AI

In the end, when labor compresses, more of the job is judgment from the top of the pyramid.

What do we actually want people for? In the past, we wanted them for labor, efficiency, and technical skills. Now, we want them for that, but we also want them for more interpersonal things.

What interests me most is what stays the same – because people are

2.     Fuck, this is good, on why we want robots at work but humans in art, via Chris Paik. Tl;dr: in the economy of necessity, humans are friction. In the economy of meaning, they’re the point.

We hate other people when latency becomes intolerable. As soon as a task is about speed, other humans feel like an irritating inconvenience. The Uber

Some people said it could never happen. My argument was always not that an LLM couldn’t create something of equal merit, but that the fact that a novel was written by Jane Austen is a big part of what gives it its value. It’s not just about the end result; it’s about where the end result comes from.

AI dramatically lowers the cost of starting. New ideas. New apps. New projects. New directions. All suddenly cheap, fast, and frictionless.

In a world where you can do anything, most people will try to do everything.

The problem, of course, is that you aren’t “paid” for doing hundreds of things poorly…you’re paid for doing one thing beautifully.

As

In the age of AI, the pendulum is swinging hard towards analog, simple, human

Position yourself where AI can’t easily reach—where your skills are both scarce and make the technology more useful.

"what is my best competitor doing with AI and what will that mean for me and my business if they are "turbocharged with AI"

The solution is what IDEO cofounder Tim Brown called a “T-shaped professional” in the 1990s: becoming a specialist with a generalist’s mindset—deep in one area (like the stem of a T), and broad enough (like the top) to adapt, connect, and multiply value across others.