<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Adoption on Thiago Avelino</title><link>https://avelino.run/tags/adoption/</link><description>Recent content in Adoption on Thiago Avelino</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><copyright>© Avelino</copyright><lastBuildDate>Sun, 03 May 2026 10:09:16 -0300</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://avelino.run/tags/adoption/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Technical founders misread adoption - Rogers explained it in 1962 and I ignored it on Pix</title><link>https://avelino.run/technical-founders-misread-adoption-rogers-pix/</link><pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://avelino.run/technical-founders-misread-adoption-rogers-pix/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Early 2021. My co-founder walks in: &amp;quot;let's add Pix to checkout.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;My answer, word for word: &amp;quot;let the big players go first and screw it up. If it works for them, we implement.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A few months later, there I was, implementing Pix at checkout. Not because I changed my mind - because the market had already decided without me.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2 id="the-technical-founders-bias"&gt;The technical founder's bias&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There's a bias technical founders carry that nobody talks about: we think we can predict adoption because we understand the technology. It's the opposite. When you understand infrastructure, you stare at architecture, latency, edge cases, failure modes. Adoption doesn't live there. Adoption lives in the gap between what people do today and what they'd rather do tomorrow, and that gap is human, not technical.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>