Learning Velocity

A quiet theory of acceleration, out-learning others and agency.

Intro

I try to judge every information by the following question:

Will it unlock the next piece of my roadmap - giving me the direction and clarity to take the optimal and measurable next step?

Intake

All intake flows through three pillars:

  1. Trusted voices - I look for people whose ideas have been applied, tested, and shaped into actionable, repeatable processes or decision-making frameworks. Repeated success in a specific domain is a proxy for quality and a way to filter out hindsight bias. Rehearsed narrative arcs built around something that worked once or in a narrow context are often ego- or audience engagement-optimized content.

  2. Basics - Mapping out fundamentals reduces time spent re-learning, clarifies trade-offs, and improves pattern recognition. I’ve never met anyone who regretted spending too much time mastering relevant fundamentals. Counterintuitive, especially when you feel the urge to dive into news and specifics. Boring, extremely effective, a good investment.

  3. News & random signals - Social media, newsletters, blogs, podcasts, conversations. Useful for signals and timing cues. Can spark breakthroughs, provide exciting inertia and unexpected insights through chaotic exploration — new connections, analogies, perspectives. Never let it dominate your intake.

Process

I choose what to study based on three filters:

  1. Relevancy - Is this connected to something I’m actively working on or aiming for? > Prioritize current direction over multi-dimensional curiosity.

  2. Immediate Utility - Does this help me take the next step, solve a stuck problem or gain clarity? > The sharper the need, the more focused the input. Prioritize what keeps you moving past obstacles and expands your next-step visibility - not browsing.

  3. Actionability - Can (and should) I apply this now? > Some information feels useful but subtly derails you. Distraction dressed as insight, inspiration that avoids friction, or clever takes that create the illusion of clarity.

If it doesn’t lead to action, it’s entertainment or organized distraction.

Match

By this point, the information is already filtered - relevant, helpful, and actionable. It enables decision-making, unlocks the next step and provides clarity. The next piece of the map is revealed.

Whether it’s Paul Graham, Zuck, or Marc Andreessen, the message is consistent: learning velocity beats experience. High-agency builders and operators win by absorbing, adapting, and applying new information faster.

While the focus is on velocity - speed and direction - this loops me back to a more structural idea: “luck surface area”, described as what you do multiplied by how well you communicate it (see the post by Jason Roberts).

Assuming we define effective learning as learning that results in progress, here’s a rough parallel:

Effective Learning (Surface Area)=What You Learn⋅What You ImplementXWhat You Need\begin{gathered} \text{Effective Learning (Surface Area)} = \\[0.45em] \frac{\text{What You Learn} \cdot \text{What You Implement}}{\vphantom{X}\text{What You Need}} \end{gathered}

Progress isn’t just a product of high-quality information, speed, or even willpower. It comes from matching.

When what you learn directly maps to what you can act on, within the scope of what you need.

While building what matters - seek the match.

LB