Roadmaps for internal developer platforms often create a false sense of certainty. They present future plans as if they’re facts, but these plans are really just beliefs or hunches that have not been rigorously tested. When teams borrow ideas from other companies or rely on well-articulated arguments, they risk treating these borrowed concepts as universal truths. This leads to a dangerous cycle where evidence is selectively gathered, and teams prioritize delivery over genuine learning. Instead of addressing real developer needs, they accumulate what the author calls "epistemic debt," a collection of untested assumptions that can hinder progress. To avoid this trap, roadmaps should treat each step as a hypothesis rather than a promise. A well-constructed roadmap item outlines the belief behind it, the evidence that supports or contradicts that belief, and the expected impacts of the change. This approach encourages teams to seek evidence actively, including negative signals that might challenge their assumptions. By doing so, they can better understand where developer flow is stalling and make informed decisions based on real data rather than borrowed confidence. The article emphasizes the importance of humility in managing roadmaps. Certainty should be earned through evidence and regularly revisited rather than taken for granted. Practices like labeling the epistemic status of roadmap items and reviewing outcomes post-delivery can help teams learn from their experiences and adapt effectively. The ultimate goal is to foster a culture of curiosity and continuous improvement, ensuring that platforms evolve based on solid insights rather than superficial confidence.