When I was in basic training in the Sargeant's course to build a career in the Brazilian Army, we were rarely allowed to leave the base, so it kinda developed a “market” inside it, where people that could go out would bring stuff for us inside, like convenience store stuff, food, etc.

So in one of the rare weekends we were allowed to go home, I went to my parents city and had the idea to take some stuff to sell to my colleagues and make some money. So I bought two boxes of Halls and three boxes of gum drops sugar candies.

The candies sold like candy (lol), but the Halls… how can I put this: I had to eat A LOT of Halls the following months. Nobody wanted it, but the guys would come looking for me from other platoons to see if I still had gum drop sugar candies to sell.

I've used this analogy in a way to explain what we would be doing as Product: we would be making sure that we had the “right product” for our customers. In my story, the Halls was definitely not the right product there, in that context, for those customers, in that market - but the gum drops sugar candies was definitely the right product, there was definitely product-market fit 🤣.

Therefore it's not enough to simply have a product to sell, we need to have the right product, the right features, and since we were working on BUILDING the product, our role would be to guarantee that we were building the right thing.

Or as Ben Horowitz1 would say: “right product right time”.

Since I used this analogy to explain what I thought was product, I have read and experienced a bunch around the “product management” world, but with time I've been accumulating also uncertainty and imposter's syndrome.

Although we build things, we work with a team, we see the results of our work on bringing a team together and delivering results for happy customers, we have always that feeling that we might not really know what we are doing.

And… probably, that is not a bug, but a feature.

If we're too sure of ourselves, maybe we'd stop talking to customers, support, maybe we wouldn't care that much with success metrics or wouldn't consider different angles before making a decision.

So if you are a product manager and you have imposter's syndrome… I guess… it's ok? It's probably part of the job.

And product management is about having the right product and the right time and “all that entails”, as Ben Horowitz said in the cited article. That means that it's the Product Manager's responsibility to guarantee that the right product is being built and that it's delivered at the right time.

Is most organizations, that will mean talking to customers, support team, engineers, designers, managers, writing documents to build alignment, organize and participate in meetings, all of that with the single goal of having the right product at the right time for your customers. You are the product manager, not anyone else.

For all the failures of the product, you should take responsibility and be accountable. For all the successes, you should praise the team that designed and built the product, that supported customers, etc. In other words, your only chance of achieving success is through the team.

That means you need to be extremely connected to your team, you need trust them and earn their trust, you should be able to rely on them and be reliable the same.

Finally, to understand more about Product Manager's job, you should definitely read Inspired2 by Marty Cagan, and Continuous Discovery Habits3, by Teresa Torres.

If you're already a Product Managers and the above books are already familiar to you, you can read Escaping the Build Trap4 and Product Operations5, both by Melissa Perri.

And then… what did you do with that idea? Did considering it helped you in any way?

Recently, my therapist suggested that some of the thoughts I was having could be forms of self-sabotage. That made me start asking myself: what exactly is self-sabotage? Why do we do it? How does it work? What are the mechanisms behind it? And, most importantly, how can we prevent it — or at least reduce its impact on our lives?

That’s how I came across The Big Leap, by Gay Hendricks.

In the book, Hendricks presents an analogy to explain self-sabotage and offers a model to understand its mechanisms, its typical manifestations, and how we can overcome them.

Since I’ve been trying to write more here, I decided to share what I learned about self-sabotage (the “thermostat” in our minds), the hidden triggers of the Upper Limit Problem, and its most common forms — according to an author I really enjoyed reading.

What Is Self-Sabotage? The Thermostat in Our Minds

A thermostat is a device that controls heating and cooling systems to keep a room within a desired temperature range.

For example, inside a sandwich maker there is a thermostat that turns off the heating element when it gets “too hot,” and turns it back on when it cools down — keeping the plate warm without exceeding a certain limit.

Gay Hendricks argues that we have a similar mechanism in our minds.

We each have a certain internal limit for how much happiness, abundance, and self-satisfaction we feel comfortable experiencing. When we go beyond that level for too long, we tend to unconsciously create reasons to bring ourselves back down.

That is what he calls self-sabotage.

If we look at the definition of “sabotage,” we find expressions such as:

• “to damage or destroy equipment, weapons, or buildings in order to prevent the success of an enemy or competitor”

• “to intentionally prevent the success of a plan or action”

This is important.

When we self-sabotage, we are — often unconsciously — taking actions that slow us down, interrupt our progress, or undermine ourselves from within. The more hidden this process is, the more effective it becomes.

Hendricks explains this using the thermostat analogy: we have an “upper limit” set in our emotional system. When positive emotions, success, or fulfillment exceed that limit, we activate behaviors that bring us back to what feels “normal.”

This is what he calls the Upper Limit Problem (ULP).

Hidden Barriers and Triggers of the Upper Limit Problem

One of the most striking ideas in the book is that, according to Hendricks, the main problem we need to solve in life is the Upper Limit Problem. If we solve it, everything else becomes easier.

To help us recognize when we are hitting this limit, he identifies a set of core beliefs that act as triggers for our internal thermostat.

These are the four main “hidden barriers.”

1) “I Am Fundamentally Flawed” → “I’ll Never Make It”

This belief is the idea that something is intrinsically wrong with us — something permanent, unfixable, built into who we are.

When we believe this, we tend to think:

“I’m just not made for this.”

“I’ll never really succeed.”

“Something always goes wrong with me.”

It doesn’t make logical sense. But emotionally, it can feel very real.

It’s not rare. Many of us have had this thought at some point — even if only occasionally.

2) “Success Makes Me Disloyal to My Roots”

Sometimes, when we start succeeding, we feel as if we are betraying where we came from.

We may unconsciously ask ourselves:

“Am I breaking some unwritten rule in my family?”

“Am I disappointing my parents by becoming different?”

“Am I leaving my people behind?”

This barrier is about loyalty — real or imagined.

I experience this sometimes myself. Over time, I’ve learned that what matters most to me is being at peace with my own story: knowing where I come from, where I am, and where I want to go.

Being conscious of the narrative I’m building with my life — even if only for myself.

3) “Success Makes Me a Heavier Burden”

In the book, Hendricks shares personal stories about feeling like a burden to his family.

His father died shortly after he was conceived. His mother was unemployed, had another child, and fell into depression. As a child, he internalized the idea that his existence was “too much” for others.

Years later, he realized he was carrying guilt for things that were never his responsibility.

The unconscious “mantra” behind this barrier is:

“I can’t expand to my highest potential because I’d be an even bigger burden than I am now.”

When we believe this, we limit ourselves to avoid “weighing on others.”

4) The “Crime” of Shining Too Brightly

According to Hendricks, this barrier is common in talented children.

They receive praise and attention, but also subtle messages like:

“Don’t show off.”

“Don’t make others feel bad.”

“Be careful not to stand out too much.”

Over time, this becomes an internal rule.

The unconscious mantra is:

“I must not expand to my full success, because if I did, I would outshine ______ and make them look or feel bad.”

As adults, this can show up as holding ourselves back to protect other people’s feelings.

We don’t fully use our potential because we fear making someone else uncomfortable.

I also like to reflect on another angle here:

Are we sometimes overestimating our own importance?

Or underestimating the strength, agency, and potential of others?

Maybe other people are more capable of handling our success than we think.

Conclusion

This article is just a brief introduction to the ideas in The Big Leap.

I tried to summarize the main concepts behind self-sabotage using the thermostat analogy and to present the key hidden barriers that define our “upper limit.”

In a future article, I may explore more about how these triggers are activated — like understanding the internal “switch” that makes the thermostat kick in.

Hendricks also talks about four “zones” of operation:

• Zone of Incompetence

• Zone of Competence

• Zone of Excellence

• Zone of Genius

That’s another fascinating topic worth exploring later.

I strongly recommend the book. And if you’ve made it this far, I hope this text was useful to you.

Until next time.

References

1. “I can’t expand to my highest potential because I’d be an even bigger burden than I am now.”

   The Big Leap, Gay Hendricks, HarperOne, 2009, p.52.

2. “I must not expand to my full success, because if I did I would outshine ______ and make him or her look or feel bad.”

   The Big Leap, p.55.

But then I hit a wall.

The Problem

DJI drones record telemetry data alongside your video files. Every frame has metadata: GPS coordinates, altitude, speed, camera settings (ISO, shutter, aperture), timestamps — all stored in an .SRT file that sits next to your .MP4.

I wanted to overlay this data on my videos. You know, like those cool flight videos where you see the altitude, speed, and coordinates updating in real-time on screen.

Simple enough, right?

Wrong.

I searched for solutions. The main one I found was Telemetry Overlay — a solid piece of software with cool features like Mapbox integration for animated maps. It’s a one-time purchase, not a subscription, which is fair.

But for my use case, it felt like overkill. I didn’t need animated maps or advanced gauges. I just wanted the basics: altitude, speed, coordinates, and camera settings rendered on my video.

I couldn’t find anything free and simple that just worked.

The Solution: Build It Myself

So I did what any developer would do — I decided to build it myself.

But here’s the twist: I didn’t do it alone.

I used Claude Code (Anthropic’s AI coding assistant) to help me build the entire library in a single session. We went from “I want to add telemetry to my drone videos” to a fully working Python library published on PyPI — in one conversation.

The result: dji-telemetry

What It Does

The library can:

• Parse DJI SRT files and extract all telemetry data

• Calculate speeds (horizontal and vertical) from GPS coordinates

• Export to multiple formats: CSV, JSON, or GPX (for mapping apps)

• Overlay telemetry on video with altitude, speed, coordinates, camera settings, and a speed gauge

• Generate transparent overlay videos for compositing in video editors

• Generate PNG frame sequences for professional editing workflows

INSTALLATION

pip install dji-telemetry

BASIC USAGE

from dji_telemetry import parse_srt, process_video

# Parse telemetry
telemetry = parse_srt('DJI_20260130_0076.SRT')

# Process video with overlay
process_video('DJI_20260130_0076.MP4', telemetry, 'output.mp4')

Or use the CLI:

dji-telemetry overlay video.MP4 --audio
dji-telemetry export video.SRT -o flight.gpx

---

The Videos

Here’s the first footage I captured with my DJI NEO 2, straight from the drone:

▶️ Watch on YouTube

And here’s the same footage with the telemetry overlay added using the library:

TODO: Add new video with telemetry overlay

[VIDEO WITH TELEMETRY OVERLAY - COMING SOON]

▶️ Watch on YouTube

Open Source

The library is fully open source under the MIT license:

• GitHub: github.com/jetervaz/dji-telemetry

• PyPI: pypi.org/project/dji-telemetry

If you have a DJI drone and want to add telemetry to your videos — or just export your flight data to GPX for mapping — give it a try. Contributions and feedback are welcome!

Follow Along

I’ll be sharing more drone footage and experiments on my YouTube channel. If you’re into aerial photography, tech, or just want to see what I’m building, consider subscribing:

🎬 youtube.com/@jetervaz

Recentemente, minha terapeuta sugeriu que determinados pensamentos que eu estava tendo poderiam ser autossabotagem. E aí eu comecei a me perguntar: afinal de contas, o que seria “autossabotagem”? Como e porquê fazemos isso? Quais são os mecanismos, as motivações, e como fazer para impedir que isso aconteça ou, pelo menos, minimizar o seu impacto na nossa vida?

Foi assim que cheguei no livro “The Big Leap”, de Gay Hendricks. No livro, o autor apresenta uma analogia para compreendermos o conceito de autossabotagem, e um modelo para compreendermos mecanismos de autossabotagem, formas típicas de manifestação, e ideias de como vencermos a luta contra esses mecanismos.

E como estou querendo escrever por aqui, decidi compartilhar o que aprendi sobre autossabotagem (o termostato em nossa mente), os gatilhos ou as barreiras ocultas do Problema do Limite Máximo (Upper Limit Problem) e suas formas típicas de manifestação, segundo esse autor que gostei bastante.

O que é autossabotagem: o termostato em nossa mente

O termostato é aquele dispositivo responsável por controlar o acionamento de circuitos e componentes que podem aumentar ou diminuir a temperatura de determinado ambiente, para que a temperatura se mantenha dentro de uma faixa desejada.

Dentro de uma sanduicheira, por exemplo, tem um termostato que desliga a resistência que aquece a chapa quando atinge uma temperatura “muito quente”, e que liga novamente para que quando a temperatura estiver muito baixa, para que mantenha a chapa sempre quente, mas sem ultrapassar o limite estabelecido.

O que o Gay Hendricks diz é que temos o mesmo tipo de mecanismo na nossa mente: nós temos um certo limite para o quanto estamos “ajustados” ou “configurados” para nos sentirmos felizes, abundantes e satisfeitos com nós mesmos. Por isso, quando percebemos que estamos sentindo muitas dessas emoções positivas, tendemos a encontrar motivos para que não devêssemos senti-las.

E isso é o que chamamos de autossabotagem. Veja abaixo as definições que o dicionário OxfordLanguages (fornecedor de verbetes do Google), exibe para o verbo “sabotar”:

A ideia aqui é revisitar o contexto e pegar trechos chave como: “danificar propositada e criminosamente […] para impedir, retardar ou interromper seu funcionamento”, “prejudicar de forma oculta e insidiosa, minar”. Para refletirmos que, se nos autossabotamos, significa que a gente está tomando atitudes com propósito de nos impedir, de nos retardar, interromper nosso funcionamento, nos prejudicar “de forma oculta” (quanto menos percebermos que estamos fazendo isso, melhor!).

E o Gay Hendricks apresenta isso sob essa analogia do termostato, indicando que nós temos um Problema do Limite Máximo (ou Superior), que é um limite máximo configurado em nosso acionador mental de sentimentos positivos e negativos do quanto podemos nos sentir bem - se as emoções positivas estão levando a melhor, por muito tempo e com mais intensidade do que “o devido”, nos apressamos em tomar atitudes para “nivelar” nossos níveis de satisfação interna.

Gatilhos ou “barreiras ocultas” do Problema do Limite Máximo (PLM)

Uma das frases mais marcantes do livro e que é bastante importante de lembrar é que o autor defende que o único problema que realmente precisamos resolver, na vida, é o “problema do limite máximo”. Se resolvermos esse problema, o jogo está ganho.

Para nos ajudar a identificar quando estamos nos deparando com esse tipo de problema, Hendricks apresenta algumas crenças que funcionam como gatilhos para o nosso “termostato” interno:

Os 4 gatilhos e barreiras ocultas do PLM

1) Sou fundamentalmente falho → “nunca vou conseguir”

Quando nós acreditamos que tem algo errado com a gente mesmo, de alguma forma, intrínsecamente à nossa existência, de forma indissociável do nosso ser, existe algum muito “errado” que faz com que, inevitavelmente, a gente “nunca vá da certo”.

Usei esses advérbios e adjetivo com “in[…]” destacadas pra deixar esse parágrafo seboso como realmente é esse tipo de raciocínio. Não faz sentido! Mas não é raro que a gente pense assim, certo? Ou é raro, mas acontece muito?

2) Sucesso me distancia das “minhas origens” / me faz desleal

Às vezes, podemos sentir que o fato de estarmos tendo sucesso nas coisas que nos determinamos a fazer, ou por estarmos conquistando o que buscamos, que de alguma forma estamos “traindo” nossas origens ou deixando de ser leais ao lugar de onde viemos.

Essa barreira aqui está relacionada a perguntas como: “Será que, com meu sucesso, estou quebrando alguma regra escrita ou não escrita da minha família?” e “estou decepcionando meus pais, apesar de ter conquistado e/ou estar conquistando aquilo que sempre quis?”. Com esses questionamentos, podemos refletir sobre como isso nos afeta.

Isso é uma coisa que eventualmente acontece comigo, mas acho que já consegui chegar em um acordo comigo mesmo sobre esse assunto. Para mim é importante estar em paz e reconhecer de onde venho, saber onde estou e para onde quero ir. De certa forma, ter consciência da história que estou construindo com a minha vida (mesmo que seja para ser contada somente para mim mesmo).

3) Sucesso me torna um fardo mais pesado

No livro, Hendricks conta de algumas histórias pessoais dele mesmo sobre esse assunto, pelo fato de que ele sentia que era uma fardo pra família dele pela forma como foi quando ele nasceu: o pai dele havia falecido alguns meses depois que ele foi concebido, e a mãe, desempregada, com um filho de seis anos, e agora com bebê recém chegado, entrou em depressão.

Ele narra com mais profundidade no livro sobre essa situação, mas resumindo: anos mais tarde, já adulto, ele percebeu que as culpas que ele carregava era por crimes que não tinha cometido, culpas que muitas vezes as interações dentro da própria família faziam com que ele sentisse, mas que não eram suas para levar.

O “mantra” desse item aqui, na minha tradução direta do texto do Hendricks, é o seguinte:

“Eu não posso expandir para o ponto mais alto do meu potencial porque eu passaria a ser um fardo ainda mais pesado que o que já sou agora.” 1

4) O crime de “brilhar demais”

Essa barreira aqui é explicada pelo Gay Hendricks como algo muito comum em crianças talentosas: de acordo com ele, elas recebem muita atenção dos pais, mas recebem também uma mensagem de que devem cuidar para não brilhar demais para que os outros não sejam prejudicados em seus sentimentos ou aparências.

O “mantra inconsciente” dessa barreira é descrito como:

Eu não devo expandir para a totalidade do meu sucesso, porque se eu fizesse eu iria brilhar mais do que _______________ e faria ele/a se sentir ou parecer menor. 2

No livro, Hendricks compartilha duas histórias muito interessantes e úteis para entender melhor esse conceito, mas aqui superficialmente já dá pra entender a ideia geral: é quando você deixa de explorar ou exercer o seu melhor por acreditar que isso faria outra pessoa se sentir mal ou parecer menos do que você.

As histórias do livro apresentam algumas visões diferentes de como isso pode surgir na nossa cabeça, mas eu gosto de explorar uma outra proposta também: será que não estamos tendo uma visão muito elevada de nós mesmos ou de nosso potencial, ou talvez estejamos tendo uma perspectiva de subestimar a capacidade, o potencial, e a agência da outra pessoa?

Conclusão

O que trouxe aqui é uma pequena introdução no assunto do livro, mas tentei resumir os principais pontos em relação a descrever o processo de autossabotagem com a analogia do “termostato”, e exemplificar as principais barreiras que explicam como esse “limite máximo” pode estar sendo definido na nossa mente.

Mais adiante, posso colocar em outro artigo um pouco mais sobre os gatilhos acionadores do limite máximo - algo como entender o método de acionamento da “chave de fim de curso” ou do chaveamento térmico de um termostato mecânico.

No livro, o autor também fala sobre uma certas “zonas de operação” do nosso cérebro: Zona de Incompetência, Zona de Competência, Zona de Excelência e Zona do Gênio - também assunto que dá pra explorar mais pra frente, e que é muito interessante também para o contexto geral.

Recomendo muito a leitura, e para quem chegou até aqui, espero que este pequeno texto seja útil. Até a próxima!