AI 时代的"超能力"：专注与坚持到底

传统观念认为，过度工作（单独）是导致职业倦怠的原因。

所以，从逻辑上讲，如果 AI 能帮助我们比以前快 2-100 倍完成任务，我们应该是工作量不足，不会有任何倦怠，对吧？

你可能太年轻而无法认识这个梗，但这是 AI 开始加速人们效率时，大多数科技行业人士的感受。

因为多年来，我们所有人都有几十个，甚至上百个副项目可以启动，但由于一天时间不够而不得不搁置。

然后 AI 出现了，并用一个诱人的谎言调侃我们……

Claude：“但是，现在有我在，也许你可以完成这一切！”

在过去的十年里，我一直是连续创业者 + 新手爸爸 + 永远有雄心的人。我有 100 多个文章标题 + 草稿提纲。我有一个“有朝一日也许会做”的清单，满是 50 个“有时间就做”的项目。

我开始试水，利用会议间隙 YOLO 一些副项目。在 5 分钟的间隔里排队使用 Claude，然后尽情发挥，再跳到下一个通话。

疯狂的是，这开始奏效了……

我想尝试、探索和写作的事情都在进行，而且这只会让我的雄心倍增 10 倍去启动更多项目！旋转更多的盘子。所有的事情！

有句名言：“你可以拥有生活中的任何事，但不可能拥有一切。”

即使 AI 能将你在单个任务上的生产力提升 100 倍，我们人类每天的秒数仍然有限。

而且我们不是机器。我们不应该每一个清醒的小时都以 100% 的速度运作。

发生的是，我开始注意到我大约有 40 个“概念验证”项目在进行中，我开始感到职业倦怠的感觉在体内生长。每个项目都是一个新的开放循环，一项新的责任，一个新的需要照料的事务。

我用 AI 来减少所需工作量，于是我发明了无尽的“假工作”。

假工作：“主要为了让自己忙碌而分配或进行的工作”

别误会，我一路上玩得很开心。但这是一个失败的策略，我不得不修正它。

在他的书《精要主义》中，Greg McKeown 强调少做但更好地做事。

我认为这在 AI 时代至关重要。

与其使用人工智能来扩大你正在做的事情的数量（横向扩展），我逐渐意识到，最佳策略是对重要的事情投入更深入的努力（纵向扩展）。

简而言之，专注并坚持到底。

我本不打算今天早上写这篇文章，但我不得不写来阻止自己。

我还有另一篇题为“芝麻街简单法”（即将发布）的文章，我试图赶紧完成。然而，当我不断思考那篇文章时，我意识到自己没有尽最大努力。也许它可以算是一个稳妥的B/B-，但这个主题需要A+的努力才能产生我期望的影响。

于是我决定再花至少2-3次时间进行修订，专注于它并投入我的注意力。

加里·谭（Garry Tan）写了一篇很棒的文章：https://x.com/garrytan/status/2062760454649487491?s=20，讲述了部分日食和全日食的区别。

主要观点？你可能认为99%和100%的日食之间的差异仅为1%，只不过是四舍五入的误差。但从视觉效果来看，这是100倍的差异。部分日食就像云层的微弱遮挡。完整日食则如同夜晚诡异地降临世界。

两者的体验在效果上截然不同。

同样，我们喜爱的事物（产品、书籍、电影等）都承担了最后1%的代价，以提供100%的体验。

困难之处在于，这最后的1%可能占据总时间的50%-90%，这也是为什么许多人干脆觉得“差不多就好”，然后完成。

现在人工智能可以让事情的效率提高2-100倍，没有理由不去付出这最后1%的努力。

唯一的办法是保持无情的专注，然后对少数重要的未完成项目坚持到底。

我仍然犯了很多错误，因为要避免追逐所有闪亮的事物（所有的事情）非常困难，但回报值得这样做。

为此，我希望发布的文章数量更少，但每篇文章都更深入。

在人工智能时代，没有人应该感到精疲力竭。其根本目的是卸下所有繁重劳动，让我们节省时间，专注于重要的事物，并变得更有人性。

Conventional wisdom is that burnout is caused (solely) by overwork.

So logically, if AI can help us complete tasks 2-100x faster than before, we should be UNDERWORKED and experiencing ZERO burnout, right?

You may be too young to recognize this meme, but it’s the feeling most people in tech had when AI started accelerating their efficiency.

Because for years, all of us had dozens, if not hundreds, of side projects we could have started but had to shelve because there weren’t enough hours in a day.

Then AI came along and teased us with a seductive lie…

Claude: “But, maybe you can do it all now that I’m here!”

For the past decade, I’ve been a repeat startup founder + new dad + always ambitious person. I had over 100 article titles + outlines in draft. I had a someday maybe list full of 50 projects to start “when I had the time.”

I started to dip my toe in the water and YOLO some of these side projects between meetings. Queuing up Claude in 5-minute increments and then letting it rip before jumping to the next call.

The crazy thing is it started to work…

Things I wanted to try, explore, and write about were working, and this only 10X’d my ambition to start more projects! Spin more plates. ALL THE THINGS!

There’s the quote: “You can have anything in life, but not everything.”

Even when AI can 100x your productivity on a single task, we humans still have a finite number of seconds in a day.

And we’re not machines. We’re not meant to operate at 100% speed every waking hour.

What happened was I started to notice I had something like 40 “proof of concept” projects going on, and I was starting to feel that pang of burnout growing inside me. Each project was a new open loop, a new responsibility, and a new thing to tend to.

I used AI to reduce my required work, so I invented an endless amount of make-work.

Make Work: “work assigned or done chiefly to keep one busy”

Don’t get me wrong, I had fun along the way. But this is a failed strategy I had to course correct.

In his book Essentialism, Greg McKeown beats the drum about doing less, but better.

I think this is critical in an age of AI.

Rather than using AI to expand the number of things you’re doing (horizontal), I have come to realize the best strategy is to go way farther on the things that matter (vertical).

In short, focus and follow through.

I didn’t intend to write this article this morning, but I had to to stop myself.

I had another one titled “Sesame Street Simple” (coming soon) that I was trying to rush out the door. However, as I kept sitting with that article, I realized I wasn’t giving it my very best. Maybe it was a solid B/B-, but the topic deserves an A+ effort to have the impact I want it to make.

And I decided to give it at least 2-3 more revisions with focused time and attention.

Garry Tan penned an amazing article ：https://x.com/garrytan/status/2062760454649487491?s=20 about the difference between a partial and a total eclipse.

The main thrust? You think the difference between a 99% and a 100% eclipse is a mere 1%, a rounding error. But visually, it’s a 100x difference. A partial eclipse feels like the dimming of a cloud. A full eclipse is like an eerie nighttime befalling the world.

The experiences could not be more different in effect.

Likewise, things that we love (products, books, movies, etc.) pay the price of that last 1% to deliver that 100% experience.

Here’s the hard part. That last 1% may feel like 50-90% of the total time, which is why so many people just say “good enough” and ship.

Now that AI makes things 2-100x more efficient, there’s no reason not to pay the price of that last 1%.

The only way to do that is to be ruthlessly focused and then follow through on the few open projects that matter.

I’m still making lots of mistakes because it’s so hard not to chase the shiny (ALL THE THINGS), but the rewards are worth it.

To that end, I hope to publish fewer articles, but go deeper on each one.

And no one should be experiencing burnout in the age of AI. The entire point was to offload all the hard labor so we could be save time, focus on what matters, and be more human.