2025 年 5 月文摘
Continuous Thought Machines
Biological intelligence is still superior to AI in many cases [24, 25, 5, 26]. Biological brains solve tasks very differently to conventional neural networks, which might explain why this is the case. It might be that biological intelligence pays heed to time in ways that modern AI simply does not. In this work, we aimed to develop a model that approaches problem-solving in a manner more aligned with biological brains, emphasizing the central role of the precise timing and interplay of neural dynamics.
传统的成长台阶塌了，自我提升道路将变得更反人性
传统职场中让职场新人一步步变成精英的成长台阶塌了。
我们人类需要大量的训练和反馈，才能提升能力。AI 时代下，很多初级能力，已经交给 AI 来完成，意味着职场新人的这些初级能力得不到锻炼，那么高级的能力是怎么得到的？人类能力是需要一步步练习的，这意味着未来人类这部分能力更难学会，我们的自我提升道路将变得更曲折、更反人性。
AI 是一面镜子，照见的正是我们人类自己。
我们之所以害怕被机器取代，其实是因为我们已经在用「机器逻辑」活着：追求听话、效率、标准化、不出错。越像机器，就越容易被机器替代。真正的问题不是「AI 会不会替代人类」，而是——我们还像不像一个「人」？
听话、苦干、不出错，这是机器的本分；而人类的作用是为世界提供异常值。
人类到底该做什么样的工作？我们真正有创造力的地方，恰恰是那些没共识的地方，是「非标准答案」，是未知的、独特的、不确定的东西。
我想说的「及早离去」，是离开那种持续牵扯你注意力的状态。如果说注意力是我们每个人最宝贵的资产，愿我们都能把它浪费在值得的事情上。
E185 世界一流的亲密关系是什么样的？
如果世界上有一个人跟你的经历成长经历如此的不同，他会能够看见一些你看不见的东西，没错，他甚至能看见你自己都看不见的自己，他引领你去看见你自己看不见的自己，这不是一件最美妙的事情吗？
剥削其实是一种非常缺乏智慧的管理方式。你剥削你的员工，其实你不是得利者，往往其实双输的一个状态。
如果说一个人的主体性，或者说这种自主意识如果有强弱之分的话，比较弱和比较强的人，他看到的好的关系真的是可以完全不一样，甚至可以是天上地下那种差异。
所以往往就会出现类似于有一种老公怎么总是叫不醒，哈哈哈，就这样一种怨恨感，或者说一种沮丧感，然后就用更加剧烈的方式去表达，然后就会有了所谓的怨妇式的形象，
Monthly Roundup #30: May 2025
Aella: Never ever trust men when they say setting up an environment is easy … My experience is that setting things up involves a series of exacting magical incantations, which are essentially impossible to derive on your own. Sometimes you follow the instructions and everything goes great but if you get things even slightly wrong it becomes hell to figure out how to recover.
How do very smart people meet each other?
Prompting guide 101
Make Gemini your prompt editor. When using Gemini Advanced, start your prompts with: “Make this a power prompt: [original prompt text here].” Gemini will make suggestions on how to improve your prompt. Ensure it says what you need, and then paste it back into Gemini Advanced to get an output.
我的 611study.icu 和 996.icu
Post-Chat UI
We made painting feel like typing, but we should have made typing feel like painting.
经营一段关系
你觉得你要经营，你觉得你要维系，恰恰说明对方不是那么 需要你，甚至对你本人压根就没有什么兴趣，所以你才不得不去做一些额外的动作，给出一些额外的付出或者贡献，好让这段关系 保持下去。
一个人无法自全独活，或者根本就不打算自全独活，觉得这样太过辛苦，所以总是想着要借力，从某个人，某群人那里得到帮助，得到庇护，得到关照，得到利益，然后就可以搭一段顺风车， 不是这样么？这也正是传统文化里的精髓部分：遇贵人，结私党，富易交，贵易妻。就算是用上了「经营」、「 维系」这样的中性词，也没有改变任何东西。
我小学时候最好的朋友，初中时就 搬走了。 我初中时候的好朋友，大学时就死掉了。
The Server That Wasn’t Meant to Exist
I solve problems - it’s what I do best.
But I can’t solve every problem. Especially not when those involved choose to protect the problem instead of fixing it.
Here’s why I get unnecessarily upset: because young people have been conditioned to see “grinding” mindlessly as a status symbol disguised as an effective strategy for achieving success.
I’m here to deconstruct that idiotic way of thinking that leads to the fact that 95% of beginners and businesses as a whole fail. “Grinding” is not wisdom nor a strategy, it’s a lack thereof.
But systems (especially productivity systems) don’t last forever in one singular state. They evolve. They adapt to the situation. They break down rapidly and leave you lost (like that Notion productivity system you obsessed about years ago that was fun at the time and served you well, but would be a waste of time in your current phase).
First, most of the creatives we admire had very similar routines.
They had intense focused work blocks followed by relentless rest that involved a complete disconnection from work.
The long walks, reading, and leisure time of the greats is what activates the Default Mode Network (DMN) in your brain. That is, when you stop focusing on work, your subconscious continues to do work for you, often in a more creative and effective way, presenting the ideas to your conscious mind (see: shower thoughts) that bring novelty and innovation to your work.
Most people have underlying fears and desires that tie them to “the grind:”
They romanticize the long and hard route They have underlying trauma that makes them want to prove themselves to people who won’t care They were raised in a frugal family and delay their success because deep down, they’re afraid to make money They think they don’t deserve leverage yet, so they do everything themselves or try to do everything at once
I take my leisure, often to the point of feeling like I should be working, until the project deadline approaches and I have sufficient clarity on how to get it done.
Then, it’s the only thing that’s on my mind. My focus narrows and distractions become zero. And once the project is done, I return to a “maintenance mode” where I do the minimal amount of work required to sustain some form of progress, knowing that if I were to try to force more, from experience, I would be disappointed with the results.
The best way to create your ideal life is to live it, right now, but on a smaller scale.
If you want to be a writer, and you aren’t already writing, you will never become one.
But if you start writing now, even if you only have 30 minutes, you can slowly titrate up the amount of time you spend writing.
Because never has their been a time where so much power lies in the hands of the individual.
One person (or a small team) can reach global scale without gatekeepers thanks to the internet Digital products don’t require permission to build or distribute They often have exponential rather than linear returns on investment of time
Any interest or skill of yours can be turned into a digital product and content that others with similar interests or skills resonate with.
None of this is to say that working a lot is always bad, but it is the lowest form of leverage out of the 3:
Labor leverage – increasing your time spent on tasks or outsourcing work to others. (Cons: management overhead and complexity) Capital leverage – your money works for you through investments. (Cons: requires existing wealth or something worth investing in) Permissionless leverage – the most powerful form of modern leverage. (Cons: most people look like they’re doing the same thing) All have their pros, but we live in the most permissionless time in history.
Permissionless leverage comes in the form of code, media, books, podcasts, tweets, newsletters, courses, etc.
These have zero marginal cost of replication.
In other words, build once, sell as many times as you’d like.
The point of AI now, in my opinion, is to spend more time on what you enjoy doing (your unique strengths) and build AI workflows and prompts that allow you to do the rest at a surprisingly high quality if you take the time to build once, use forever.
I’d rather read the prompt
I believe that the main reason a human should write is to communicate original thoughts. To be clear, I don’t believe that these thoughts need to be special or academic. Your vacation, your dog, and your favorite color are all fair game. However, these thoughts should be yours: there’s no point in wasting ink to communicate someone else’s thoughts.
The whole point of making creative work is to share one’s own experience - if there’s no experience to share, why bother? If it’s not worth writing, it’s not worth reading.
AI 正在让人变得前所未有地自以为是
其中最让我愤怒的，就是那些对软件开发毫无了解，没有学过任何相关知识，觉得开发软件就是写代码，所以让 AI 帮自己写代码，就可以把自己称作「程序员」了。他们的无知令人发笑，他们觉得一个计算机学生在大学一年级干的事情就是这个行业内所有人做的绝大部分工作。
不懂得软件设计的基本原则，不懂得模块化设计，不懂得什么是高内聚低耦合，不懂得任何一种软件过程模型，不懂得需求分析和需求的灵活性以及如何在设计软件时就考虑到灵活性设计，更不懂得软件工程背后的思想，觉得自己花了钱、订阅了 AI 产品，没有一点理智消费者的基本素养就相信了过度粉饰的广告，觉得一个技术等同于实习生的不是人的东西，加上技术和知识储备都不如机器的自己，就能开发出真正的好软件，实际上，这两东西拼起来都凑不出一个好程序员。我在他们言谈和行为中看到的，除了无知，还有一种我怎么也想不明白的傲慢和自负。
你他妈的不仅自己在丢人现眼，还侮辱了所有的程序员。
你可以用 Cursor 这样的工具把你的好想法变成现实，但别把自己当成程序员，更别他妈的说，因为会用 AI，自己早上是程序员，下午是作家，晚上是自媒体人这种自负得令人作呕的话了，请停止侮辱更多的群体。你不过是个付了钱，连提示词都不一定写得清楚的用户而已。
对 AI 了解越少的消费群体，对 AI 产品的接受程度更高（“lower literacy-higher receptivity”）。那些了解算法、训练数据和计算模型背后原理的人，不会觉得科技是什么神秘事物，而其他人，则更有可能觉得 AI 像是魔法一样神秘，进而吸引他们去使用 AI，把 AI 当做法器一样，以为可以带着它去屠龙了，小心
郭德纲：我不是什么相声大师，我就是看坟的。…..
十年一瞬、百年一叹， 回首相声史记， 见一身名为中国的伤痕， 听一曲名为命运的悲歌， 多少荣辱，几多悲歌， 也下作，也高贵，也受追捧，也承糟践， 千种辛酸、万种滋味， 写不尽也便不写尽。
不想工作，每天都很累：你不是懒，而是“内心失序”了
内心失序，是契克森米哈赖在《心流》里提出的概念。
内在失序——也就是资讯跟既定的意图发生冲突，或使我们分心，无法为实现意图而努力——是对意识极为不利的影响力。——《心流》
简单来说，就是你正要做 A 事情的时候，心里却想着 BCD 的事。他认为：
内心失序的现象，会去强迫我们的注意力转移到错误的方向，不再发挥预期的功能，精神能量也窒息了。
但我最近的感受是，这种原本偶尔出现的心理状态，现在变得越来越高频且普遍了，而且不止我一个人遇到。
及早离去
在现代社会，为了保持自己的购买力不下降，人们确实要投资、可以投资。
买股票、买基金、找投顾 … 这些因人而异，每个人都可以找到适合自己的合理选择。
我想说的「及早离去」，是离开那种持续牵扯你注意力的状态。
如果说注意力是我们每个人最宝贵的资产，愿我们都能把它浪费在值得的事情上。
What do insanely wealthy people buy, that ordinary people know nothing about?
周报 #80 - 关于求婚、爱情与婚姻
My prince, my soul mate, my friend.
爱，死亡和机器人 第四季
If nothing is curated, how do we find things? ⭐
For a musician who normally goes into hiding and only emerges when it’s time to promote something, it’s been a pretty exciting time to be a fan.
I always felt like social media creates an illusion of convenience. Think of how much time it takes to stay on top of things. To stay on top of music or film. Think of how much time it takes these days, how much hunting you have to do. Although technology has made information vast and reachable, it’s also turned the entire internet into a sludge pile. And now, instead of relying on professional curators to sort through things for us, now we have to do the sorting.
闫鹤祥这段脱口秀真的看一次感动一次 舞台上真情流露
经典相声如此照相。姜昆和李文华老师说的相声太好了。
5 岁+程序员依然可以兼顾热爱代码和享受生活
Issue#29 -没有"自我意识"，是我的问题吗？
并不是我们哪里做得不够好，才没有建立自我意识；而是我们从未有过足够的机会和资源去探索和认识自己，所以所谓的“自我”才会如此的模糊。
我认为这种停止自责是重要的，因为它不仅仅是停止内耗，更是对我们自身能量的重新整合和调整。
⭐
So, it seems the math of game theory is telling us something: that Copycat’s philosophy, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, may be not just a moral truth, but also a mathematical truth.
the fewer “repeat interactions” there are, the more distrust will spread
The same thing happens: with a lower “win-win” reward, Always Cheat takes over. Game theory has two powerful ideas about this:
“Zero-sum game”. This is the sadly common belief that a gain for “us” must come at a loss to “them”, and vice versa.
“Non-zero-sum game”. This is when people make the hard effort to create a win-win solution! (or at least, avoid a lose-lose) Without the non-zero-sum game, trust cannot evolve.
This is why “miscommunication” is such an interesting barrier to trust: a little bit of it leads to forgiveness, but too much and it leads to widespread distrust! I think our modern media technology, as much as it’s helped us increase communication… has increased our miscommunication much more.
Game theory has shown us the three things we need for the evolution of trust:
- REPEAT INTERACTIONS Trust keeps a relationship going, but you need the knowledge of possible future repeat interactions before trust can evolve.
- POSSIBLE WIN-WINS You must be playing a non-zero-sum game, a game where it’s at least possible that both players can be better off – a win-win.
- LOW MISCOMMUNICATIONIf the level of miscommunication is too high, trust breaks down. But when there’s a little bit of miscommunication, it pays to be more forgiving.
If there’s one big takeaway from all of game theory, it’s this:
What the game is, defines what the players do. Our problem today isn’t just that people are losing trust, it’s that our environment acts against the evolution of trust.
That may seem cynical or naive – that we’re “merely” products of our environment – but as game theory reminds us, we are each others’ environment. In the short run, the game defines the players. But in the long run, it’s us players who define the game.
So, do what you can do, to create the conditions necessary to evolve trust. Build relationships. Find win-wins. Communicate clearly. Maybe then, we can stop firing at each other, get out of our own trenches, cross No Man’s Land to come together to live and let live.
What Comes Next Isn’t a Product. It’s a Provocation.
We weren’t solving problems. We were developing solutions without knowing the problems.
The same could be said of Bauhaus, Black Mountain College, and Bell Labs. These were not just institutions of instruction. They were catalysts that attracted visionaries and outsiders, bringing together brilliant minds who might otherwise never have collaborated. They treated form as a form of inquiry. They questioned the boundaries between disciplines and then blurred them deliberately. They approached taste as methodology. And they did it by creating space—not just physical space, but cultural permission—for experimentation without expectation.
The Media Lab taught me that the future doesn’t start with a plan; it starts with an experiment.
We should support that pursuit. We should build the spaces that make them possible.
Because what comes next is not a product. It is a provocation.
air
Our Beliefs
Design will be the differentiator Execution is no longer scarce. Creativity is. While others obsess over model parameters and benchmarks, the winners will be crafting narratives and experiences that resonate at a human level. Teams with exceptional design sensibility, brand clarity, and storytelling ability will create the enduring companies of this era.
Depth is the new scale Tomorrow’s breakout products won’t just serve more people, they’ll serve people more meaningfully. Products will feel tailor-made for each individual because, increasingly, they will be. These intimate user experiences will create rich emotional connections. Eames’ Powers of Ten provides a helpful reminder of just how much potential lies with zooming in.
A new Playbook is being written Consumers are going to be looking for new, novel product experiences that have AI as their foundation, not just drizzled on top. It’s unclear what interfaces, interactions, and modalities will make up these experiences. But if history is any indicator, the designs that gain traction in the next couple of years, will likely determine the shape of AI-first products for years to come. At AIR, we will be writing this new playbook together.
Don’t believe incumbents. Everything can be re-invented. It doesn’t matter what existing companies say. It doesn’t matter how confidently they seem to be tracking the progress of AI. They do not have the advantage.
The future belongs to those with fresh ideas, who are unburdened by the past, and will build with AI as the foundation of the entire experience. There is no software used today that cannot be completely re-imagined and re-invented.
Google I/O ‘25 Keynote
Sam & Jony introduce io
创造世界是一种什么样的体验
假设一个机器 A 能够自发地制造出机器 B，那么 A 中必须包含完整的 B 的信息，只有这样 A 才能根据这些信息将 B 制造出来。因为 A 包含的信息大于等于 B，即 A 要比 B 复杂。
如果根据这样的理解，机器的复杂度会在制造过程中不断降级和衰退，即一个系统的复杂度总是高于它所能制造的子系统的复杂度。
但是另一方面，在自然界却存在与之背离的欣欣向荣的现象：生命的诞生与进化，科技的发展和进步，都在往越来越复杂和多样化的方向发展，即人人都谈论的「涌现」这一概念。
由于对此难以控制、预测和描述。因此，在历史上的大部分时间里，人们都认为这是一种神迹。
Models and science
Richard Feynman captured this principle succinctly: “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” Models, no matter how elegant, are mere human constructs, subordinate to the unyielding truth of reality.
巴菲特最经典的演讲，段永平自称看了 10 遍！建议收藏
https://tilsonfunds.com/BuffettUofFloridaspeech.pdf
But in determining whether you succeed there is more to it than intellect and energy. I would like to talk just a second about that. In fact, there was a guy, Pete Kiewit in Omaha, who used to say, he looked for three things in hiring people: integrity, intelligence and energy. And he said if the person did not have the first two, the later two would kill him, because if they don’t have integrity, you want them dumb and lazy.
You would probably pick the one you responded the best to, the one who has the leadership qualities, the one who is able to get other people to carry out their interests. That would be the person who is generous, honest and who gave credit to other people for their own ideas.
But time is the friend of the wonderful business; it is the enemy of the lousy business.
If I ever write a book it will be called, Why Smart People Do Dumb Things. My partner says it should be autobiographical. But this might be an interesting illustration. They are perfectly decent guys. I respect them and they helped me out when I had problems at Salomon. They are not bad people at all.
But to make money they didn’t have and didn’t need, they risked what they did have and what they did need. That is just plain foolish; it doesn’t matter what your IQ is. If you risk something that is important to you for something that is unimportant to you it just doesn’t make sense. I don’t care if the odds you succeed are 99 to 1 or 1000 to 1 that you succeed. If you hand me a gun with a million chambers with one bullet in a chamber and put it up to your temple and I am paid to pull the trigger, it doesn’t matter how much I would be paid. I would not pull the trigger. You can name any sum you want, but it doesn’t do anything for me on the upside and I think the downside is fairly clear. Yet people do it financially very much without thinking.
It is like Henry Kauffman said, “The ones who are going broke in this situation are of two types, the ones who know nothing and the ones who know everything.” It is sad in a way.
You see it the same way I see it. We do everything the same—our lives are not that different. The only thing we do is we travel differently. What can I do that you can’t do?
I get to work in a job that I love, but I have always worked at a job that I loved. I loved it just as much when I thought it was a big deal to make $1,000. I urge you to work in jobs that you love.
If you think you will be happier getting 2x instead of 1x, you are probably making a mistake. You will get in trouble if you think making 10x or 20x will make you happier because then you will borrow money when you shouldn’t or cut corners on things. It just doesn’t make sense and you won’t like it when you look back.
I like businesses that I can understand. Let’s start with that. That narrows it down by 90%. There are all types of things I don’t understand, but fortunately, there is enough I do understand.
I don’t want an easy business for competitors. I want a business with a moat around it. I want a very valuable castle in the middle and then I want the Duke who is in charge of that castle to be very honest and hard working and able. Then I want a moat around that castle. The moat can be various things: The moat around our auto insurance business, Geico, is low cost.
Now give me some money and tell me to hurt somebody in some other fields, and I can figure out how to do it.
So I want a simple business, easy to understand, great economics now, honest and able management, and then I can see about in a general way where they will be ten (10) years from now.
But if you don’t know enough to know about the business instantly, you won’t know enough in a month or in two months. You have to have sort of the background of understanding and knowing what you do or don’t understand. That is the key. It is defining your circle of competence.
One thing that people don’t understand is one thing that makes this product worth 10s and 10s of billions of dollars is one simple fact about really all colas, but we will call it Coca-Cola for the moment. It happens to be a name that I like. Cola has no taste memory. You can drink one of these at 9 O’clock, 10 O’clock, 1 O’clock and 5 O’clock. The one at 5 o’clock will taste as good to you as the one you drank early in the morning, you can’t do that with Cream Soda, Root Beer, Orange, Grape.
The interesting thing about investments for me and my partner, Charlie Munger, the biggest mistakes have not been mistakes of commission, but of omission.
I don’t think about the macro stuff. What you really want to in investments is figure out what is important and knowable. If it is unimportant and unknowable, you forget about it. What you talk about is important but, in my view, it is not knowable.
Wall Street makes its money on activity. You make your money on inactivity.
So I would say for anyone working with normal capital who really knows the businesses they have gone into, six is plenty, and I probably have half of what I like best. I don’t diversify personally. All the people I’ve known that have done well with the exception of Walter Schloss, Walter diversifies a lot. I call him Noah, he has two of everything.
We own a lot of Gillette and you can sleep pretty well at night if you think of a couple billion men with their hair growing on their faces. It is growing all night while you sleep. Women have two legs, it is even better. So it beats counting sheep. And those are the kinds of business…(you look for).
DumPy: NumPy except it’s OK if you’re dum
What I want from an array language is:
Don’t make me think. Run fast on GPUs. Really, do not make me think. Do not.
Alex.Party
If you aren’t using this technology, then you are shooting yourself in the foot. There is no future where this technology is not dominant and relevant. If you are not using this, you will be unemployable. This technology solves every development problem we have had. I can teach you how with my $5000 course.
tixy
法律原则：其性质、地位和作用
法律原则往往是法律所要实现的重要价值的体现，是法律的总体性的指引性标准，其价值位阶高于法律规则。许多法律部门都在其内容中明文规定了法律原则，违背法律原则的行为可能无效，即使严格遵循了法律规则。例如，民法规定，民事行为不得违背公序良俗。刑法规定，刑法的目标是打击犯罪和保护人权。
若将一个案件事实适用于相关的法律规则，与某些个法律原则冲突，法律原则就可能绕开法律规则，直接适用于案件事实。这是法律原则在案件处理之中发挥作用的最强烈的形式。
Working with LLMs: A Few Lessons
Perfect verifiability doesn’t exist
LLMs inherently are probabilistic. No matter how much you might want it, there is no perfect verifiability of what it produces. Instead what’s needed is to find ways to deal with the fact that occasionally it will get things wrong.
This is unlike code that we’re used to running before. That’s why using an LLM can be so cool, because they can do different things. But the cost of it being able to read and understand badly phrased natural language questions is that it’s also liable to go off the rails occasionally.
Which means there’s a pareto frontier of the number of LLM calls you’ll need ot make for verification and the error-rate each LLM introduces. Practically this has to be learnt, usually painfully, for the task at hand. This is because LLMs are not equally good at every task, or even equally good at tasks that seem arbitrarily similar to each other for us humans.
This creates an asymmetric trust problem, especially since you can’t verify everything. What it needs is a new way to think about “how should we accomplish [X] goal” rather than “how can we automate [X] process”.
小议特朗普关税新政与 A 股走势
但问题是世界会跟着美国走吗？会由自由主义整体转向实用主义吗？美国是这么想的，也是这么做的，不但四处筑墙、退组、还挑拨矛盾，唯一的目的就是把队伍变成一个个单独的人。但问题在于，美国这个带头大哥脱离队伍了，但队伍并没有散，还按照原来的方向行进，原来的老二、老三等都想着成为带头大哥，带着队伍继续辉煌。
如果真的变成这样，是美国最不想看到的，那么它就真的成为局外人了。脱离队伍容易，但想重新进入队伍就难了，要想重新回归队伍，并重新当老大就更难了。美国现在所处的位置刚好是脱离队伍脱离了一半，一只脚在门外，一只脚在门内，它最想干的事是先解散队伍，然后再迈出门内的那只脚。
当前世界最不同于二战后的是，那时最核心的优势是手里有资本可以输出，而当前最核心的优势是国家有大市场能够吸引他国来。
要我说，即使美国不对中国加征关税，中国也应该对出口美国的上述三种产品征收歧视性出口税，定向推高美国 CPI。
巴菲特说，股市短期是个投票器，长期是个称重器，我相信 A 股目前是低估的，在坚实的经济基础下是有回归价值的。所以，短期（一周左右）A 股可能会向下躁动，但长期看肯定会稳定向上。大众多给点信心，我们就会走出独立行情，这一点其实和现在要走自由主义还是现实主义的路线之争很相似。
股票市场的道理《穷查理宝典》
股票本质上是公司的部分所有权。
股票的价格就是由股票的价值，也就是公司的价值所决定的。
而公司的价值又是由公司的盈利情况及净资产决定的。
虽然股票价格上上下下的波动在短期内很难预测，但长期而言一定是由公司的价值决定的。
而聪明的投资者只要在股票的价格远低于公司实际价值的时候买进，又在价格接近或者高于价值时卖出，就能够在风险很小的情况下赚很多钱。
投资股市最大的风险是你的投资未来会不会出现永久性的亏损。
下礼拜就 38 周岁了，感觉很恍惚
有效社交
只有你有价值了，你的社交才有价值。
你的“可交换价值”越大，你能够吸引的人就越多，愿意主动跟你打交道的人也越多。
据说。华尔街金融圈有一个“社交估值”理论：评估一个人的商业价值，只需计算这个人身边最紧密的五个人的平均值，即可得知。
女之眈兮｜第 0 期：勇敢谈论我们所注视的那部分世界
我们总觉得激进是一个暴烈的坏词，但几个月前，我在读一本叫 A Sentimental Education 的书时，看到了一句关于激进的定义，是这样说的：
“That’s what I meant by radical: looking at the world as a set of systems that need to be changed, not accepted.”
Zuckerberg’s Dystopian AI Vision
Big tech atomises you, isolates you, makes you lonely and depressed – then it rents you an AI friend, and AI therapist, an AI lover. Big tech are parasites who pretend they are here to help you.
【深度】谁是中国疯狂爆亏的 TOP5 行业？CLS 同学带你速览上市公司 2024 年报一探究竟（上）！
Why Bell Labs Worked. ⭐
People who can survive this system aren’t necessarily the same as people who can do great work. Most of the great names of the past would be considered unemployable today;
“It’s difficult to imagine how I would ever have enough peace and quiet in the present sort of climate to do what I did in 1964… Today I wouldn’t get an academic job. It’s as simple as that. I don’t think I would be regarded as productive enough.”
— Peter Higgs
Higgs’ statement gets to the heart of the problem, MBA culture,
We live in a metrics obsessed culture that is obsessed with narrowly defined productivity. There’s too much focus on accountability and too little focus on creativity.
The reason why we don’t have Bell Labs is because we’re unwilling to do what it takes to create Bell Labs — giving smart people radical freedom and autonomy.
The freedom to waste time. The freedom to waste resources. And the autonomy to decide how.
“I’ve always pursued my interests without much regard for final value or value to the world. I’ve spent lots of time on totally useless things.”
— Claude Shannon
Sadly, freedom and patience alone isn’t enough. The Bell Labs formula can be briefly described as,
- Use good taste to find great, ambitious people.
- Surround them with other great, ambitious people.
- Hire smart, technical makers to be around them. – Cross-pollinate between the two groups as necessary.
- Make sure people talk to each other every day.
- Create a school so they teach one another. – Encourage everyone to study / improve.
Once the group is humming with activity and has a sense of self identity, the smart leader can then,
- Use taste to curate problems for the researchers.
- Give freedom to think — for years, if necessary. Trust the taste.
- Make explicit hand-offs to the makers. – Once you have something that works from the makers; emphasize fast scaling and execution.
- Scale outwards as necessary. Proving and expanding on the above formula is left as an exercise to the reader.
基于信任的顾问合作模式
我做事的方式更接近于传统咨询公司的策略 —— 计算工作时长，并为工作时长付费，而且可以接受后付费。
这里有几个前置条件：
我的客户往往是介绍而来，很少有纯粹的冷启动客户；所以我们存在一定的基础信任； 我的时间的价格很高，基本上持平我在字节的时薪； 我会记录我在这个项目的时间花费，从而让项目方拥有更明确的支付预期，知道「我花钱买了什么」。
The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck
学会拒绝，专注于一件事情、一个人、一个地方，这样的承诺（commitment）比起有着无限的选择，才是真的自由。这样的自由将自己从迷茫中解放出来。作者认为 commitment 就是拒绝一切偏离自己价值观的事物。
The Consumer AI Revolution Won’t Be Technical. It’ll Be Emotional.
Brand, after all, is a proxy for trust. And trust is the most valuable commodity in a world where AI agents will act on your behalf. Within five years, the most beloved AI product won’t have an app, a screen, or a UI, and its brand will be more trusted than your bank. Consumer AI isn’t a technical breakthrough; it’s a cultural one. The winners will look less like OpenAI and more like Nike or Pixar: emotionally fluent, culturally embedded, behavior-shaping machines hiding in plain sight. That’s where the defensibility lies – not in proprietary models, but in emotional resonance and behavioral lock-in. Just like Apple. Just like Spotify. Just like every consumer product that became infrastructure in disguise.
The Ingredients of a Productive Monorepo
If you can forgive this abuse of big-O notation, this principle guides all engineering for monorepo-related developer tools:
Any operation over your repository that needs to be fast must be O(change) and not O(repo).
ruff
Ruff is so fast that sometimes I add an intentional bug in the code just to confirm it’s actually running and checking the code.
软件设计的哲学
Overall, the best way to reduce bugs is to make software simpler.
How To Build A Better Personal Brand Than 99% Of People
What most people don’t understand is that a “personal brand” isn’t a business model. It’s a traffic source. It’s a trust mechanism. Founders build a personal brand to get users for their startup. Ecommerce brands use UGC to sell physical products. You can quite literally sell anything – from bags of coffee to nudes – if you have a trustworthy personal brand.