidence supporting pet hypothesis
+- Dismissing contradictory data as "noise"
+- Stopping investigation once "a" cause is found
+- Interpreting ambiguous evidence favorably
+
+### Counter-Strategies
+
+**Actively seek disconfirmation**:
+- Ask "what would prove me wrong?"
+- Design tests specifically to disprove hypothesis
+- Have someone else review your reasoning
+
+**Test alternative hypotheses**:
+- Even when confident in one theory
+- Especially when confident in one theory
+- Give each hypothesis fair testing time
+
+**Document objectively**:
+- Record all evidence, not just supporting evidence
+- Note your confidence level before and after tests
+- Track hypothesis changes over time
+
+## Correlation vs Causation
+
+Mistaking timing for cause.
+
+### Common Mistakes
+
+| Observation | Faulty Conclusion |
+|-------------|-------------------|
+| "It started when X changed" | X caused it |
+| "Happens at specific time" | Time is the cause |
+| "Only affects user Y" | User Y is doing something wrong |
+| "Works after restart" | Memory/state is the issue |
+
+### Verification Steps
+
+1. **Test direct causal mechanism** — Can you explain HOW X causes the symptom?
+2. **Look for confounding variables** — What else changed or varies?
+3. **Verify by removing supposed cause** — Does removing X fix it?
+4. **Test in isolation** — Does X cause it when nothing else varies?
+
+### Example
+
+Observation: "Bug only appears on Mondays"
+
+Bad conclusion: "Something about Monday causes the bug"
+
+Better investigation:
+- What's different on Monday? (traffic patterns, batch jobs, fresh caches)
+- Is it Monday specifically or "first day after weekend"?
+- Does it happen on holidays?
+- What runs over the weekend?
+
+## Anchoring
+
+Over-reliance on first piece of information.
+
+### Manifestations
+
+- First hypothesis dominates thinking
+- Initial symptom description defines investigation
+- Early evidence weighted more heavily
+- Difficulty abandoning initial direction
+
+### Counter-Strategies
+
+- Explicitly generate 3+ hypotheses before testing any
+- Weight evidence by quality, not order discovered
+- Periodically re-read original problem statement
+- Ask "what if my first assumption is wrong?"
+
+## Availability Heuristic
+
+Over-weighting recent or memorable experiences.
+
+### Manifestations
+
+- "This looks like the bug we had last week"
+- Assuming familiar problems over unfamiliar ones
+- Checking usual suspects first (sometimes good, often biasing)
+
+### Counter-Strategies
+
+- Consider base rates (how often does this actually happen?)
+- Check if "familiar" actually matches evidence
+- Maintain systematic approach even when "obvious"
+
+## Premature Closure
+
+Stopping investigation too early.
+
+### Warning Signs
+
+- Relief when finding "a" cause
+- Desire to move to fix stage quickly
+- Skipping verification steps
+- Not testing alternative hypotheses
+
+### Prevention
+
+- Multiple working hypotheses rule
+- Require explicit disconfirmation of alternatives
+- Verification stage mandatory before declaring root cause
+- Ask "what else could cause this symptom?"
+
+## Sunk Cost Fallacy
+
+Continuing failed approach due to invested effort.
+
+### Manifestations
+
+- "We've spent hours on this theory, it must be right"
+- Reluctance to abandon promising-but-wrong direction
+- Adding complexity to failing hypothesis instead of reconsidering
+
+### Counter-Strategies
+
+- Time-box hypothesis testing
+- Set explicit abandon criteria before starting
+- Treat investigation time as learning, not investment
+- Ask "if I started fresh, would I pursue this?"
+
+## Escalation Protocol
+
+When you recognize you're stuck in a pitfall:
+
+1. **Acknowledge** — Name the bias or pattern
+2. **Document** — Write down current state and reasoning
+3. **Reset** — Return to discovery stage
+4. **Reframe** — Look at problem from different angle
+5. **Seek outside perspective** — Fresh eyes often see what you miss
+
+If stuck for > 2x expected time, mandatory escalation or perspective shift.