AI 如何重塑设计流程

今天的嘉宾是 Jenny Wen。Jenny 曾是 Claude 的设计负责人，现在领导 Claude Co-work 的设计工作。在此之前，她是 Figma 的设计总监，领导了 Fig Jam 和 Slides 的设计团队。她还曾在 Dropbox、Square 和 Shopify 担任设计师。我喜爱这次对话的原因是，Jenny 正身处设计行业未来的前沿，她将为我们一窥那个未来的面貌，以及设计师的工作将发生多么巨大的变化。这相当疯狂，也极其有趣。非常感谢 no 111 和 Emily Lin Hasham 为本次对话提供了话题和问题。别忘了访问 lennisproass.com，那里有专为 Lenny 通讯订阅者提供的超值优惠。在简短赞助商环节后，我们马上进入正题。

Today's guest is Jenny Wen. Jenny was head of design for Claude, is now leading design for Claude Co-work. Prior to that, she was director of design at Figma, where she led the design teams behind Fig Jam and Slides. She was also designer at Dropbox and Square and Shopify. And what I love about this conversation is that Jenny is living in the future of where design as a profession is heading. And she is here to give us a glimpse into what that looks like and how much things are going to be changing for designers. It is pretty wild and extremely interesting. A huge thank you to no 111 and Emily Lin Hasham for suggesting topics and questions for this conversation. Don't forget to check out lennisproass.com for an incredible set of deals available exclusively to Lenny's newsletter subscribers. Let's get into it after a short word from our wonderful sponsors.

Jenny，非常感谢你来做客，欢迎来到播客。

Jenny, thank you so much for being here and welcome to the podcast.

嗯，很高兴来到这里。

Yeah, excited to be here.

我一直很期待这次对话，因为我在这个播客上花了很多时间讨论软件工程的未来——这个角色变化有多大，产品管理的角色变化有多大。但我没怎么讨论设计的变化。显然，设计也在发生巨大变化，而你正好身处前沿。我也知道你对此有很多强烈的看法。所以我想聊的东西很多。我想先从一个宽泛的问题开始：随着 AI 的兴起，设计流程正在如何变化？

I've been looking forward to this conversation because I spent a lot of time on this podcast talking about the future of software engineering, how much that role is changing, the role of product management, how much that role is changing. I haven't spent a lot of time on how design is changing. Clearly it is also changing in a really big way and you have such a front row seat to where things are heading. I also know you have a lot of very strong opinions about where things are heading. So there's a lot of stuff I want to talk about. I want to just start with this broad question. How is the design process changing with the rise of AI?

变化很大。我认为这种变化还有很长的路要走。我觉得实际上我们看到工程领域在过去一段时间里的变化比设计领域要大得多。但工程领域的大量变化迫使设计也必须改变。背景是这样的：几个月前，也就是九月，我在柏林的一个会议上做了一次演讲，题目是“别相信设计流程”。我基本上是说，设计师被教导的那种设计流程——你先去做一堆研究和发现，然后发散、收敛、再发散、再收敛——这个我们奉为圭臬、拼命维护的流程，我们常说“相信流程”，它基本上已经死了。我觉得在 AI 时代之前它就已经在消亡了，但现在工程师可以跑起来，启动他们的七个 Claude Code 智能体，作为设计师，我们真的必须放弃那个流程。我认为这就是正在发生的重大变化。但即使在演讲后的三四个月里，那个演讲对我来说已经开始显得过时了，这有点尴尬。

It's changing a lot. I think it still has a long way to go in terms of the way it's changing. Like I think we've actually seen engineering change a lot more in the past little while than design actually has. But I think the result of engineering changing a bunch is that design is sort of forced to change. Some context around this: I did a talk at a conference in Berlin a few months ago in September and I called it 'Don't trust the design process' where I basically said, hey, this design process that designers have been taught — where you go off and do a bunch of research and discovery, then you diverge, converge, diverge, converge — this process that we sort of treated as gospel and tried so hard to preserve, we were like 'trust the process.' That is basically dead. I think it was sort of dying before the age of AI, but given now that engineers can go off and spin off their seven Claude Code agents, as designers we really have to let go of that process. And I think that's the big thing that's changing. But even in the past three to four months since I did that talk, that talk actually starts to feel pretty outdated to me, which is a little embarrassing.

设计师被教导的这个设计流程，我们几乎把它奉为圭臬。它基本上已经死了。你作为设计师，实际上已经没有时间再去制作那些精美的设计稿了。

This design process that designers have been taught, we sort of treat it as gospel. That's basically dead. You as a designer actually do not have the time to make these beautiful mocks anymore.

现在设计角色的很大一部分是帮助工程师和团队执行，而不仅仅是告诉他们“这是设计”。

A big part of the design role now is helping engineers and teams execute, not just telling them here's the design.

几年前，60% 到 70% 的工作是制作模型和原型。但现在我觉得制作模型的部分只占 30% 到 40%。

Few years ago, 60 to 70% of it was mocking and prototyping. But now I feel the mocking up part of it is 30 to 40%.

你最好别去阻碍，让他们自由发挥。不只是设计师觉得“哦，我们得跟上工程师的步伐”，我觉得连工程师也在问“我们怎么跟上自己？怎么跟上我们所有的智能体？”有七个智能体在不停地运行。

You're better off not blocking that, letting them cook. It's not just designers who are feeling like 'oh yeah we have to keep up with engineers.' I think even engineers are like 'how do we keep up with ourselves? How do we keep up with all our agents?' There are seven agents who are constantly running.

工程领域的大量变化迫使设计也必须改变。我们过去会制定 2 年、5 年甚至 10 年的愿景。现在愿景变成了 3 到 6 个月，而且不一定需要制作精美的幻灯片。有时只是创建一个原型，为人们指明正确的方向。

The result of engineering changing a bunch is that design is sort of forced to change. We used to go off and make this 2 year, 5 year, 10 year vision even. Now it becomes a vision that's 3 to 6 months out and isn't necessarily creating this beautiful deck. Sometimes just creating a prototype that points people in the right direction.

Boris 最近在播客里说，Claude Code 现在能帮他产生想法。我们会变得更擅长品味、判断和设计。我们可能有点过于执着于这些了。

Boris on the podcast recently was saying Claude Code is now helping him come up with ideas. We'll get better at taste and judgement and design. We might be holding on to that a little bit too much.

人类的大脑在哪些方面会继续有价值？

Where will human brains continue to be valuable?

归根结底，必须有人决定什么真正会被构建、什么真正重要。仍然需要有人对决策负责。

At the end of the day, someone has to decide what is actually going to get built and what actually matters. Someone still needs to be accountable for the decision.

你现在招聘设计师时会看重什么？

What do you now look for when you're hiring designers?

目前大概有三种类型的人让我非常感兴趣。

There's probably three archetypes of folks that are really interesting to me right now.

但尤其是在 Opus 4.6 带来的巨大转变，以及很多人在假期期间真正发现并使用 Claude Code 之后，我认为我们正在看到这种改变流程的力量进一步加剧。我现在看到的情况是，设计工作基本上分为两种类型，在这个新世界里，设计工作正在变得高度分层。第一种是纯粹支持实施和执行的工作。这种情况下，工程师们用他们的 Claude Code 来创建各种功能，任何人都可以提出一个想法。你只需要谈论一个想法，然后有人——通常是工程师，因为他们仍然比我们更擅长实现这些东西——就会做出一个粗糙的版本，你可以试用。作为设计师，你实际上没有时间再去做那些精美的设计稿，或者以这种方式来主导。然后我认为还有第二种同样非常重要的工作，那就是为事物创造愿景或方向。这种工作最难腾出时间来做，而且我们以前也做过，但我认为它的形态正在发生很大变化。我们过去会说要做一个设计愿景，要做一个 2 年、5 年甚至 10 年的愿景，然后指引我们朝着某个方向前进。但现在技术变化的方式让我们实际上不知道 2 年后会发生什么。变化太多，愿景通常变成了 3 到 6 个月，而且不一定是制作一个精美的、故事讲得很好的幻灯片。有时只是创建一个原型，为人们指明正确的方向。我认为这类工作在这个世界里仍然非常重要，因为在一个人们可以用他们的 Claude Code 随意创建功能、朝任何方向或方式实施的世界里，你需要为他们指明方向。为了确保我们都在共同创造有意义的东西，并且以高效的方式完成，如果我们都朝着一个更大的目标努力，那比随机做事情要高效得多。这就是我看到的巨大转变。我现在对此有一些看法，但三个月后再问我，可能又会发生变化。

But especially with the big shift of like Opus 4.6 and a bunch of folks just really discovering and using Claude Code over the holiday break, I think we're seeing this force to change our process happen even more. The way I sort of see it now is there are basically two types of design work, and design work is kind of becoming really stratified in this new world. So there's the first one, which is really just supporting the implementation and execution. This is the one where engineers are using their Claude Code to create all these features, and anybody can put an idea out there. You can just talk about an idea, and somebody, usually an engineer because they're still better at implementing this stuff than we are, will just make a scrappy version of it, and you can try it out. As a designer, you actually do not have the time to make these beautiful mocks anymore or to lead in this way. And then I think there's the second kind of work that feels also really important, which is creating the sort of vision or direction for things. This one feels the hardest to make time for, and it's still one that we did before, but I think the shape of it is very much changing. I think we used to go off and say we're going to do this design vision, we're going to go off and make this 2-year, 5-year, whatever 10-year vision even, and we're going to point us towards something. But the way the technology is changing now, we actually don't know what's going to happen in 2 years. There's too much changing, and it usually becomes a vision that's 3 to 6 months out and isn't necessarily something that is creating this beautiful deck that's beautifully story told. It's sometimes just creating a prototype that points people in the right direction. And I think this kind of work is still really important in this world because in a world where people can spin off their Claude Code, make whatever features they want in any direction or implementation, you need to point them towards something. And to make sure that we're all making something that makes sense together and is also done in a way where it's efficient, if we're all working towards something that has one greater cause, it's much more efficient to do that than just random things. So that's the big shift that I'm seeing. And I think I have opinions about it now, but ask me in like 3 months and it might actually change even more.

所以你的意思是，并不是你或设计领域觉得我们需要改变。而是工程能力以及你能如此快速地构建这一事实，迫使设计师的角色发生改变。因为正如你所说，工程师可以不断地发布、发布、发布，而你发现最好不去阻止他们，让他们自由发挥，然后在他们发布的过程中帮助他们，把东西整合起来，确保一切都能衔接，并给予一些指导。

So what you're saying here is it's not like you or the design field is like we need to change. It's engineering and the fact that you can build so quickly just forces the role of a designer to change because as you said engineers can just ship ship ship ship ship and what you're finding here is you're better off not blocking that, letting them cook as they say, and then there's kind of this mode of helping them along as they ship, bring it together, make sure it all kind of connects, guide them a little bit.

是的，我也这么认为。我不认为有一个统一的声音说设计师们，我们现在需要改变，但确实存在工程工具真正改变所带来的连锁效应。我认为明年左右我们可能也会看到设计工具的变化。但目前很多方面还落后于工程。而且我认为这对我们来说也是非常赋能的，因为作为设计师，我们现在也能使用很多这些编码工具，我们可以以实施的方式参与到流程中。比如我做了很多最后一步的工作，实现所有的打磨，并与工程师紧密合作，让功能最终完成，同时用实际代码制作原型，而不是再次依赖工程师来做这些。

Yeah, I think so. Yeah, I don't think there is like one unifying voice that's like designers, we need to change right now, but there is sort of the follow-on effects of engineering tooling really changing. I think we'll probably see design tooling change in this next year or so as well. But a lot of it right now is trailing behind. And I think it's also really empowering for us too because as designers we also now have access to a lot of these coding tools and we can be a part of the process in a way where we're implementing stuff. Like I'm doing a lot of last mile stuff where I'm implementing all the polish and sort of working with engineers really closely to get the feature across the line, and also prototype stuff in actual code as opposed to relying on engineers to do that again.

你认为这在所有公司中真实程度如何？比如 AI 公司、非 AI 公司。有人可能听到这个，Anthropic Claude，好吧，他们处于最前沿。一方面，它有点偏向开发者。但我想人们可能会觉得，好吧，这在 Salesforce 不会发生，在 ServiceNow 也不会发生。所以我想，你觉得这是所有团队的发展方向吗？主要是 AI 前沿公司吗？你认为设计流程的转变会有多广泛？

How true do you think this is at all companies? At say AI companies, non-AI companies. Someone may be hearing this, Anthropic Claude, okay, it's like they're at the bleeding edge. For one, it's developer a little bit. But I think people might be feeling like okay, this is not going to happen at Salesforce, this is not going to happen at ServiceNow, wherever. So I guess, do you feel like this is where all teams are heading? Is it mostly AI bleeding edge companies? How widespread do you think the design process shift is going to be?

我去年做的那场演讲奇怪地成为了我做过的最有共鸣的演讲。我认为这是整个行业开始感受到的事情，人们会说，哦，是的，我们不能再使用旧的设计流程了。你知道，我们正在使用像 Claude Code 和 BZero 这样的工具来启动原型，产品经理也开始启动原型等等。所以我认为有一些东西正在浮现。但那次演讲的另一个有趣观察是，实际上也有相当多的反对声音。人们显然将整个职业生涯都投入到学习、教授、使用这个非常稳定的设计流程中，我认为有很多质疑，比如，哦，我们不能没有发现阶段，我们不能没有这些流程环节。所以我认为行业中仍有一部分人还没有完全接受这种工作方式，如果这说得通的话。

So the talk that I did last year has weirdly been like the most resonant talk that I've done. And I think it's something that people are starting to feel across the industry where they're like, oh yeah, we can't do the old design process anymore. You know, we are using tools like Claude Code and BZero and whatnot to start to spin up prototypes, and PMs are starting to spin up prototypes and stuff like that as well. So I think there's something there emerging. But the other interesting observation with that talk too was there was actually also a decent amount of backlash. Like people clearly have invested their entire careers in learning, teaching, using this really stable design process, and they were, I think there was a lot of discrediting like, oh yeah, we can't do without discovery, we can't do without these pieces of process. So I think there is still a piece of the industry that is not quite there yet in terms of this way of working, if that makes sense.

嗯。

Yeah.

而其中很大一部分是，你可以争论的问题是，什么能带来最好、最成功的产品和公司。你可以说是花时间做发现、用户研究、设计稿、迭代、Beta 测试。或者也可以是工程师发布一些还行、不惊艳、但足够好的东西，我们学习、迭代、构建、再迭代。你的感觉是，第二条路不仅是每个人都在做的，而且实际上在当前能带来更好的产品吗？

And a big part of this is, you could argue the question is what leads to the best, most successful products and companies. And you could argue it's spending time doing discovery, user research, mocks, iterating, beta testing. Or it could be just engineer ships stuff that's okay, not amazing, good enough, we learn, iterate, build, iterate. Is your sense that that second path is not only just what everyone's doing, but that actually leads to the better product at this point?

我认为你需要在何时真正发布产品上做出选择并自行判断。但我认为执行、尝试新事物并用真实数据和真实用户思维在产品中测试的能力，确实能带来更好的产品，尤其是当我们都在使用这些非确定性的新兴 AI 模型时。你无法模拟所有状态，你知道，你无法理论化，甚至无法用它制作一个可点击的原型。

I think you sort of have to choose and use your discretion as to when to actually ship something. But I think the ability to execute, try something out and try it with real data and a real user mindset in the product, I think that does lead to a better product, especially as we're all working with these new developing AI models that are non-deterministic. You can't mock up all the states, you know, and you can't theorize and you can't even make a clickable prototype with it.

你必须在底层使用实际的模型，并观察人们用它们尝试自己的用例，因为对于这些模型，你会发现你可以为不同的用例设计它们，但你必须通过观察人们的使用来发现用例。

You sort of have to use the actual models underneath and you have to see people try it out with their use cases because with these models, you discover you can design them for different use cases, but you have to discover use cases as you see people using them.

基于你刚才说的，我经常听到的另一件事是，你不知道人们会用 AI 做什么。你不知道它在某些事情上会有多好，这是它的非确定性部分。所以你可以创建这些可能性的惊人模型，然后人们以完全不同的方式使用它，这就是 co-work 的来源，可能甚至 Claude Code 一开始也是这样。那么在 Anthropic 做设计师是什么感觉？给我们讲讲在风暴中心 Anthropic 工作的一天。

The other thing I always hear, building on what you just said, is you don't know what people will do with AI. You don't know how good it'll be at certain things, the nondeterministic piece of it. So you can create these amazing mocks of what it might be, and then people use it in a completely different way, which is where co-work came from and probably even Claude Code at the beginning. So what's it like to be a designer at Anthropic? Just give us a day in the life of working at Anthropic, at the center of the storm.

在 Anthropic，我花了很多时间实际上只是了解公司里正在发生的事情。我觉得这家公司——我在其他几家规模差不多的公司工作过——信息量很大，事情很多，但我真的觉得有必要跟上。你知道，有研究方面的模型开发，任何时候都有很多不同的团队在原型设计和尝试不同的想法，还有很多不同的代号之类的东西。很多时候我都在努力导航，弄清楚那些项目是什么，因为我在试图发现和看到接下来会发生什么，因为既有研究团队的东西，也有我们一些更接近研究、尝试和原型设计的实验室团队的东西。然后还有一些我自己想尝试的东西，你知道，我们内部有很多原型和产品可以使用，我只是好奇，想试试那些东西。然后我觉得内部也有很多人对行业走向有很多见解和观点，其中一些读起来真的很有趣，因为很多都是哲学辩论或公司方向之类的东西。是的，我觉得我就是想跟上这些事情，而在一个普通公司，我会觉得没关系，这是在我触及范围之外的事情，我不太关心。在这里，我认为无论是数量还是正在发生的事情的种类，我都非常感兴趣去跟上。除了这种跟上节奏，那不是我工作的主要部分，但我认为它确实是其中非常有趣的一部分。

A good amount of time at Anthropic is actually just catching up on what's happening at the company. I think this is the company where—I've worked at a few other companies around this size—I think there's just a lot of information and a lot of things going on, but I feel really compelled to keep up with it. You know, there's stuff like model developments on the research side, and at any given time there are so many different teams prototyping and trying different ideas out, and there are a bunch of different code names and stuff like that. A lot of time I'm just trying to navigate and figure out what those projects are because I'm trying to spot and see what's coming up ahead for me, because there's stuff from both the research team but also some of our labs teams that are closer to research and trying out and prototyping stuff. And then there's just stuff I want to try out, you know, like we have a bunch of prototypes and products internally that we can use, and I am just curious and I want to try those things out. And then I think there's also a lot of folks who internally have a lot of insights and opinions on where the industry is going, and some of those are just really interesting to read because a lot of these are like philosophical debates or directions of the company and stuff like that. Yeah, I feel like I just want to keep up with these things, whereas at a normal company I'm like, it's fine, this is stuff happening outside of my reach, I don't really care as much. Here, I think it's both the volume and the kinds of things that are happening that I'm really interested in keeping up with. Aside from that sort of keep-up, that's not a huge part of my job, but I do think it's a really interesting part of it.

嗯，这跟你之前说的点联系起来了。现在设计角色的很大一部分是帮助工程师和团队执行。不仅仅是告诉他们这是模型，这是设计。而是帮助他们保持正轨，帮助他们连接想法，在过程中创造连贯的体验。所以这说得通。

Well, it connects to the point you made earlier. A big part of the design role now is helping engineers and teams execute. Not just telling them here's the mock, here's the design. It's helping them stay on track, helping them connect ideas, create a cohesive experience as it's happening. So that makes sense.

是的。是的。是的。我认为部分原因只是好奇心，你知道，感觉就像我坐在前排，目睹行业里发生的这么多事情。所以很多时候，是的，我们的 Slack 是个金矿，你知道，我就是很兴奋地阅读人们正在做的事情和他们说的话。

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I think part of it is just curiosity, you know, like it feels like I have this front row seat to so much happening in the industry. And so a lot of it is like, yeah, our Slack is a gold mine, you know, like I'm just excited to read through the things that people are working on and they're saying.

我从未想过，作为一个普通人，已经有这么多 AI 新闻要跟踪，而实际看到实验室内部发生的事情又是一整套新的信息流要关注。

I never thought about how there's already so much AI news to keep track of as a regular person, and then actually seeing what's actually happening inside a lab is a whole new set of feeds to watch.

是的。是的。我觉得最好的 AI 新闻可能是在内部，如果你在这些公司的 Slack 里的话。

Yeah. Yeah. It's like I think that is the best AI news is probably internally if you're ever at one of these companies in the Slack.

靠。是的。跟踪正在发生的事情这个问题越来越难了。好的。所以那是工作的一部分。还有什么？

Damn. Yeah. It just problem keeps getting harder of just keeping track what's going on. Okay. So that's part of the job. What else?

仍然有一些传统的工作，比如让我思考未来会发生什么，并为此做一些设计。例如，这周我留出了一些时间，我想，好吧，我们一直在 co-work 上处于执行模式，现在我想留出一些时间来思考，嘿，未来 3 个月会是什么样子，考虑到市场的位置、模型的位置，它实际上可能走向哪里，可能是什么？因为我认为可视化并向团队展示，让大家朝着同一个方向前进仍然非常有帮助。然后我一天中还有很多时间与工程师一起即兴创作，很多只是对话、白板讨论，或者浏览他们构建的东西并给他们反馈，以那种类似咨询的方式做设计师。然后我有一部分时间花在代码上，你知道，比如打磨、实现东西。有时会发生这样的情况：我和一个工程师一起解决了一个问题，他们实现了第一个版本，然后我就进去和他们一起打磨。这是我工作中非常有趣的一部分，我认为几个月前还不存在这么多。

There is still some of the traditional like let me think about what's happening in the future and let me make some designs for that. That's something that for example this week I've allotted some time to where I'm like okay cool, we have been in a lot of execution mode for co-work, and now I want to set aside some time to think about hey what do the next like 3 months look like and where could that actually go given where the market's at, where the models are at, and what could that be? Because I think it's still really helps to visualize that and show that to the team and point everyone in the same direction. And then I also spend a bunch of my day just jamming on stuff with engineers, like a lot of it is just a conversation or whiteboarding or going through something that they built and giving them feedback on it, and being a designer in that kind of way where we're like consulting. And then I spend a part of my day in code, you know, like polishing, implementing stuff. Sometimes what happens is an engineer and I have worked through something and they've implemented a first version of it, and I just go in and polish it with them. And that's a really fun part of my job that I think didn't exist as much a few months ago.

你还在做传统设计流程的元素吗？原型设计、用户研究、小组讨论，我不知道，就像你描述的那整套东西。

Are you still doing elements of the traditional design process? Prototyping, user research, panels, I don't know, just like going out and in, you know, like the whole thing you described.

是的，我们在某种程度上仍然在做所有这些。我们团队里有一位用户研究员，他正在组织传统研究和调查，整个团队都在阅读那些研究和反馈。我们仍然在做原型设计。我们仍然在做模型。我认为只是我现在有了更广泛的工具，而且我认为我花在每件事上的时间比例发生了变化。

Yeah, we're still doing all of that to some extent. We have a user researcher on the team who is putting together both traditional studies as well as surveys, and the whole team is reading those studies and that feedback. We are still prototyping stuff. We are still mocking stuff up. I think it's just I have a wider set of tools now, and I think the proportion of time I spend doing each thing just has changed.

明白了。好的。所以这是一个非常有趣的要点。以前那是很大一部分——我想以前你生活的饼图会是传统的思考、规划、原型设计、建模、研究，然后就是反馈和执行，而现在是今天这样。

Got it. Okay. So that's a really interesting takeaway. It used to be that was a huge—like I guess what would be the pie chart of what your life was before where it's like traditional thinking, planning, prototyping, mocking, research and then just like feedback and execution and now today.

是的。我认为作为设计师，几年前我会说大概 60% 到 70% 的时间是建模和原型设计，然后最后 20% 左右的时间是与工程师即兴创作、咨询，最后大概 10% 的时间用于协调会议等。但现在我觉得建模部分大概是 30% 到 40%，然后另外 30% 到 40% 现在是直接与工程师即兴创作和结对，然后还有一部分——我不知道还剩多少——但有一部分现在也是实现工作。

Yeah. I think as a designer a few years ago I would say maybe 60 to 70% of it was like mocking and prototyping stuff up, and then spending the last 20 or so doing the sort of jamming with engineers, consulting with them, and the last like 10% maybe doing coordination meetings etc. But now I feel like the mocking up part of it is like 30 to 40%, and then there's that other 30 to 40% there that is now jamming and pairing directly with engineers, and then there's a slice—I don't know how much I have left—but there's a slice of it that is now like implementation as well.

太棒了。顺着这个话题，你的 AI 工具栈里有什么？作为设计师，我知道你也是管理者。我想聊聊你实际在用哪些工具？

Amazing. So kind of following that thread, what's in your AI stack? What do you as a designer? I know you're a manager. I want to talk about how you actually are I see also what's in your AI stack. What tools are you using in your role?

我的 AI 工具栈里有什么？嗯，我们正在深入云栈。是的。我显然在用聊天工具，比如 Cloud Chat，而且越来越多地使用 Claude Co-Work。我基本上把所有聊天用例都迁移到了 Co-Work，因为我发现它更擅长处理那些长时间运行的任务。我之前问 Claude 的大部分事情都是这类长时间任务。当然还有 Claude Code。我主要在 VS Code 的 IDE 里用它，因为我经常调整前端的东西，能看到代码同时和 Claude 对话很有帮助。我还在尝试更远程地使用 Claude Code，比如通过手机和 Slack。有人会说“哦，这个图标不对”，然后你 @Claude，Claude 就搞定了，你再捡起 PR 就完成了，这真的很有趣。我觉得我们这里完全是个 Claude 之家。所以基本上这就是我的工具栈。

What is in my AI stack? Well, we're working on topics. So, we're going deep on the cloud stack. Yeah. I'm using obviously like chat, cloud chat, and then increasingly more and more Claude Cowork. I've basically shifted all of my chat use cases over to co-work because I've been finding that it's better at these longer running tasks. Most of the things I was asking Claude for are these longer running tasks. And then there's Claude Code, of course. I use it mostly in VS Code in the IDE because I'm usually tweaking frontend stuff and it helps to just be able to see the code and then talk to Claude as well. I've been trying to actually use Claude Code more remotely, like through both mobile and through Slack as well. It's really fun for somebody to say, "Oh yeah, this one icon's off or something," and you just at mention Claude and Claude does it, and then you pick up the PR and it's done. That's been really fun too. And yeah, I think we're a fully Claude house here. So yes, that's basically my stack.

作为设计师，你还在用 Figma 吗？

Are you still using Figma as a designer?

我还在用 Figma。是的。

I am still using Figma. Yes. Yes.

好的，我就在等这个。所以 Figma 还是你生活的一部分。作为前 Figmate，你们是这么叫的吗？

Okay. I was waiting to hear. So, Figma is still part of your life. Being a former Figmate, is that what you were called?

是的，Figates。

Yeah. Figates. Yeah.

好的。我知道 Twitter 上有个大争论：代码是不是设计的未来？我们还需要 Figma 吗？还需要设计吗？你怎么看？

Okay. So, I know there's this big debate on Twitter just like is code the future of design. Do we need to like Figma anymore? Do we need to design? What's your sense?

Figma 仍然很重要。作为前 Figmate，我可能有点偏见，但我觉得当我用 Figma 时，我会想：是的，这就是我应该用的，它仍然很好地填补了我的空白。我认为其中很大一部分是探索大量不同的选项。这是设计过程中非常重要的一环——能想出 8 到 10 种不同的方法来做一件事。我认为最好的设计发生在你能把一堆想法扔到墙上，然后筛选、推动自己想出各种不同方向的时候。目前，编码或使用这些编码工具并不太适合这一点，因为它们非常线性。你会深度投入一个方向，然后和 Claude 迭代，比如。所以 Figma 在探索所有这些不同选项方面非常出色，我认为它在一定程度上仍会存在。然后，还有一些非常精细的视觉和交互细节，也很适合在 Figma 中尝试。同样，这是很多不同的方向，但都是微观方向。能够思考不同的排版或风格，在画布上专门探索这些，仍然非常有帮助，而且我不总是想直接去代码里做。

Figma is still important. I mean, as a former Figmate, I'm maybe even biased in that way, but I think there is still like when I use Figma, I'm like, yes, this is what I should be using and it still fills a very good gap for me. I think a lot of that is actually just like one is exploring a lot of different options. I think that's a really important part of the design process to be able to just think about like eight to 10 different ways to do something. I think the best design happens when you're able to just throw a bunch of ideas at the wall and curate and just push yourself to come up with a bunch of these different directions. Right now, coding or working with some of these coding tools doesn't lend itself super well to that because it's super linear. You super invest in one direction and you just iterate with Claude on them, for example. So, Figma has been really great at just exploring all these different options and I think it's still going to exist that way to some extent. And then I think there's like really fine sort of visual and interaction details that are also really great to be able to just try out in Figma. Again, it's a lot of different directions, but it's micro directions. It's being able to think about like different typography or styles. Having those in a canvas where you can just explore that specifically is still so helpful and is not something that I always want to go directly to code in.

有趣的是你还在用 IDE，因为在工程领域，它明显在向命令行和智能体迁移，IDE 有点过时了。所以这很合理。你只想编辑一些 CSS 东西、一些颜色。所以我能理解为什么不让智能体直接“嘿，把这个十六进制值改了”，直接改更简单。

It's interesting you still use an IDE because in engineering it's clearly shifting to command lines, agents, IDs are kind of moving to not be cool anymore. So it makes a lot of sense. You just want to edit some CSS things, some color stuff. And so I could see why not just telling the agent, "Hey, just come on, change this one hex value," just changing it is so much easier.

是啊，当你可以直接进去改成另一个类时，说“你能把这个改成这个类吗”真的很烦。

Yeah, it's really annoying to be like, "Can you change this to this class" when you can just go in and change it to a different class.

所以这很有趣。我想知道 IDE 现在是否对设计师和产品经理有用，而工程师已经转向别处了。

So that's interesting. I wonder if IDs now become useful for designers and PMs and engineers have moved on.

嗯，也许吧。是的。

Yeah, maybe. Yeah.

好的。你花了很多时间和工程师一起工作，给他们反馈，引导他们往正确的方向走。我感觉你的建议是放手，不要觉得自己必须当守门人，但也要帮他们朝着有凝聚力的方向前进，创造出我们引以为傲的产品。我觉得很多设计师现在都处于这种状态：“天哪，我根本跟不上这些工程师整天发布东西的速度。”你学到了什么，无论是如何帮助工程师提升设计水平，从而让最终结果更好，还是如何保持掌控而不发疯？

Okay. So a lot of your time you spend working with engineers, giving them feedback, kind of nudging them in the right direction. There's a sense I feel of just like your advice is like let go. Don't feel like you need to be this gatekeeper, but there's this piece of okay, help them move in a direction that is cohesive and is creating products we're proud of. A lot of designers, I think, are in this boat right now just like, "Oh my god, I can't keep up with all these engineers shipping stuff all day." What's something you learned about just either how to help your engineers get better at design so that it just ends up being better or just kind of keeping on top of this and not going crazy?

每当我和工程师合作项目，更多是咨询性质时，我会试着解释我为什么这么想，帮他们提炼原则，而不是直接说“不，我觉得这个不应该放这里”。而是说“不，我觉得这里应该有个按钮，因为不是所有人都知道你可以提示这个。”然后举一个来自研究等背景的例子。我也会尽量引导工程师去看我们的设计系统之类的东西，以及代码，因为现在 Claude 写了很多代码，但它并不总是能识别设计系统中的内容。所以，尽可能让他们掌握未来可以独立使用的东西，这很有帮助。至于你提到的不要发疯，我觉得这很难。现在真的很难。我从工程师和设计师那里都经常看到这种情况：既然我们能做这么多，我们就想做得更多。所以不只是设计师觉得“哦，我们得跟上工程师”，连工程师也在想“我们怎么跟上自己？”这是我经常听到的。

Whenever I do work with engineers on projects and it's more on like a consulting basis, I do just try to explain why I'm thinking the way that I'm thinking to help them extract principles as opposed to me just being like, "No, I don't think this should go here." It's like, "No, I think we should have a button here because not everybody realizes you can prompt this." And here's an example where it comes from research and whatnot. So, I also just like try to point engineers to our design system and stuff like that and code because right now Claude is like writing a lot of the code and it's not always picking up stuff in the design system and whatnot. So, as much as I can sort of equip them with stuff that they can use in the future without me, that's helpful. And then on your point of trying not to go crazy, I think it's hard, you know. I think it's really hard right now. And I see this a lot from actually both engineers and designers where it's like now that we're sort of capable of doing so much, we want to do more. And so I think it's not just designers who are feeling like, "Oh yeah, we have to keep up with engineers." I think even engineers are like, "How do we keep up with ourselves right now?" So that's something I'm hearing a lot.

太对了。天哪，怎么跟上我们所有的智能体。我们一直在运行七个智能体。

That's so true. Oh man, how to keep up with all our agents. Our seven agents we're constantly running.

是啊。

Yeah.

好的。那么作为设计师，在这个职业中，工艺、出色的体验、质量和信任是工作的核心部分，有助于将这些注入产品，因为理论上这会带来非常成功的产品和公司。当你的产品每天发布上千次，你无法完全掌控，而且没有设计师参与时，你如何看待保持工艺质量、信任？

Okay. So then as a designer where in this profession, craft and great experience and quality and trust are such a core part of the job to help instill that in the products because that in theory leads to really successful products and companies. How do you just think about maintaining craft quality, trust as your products are just shipping a thousand times a day and you're not able to stay on top of them and there's no designer involved?

并不是没有设计师参与，而是说一个设计师要处理的事情太多了。

It's not that there's no designer involved. It's more just like there's almost that there's too much for one designer to handle.

我在想，功能或产品处于采用周期的哪个阶段，是早期预览还是成熟发布。比如，我们有时会以研究预览的形式发布产品。它还很早期，会有很多缺陷，我们会提前说明。Quad Co-work 就是一个很好的例子：我们把它标为研究预览，知道它就像我们的模型一样——这是它最差的状态——但我们还是发布了，因为内部测试后发现它有一些强大的功能，某些人会从中受益。它可能不是最容易用的，质量也不是最高的，还会有一些问题，但我们相信利大于弊。这样做是可以的，尤其是当产品已经具备真正价值的时候。但你必须向用户承诺：我们会发布它，然后迭代，听取你们的反馈，让它变得更好。你必须做出承诺，向世界展示你正在持续交付和改进。如果你发布了一个早期产品，然后什么都不做，你就会失去信任——这会损害品牌。但在早期发布的同时维护品牌是可能的。我们在这方面做得不错。作为设计师，我觉得这很有趣，因为你可以立即学习并知道下一步该做什么。

I think about where the features or products are in the cycle of adoption versus early preview. For example, we sometimes launch things as a research preview. It's early, it's going to have flaws, and we caveat that. Quad Co-work is a good example: we labeled it a research preview, knowing it's like our models—this is the worst it'll ever be—but we put it out because internally we've tried it and there's something powerful that some people will benefit from. It might not be the easiest or highest quality, and it might have issues, but we believe the benefits outweigh the cons. That's okay to do, especially when the product already has real value. But you have to promise users: we'll put it out, iterate, take your feedback, and make it better. You have to commit, show the world you're shipping and improving. You lose trust if you release early and nothing happens—that degrades a brand. But releasing early while maintaining brand is possible. We've been doing that well. For me as a designer, it's fun because you learn immediately and know what to do next.

我听你描述过这种方式，叫做通过速度建立信任。

The way I've heard you describe this is building trust through speed.

没错，确实如此。这不仅是靠速度建立信任，也是让人们感到被倾听，我们根据他们的反馈进行修复，这些反馈得到了重视和应用。

Yeah, for sure. It's building trust through speed, but also making people feel heard and that we're fixing things based on their feedback, which is appreciated and used.

是的，当实验室发布产品时，这一点很明显。你们在这方面做得很好。团队里的每个人都在发推文，回复推文和评论，然后发布修复。给人一种明确的感觉：这只是今天的状态，我们知道哪里有问题，我们会修复。而且因为 Claude Code 可以非常快速地编码，修复也来得很快。

Yeah, it's clear when the labs launch stuff. You all are very good at this. Everyone on the team is tweeting, responding to tweets and comments, and then shipping fixes. There's a clear sense that this is just today, we know this is broken, and we will fix it. And because Claude Code can code very quickly, the fixes come very fast.

另一个大家常问的大问题是：什么技能会变得有价值？Lex 最近说过：随着 AI 越来越聪明，人类大脑在哪些方面仍然有价值？我们已经从代码片段自动补全发展到 100% 的代码由 AI 编写。现在 AI 在审查自己的代码。Boris 最近在播客里说，Claude Code 正在帮他构思想法和决定要构建什么。整个产品工作流程正在被 AI 逐步吞噬。那么，至少在超级智能出现之前，人类大脑在哪些方面仍然有用？你认为 AI 会在品味、判断力和设计方面变得非常出色吗？

Another big question people ask is: what skills become valuable? Lex put it recently: where will human brains continue to be valuable as AI gets smarter? We've gone from tab-completing code segments to 100% of code written by AI. Now AI reviews its own code. Boris on the podcast recently said Claude Code is helping him come up with ideas and decide what to build. The whole product workflow is being eaten by AI. So where will human brains still be useful, at least until we have superintelligence? Do you think AI will get very good at taste, judgment, and design?

我认为 AI 会在品味、判断力和设计方面变得更好。是的。我们可能过于坚持认为设计师永远知道该发布什么。但我确实认为 AI 的品味会提升。归根结底，必须有人决定实际构建什么以及什么重要。当人们说 AI 会为我们构建软件时，构建软件的难点往往不在于构建本身。工作中最困难的时刻可能是关于某个功能应该包含什么的分歧。AI 可以参与，但它无法解决人与人之间的争端。所以，决定构建什么这件事——在某种程度上是品味，或者说是关于下一步做什么的判断。

I think it will get better at taste, judgment, and design. Yeah. We might be holding on to that too much, saying a designer will always know the best thing to ship. But I do think AI's sense of taste will get better. At the end of the day, someone has to decide what actually gets built and what matters. When people say AI will just build software for us, the hard parts of building software are often not building it. The hardest times at work are probably things like disagreeing about what should go into a feature. AI can weigh in, but it can't solve disputes between people. So there's something about deciding what goes into things—that's taste in some way, or judgment about what to do next.

看看 AI 接管编程的速度有多快——一年前，甚至两年前，大多数人还认为 AI 不会变得这么好。现在最优秀的工程师如此信任它，甚至不再看代码了。这让我重新评估了那些假设，比如 AI 永远无法像优秀的 PM 或设计师那样判断什么是好的、决定构建什么。我开始认为它会达到那个水平。即使在你举的例子中，AI 也可以给两个试图做决定的人提供所有数据，并说明为什么这是正确答案，然后只需按“是”就行。所以我认为我们低估了它在这方面会变得多好。

Just watching how quickly AI took over coding—a year ago, definitely two years ago, most people thought AI wouldn't get this good. Now the best engineers trust it so much they don't even look at the code anymore. That made me re-evaluate assumptions that AI will never be as good as really good PMs or designers at judging what's great and deciding what to build. I'm starting to think it will get there. Even in your example, AI could give two people trying to make a decision all the data and say why this is the right answer, and just press yes. So I think we undervalue how good it'll get at this stuff.

是的。

Yeah.

所以，你的感觉是它会变得更好，但我们仍然需要优秀的设计师、优秀的 PM 和工程师参与进来。

So, your sense is it'll get better, but we'll still need awesome designers, awesome PMs, and engineers to be involved.

是的。是的。是的，我认为仍然需要有人决定我们要构建什么样的产品，或者根据 AI 呈现的内容，仍然需要有人对决策负责。就像即使 Claude 今天可以为你编写所有代码，仍然是工程师对代码是否实际工作、在产品中是否有意义负责。所以存在那个决策和判断层，也许有一天我们不必做，但它仍然落在我们身上。

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think someone will still have to decide what kind of product we want to build, or given what AI presents, someone still needs to be accountable for the decision. The same way that even though Claude can write all the code for you today, it's still an engineer who is accountable for whether that code actually works and makes sense in the product. So there's that decision-making and judgment layer, which maybe one day we won't have to do, but it still falls on us.

是的，这说不通。这让我想起放射学的例子，总有一种感觉 AI 会接管那个领域并告诉你发生了什么。但人类主要的作用是签字批准决策，因为如果出错需要有人承担责任。这可不是世界上最好的工作。但那是另一个领域：健康 vs. 代码。

Yeah, it doesn't make sense. It makes me think about the radiology example where there's always the sense that AI is going to take over that field of radiology and tell you what is going on. But the human is mostly useful for signing off on the decision because someone needs to be liable if they're wrong. Which isn't the best job in the world. But that's a different game: health versus code.

好的。AI 设计中另一个持续存在的问题是，感觉聊天机器人和终端就像……我不认为有人预料到这会成为 AI 的持久用户界面，比如聊天机器人。不，不，不，这只是旅程中的临时停靠点，但现在它甚至走得更远，变成了终端。你有什么想法……我不知道……你认为我们与 AI 交互的方式会有下一步吗，还是说聊天机器人和终端基本上就是我们的终点？

Okay. Another ongoing question in AI design is just like it feels like chatbots and terminals are just like... I don't think anyone expected this to be the lasting user interface to AI, like chatbots. No, no, no, this is just a temporary stop along the journey, but now it's got even further and just terminals. Do you have thoughts on... I don't know where... Do you think there will be a next step of how we interface with AI, or do you think chatbots and terminals are mostly where we end up?

很可能是两者的结合，既有你与之交互、点击的 UI 和界面，感觉更触觉化。我们在 Claude 中已经看到并尝试了这一点，比如聊天机器人。我们最近发布了一系列小部件，让 Claude 可以引出并问你问题，还能以交互方式显示天气、股票等信息。我认为这些反响很好，因为人们仍然喜欢看到 UI、触摸和点击它们，而且它们比向 Claude 打字要高效得多。但同时，当我们真正深入聊天机器人范式时，我认为这给了我们一个全新的灵活性世界，这是那些固化的 UI 所没有的。所以我的看法是，我认为聊天永远不会消失，因为它开辟了一种全新的方式，以无限的方式与模型合作，与计算机对话，这是我们以前没有的。但我认为对于非常具体的事情，UI 仍然是最直接的。而且我认为很可能发生的是，很多 UI 将越来越多地由模型生成，而不是我们手动编码每个实例。但我觉得我们处于这样一个空间：我认为聊天，甚至可能终端对话，都不会消失。

There will likely be a combination of both, like both UIs and interfaces that you are interacting with, clicking with, and that feel more tactile. We are already seeing this and playing with this within Claude, like the chatbot. So we recently released a bunch of these widgets that let Claude sort of elicit and ask you questions and also show you things like the weather and stocks and whatnot in interactive ways. And I think those have had a really good reception because people still like to see UIs and touch them and click them, and they are much more efficient than typing something to Claude. But at the same time, when we really leaned into this chatbot paradigm, I think that just gave us this whole world of flexibility that we didn't get with these sort of baked-in UIs. So my read here is like I don't think chat is ever going away because this opened up this new way of infinite ways to work with the model and to sort of talk to the computer that we just didn't have before. But I think that it will still be most direct for very specific things to exist in this UI. And I think that what will probably happen here is that a lot of those UIs will be generated more and more often by the models as opposed to something that we're hand coding each instance. But I think we're in this space where I don't think chat and maybe even talking to the terminal is going to go away.

有趣的是，在 OpenClaw、Claude、mbot 等所有名字中，创新之一是通过 WhatsApp、Telegram 和 SMS 与它聊天的另一种方式，就像另一种形式的聊天机器人，但那是一个巨大的解锁：哦，我可以通过 WhatsApp 直接与它聊天。

It's interesting that with OpenClaw, Claude, mbot, all the names, the innovation, one of the big innovations is another way to chat with it through WhatsApp and Telegram and SMS, just like another form of chatbot, but that was a big unlock: oh, I could just chat with it through WhatsApp.

是的。就像你喜欢聊天和与人交谈一样，我们作为人类一直在这样做。所以这是一种非常丰富的交互方式，现在我们基本上有了另一种与计算机交互的媒介。

Yeah. And it's like you like chatting and talking to someone is still like, you know, we as humans are doing it. And so it's a way for us to interact in a really rich way, and now we just have this other medium to interact with a computer basically.

是的。所以 Kevin Wheel，他在另一个我不提名字的 AI 实验室工作，他在播客中提出了一个很好的观点：对话是处理各种智力水平的绝佳方式。我们可以与非常聪明和不太聪明的人交谈，对话这种方式在整个谱系中扩展得很好。我们可以与智商 200、300 的人交谈，对话仍然有效。所以这就是为什么它一直是处理模型不断增长的智力的美妙方式，并且它继续有效。

Yeah. So Kevin Wheel, who works at another AI lab I won't mention, he had this great point on the podcast that talking is such a beautiful way to handle every level of intelligence. We can talk to people that are very very smart and not so smart, and it's talking and it scales so well across the spectrum. We can talk to people at 200 IQ, 300, like talking still works. So that's why it's been this beautiful way to deal with the growing intelligence of models and it continues to work.

是的，这完全说得通。是的。

Yeah, that totally makes sense. Yeah.

本期节目由 Omni 赞助。如今许多产品团队都在讨论如何交付 AI 分析。难点显而易见。让 LLM 在生产环境中猜测 SQL 是一团糟，而且是个坏主意。Omni 采取了不同的方法。他们内置了语义层，因此当你嵌入他们的分析时，AI 实际上知道你的业务定义，而不仅仅是原始表。你可以在任何内容进入生产环境之前测试查询、验证推理并锁定权限。如果你想在你的产品中拥有 AI 分析，而无需从头构建整个堆栈，请访问 omni.co/lenny 获取免费 3 周试用。Perplexity、DBT 和 Buzzfeed 等公司使用 Omni 来交付客户可以信赖的分析。网址是 omni.co/lenny。

This episode is brought to you by Omni. Many product teams today are in the process of debating how to ship AI analytics. The hard part is obvious. Having an LLM guess at SQL in production is a huge mess and just a bad idea. Omni takes a different approach. They have a semantic layer built in so that when you embed their analytics, the AI actually knows your business definitions, not just your raw tables. You can test queries, validate the reasoning, and lock down permissions before anything hits production. If you want AI analytics in your product without building the whole stack from scratch, check out omni.co/lenny for a free 3-week trial. Companies like Perplexity, DBT, and Buzzfeed use Omni to ship analytics their customers can trust. That's omni.co/lenny.

好的。我想回到管理和个人贡献者（IC）这个整体概念。你在很多方面把自己放回了 IC 的角色。谈谈这个，以及你是否认为这是设计经理需要做的事情。

Okay. I want to come back to this whole idea of management and IC. So you've spent, you've kind of put yourself back into the IC role in a lot of ways. Talk about that and if you think that's just like a thing design managers need to be doing.

是的，我有看法。过去一年在 Anthropic，我最初是以 IC 身份加入的。然后我在一个需要这种结构的组织里管理了团队几个月。现在我又回到了全职 IC 工作。我以 IC 身份加入 Anthropic，是因为我对这里作为 IC 可以做的工作感到非常兴奋，也因为我觉得我想贴近工作，而且我认为在我升入公司管理层之前，这是一个非常重要的时机。我当时有这些疑问和疑虑：中层管理在未来安全吗？我们目前的工作方式真的会持续到未来吗？还是我应该尝试别的事情，亲自动手？公平地说，我其实喜欢硬币的两面。我喜欢管理别人。我喜欢组建团队并在那个层面工作，但我也非常喜欢 IC 工作。我当初管理时有点不情愿，心想好吧我来做。所以我几乎同样喜欢硬币的两面。但我认为，过去一年做 IC 教会我的是，它实际上给了我很多技能，如果我只是管理一整年，我不认为我能获得这些技能。比如设计过程在过去一年变化如此之大，我觉得我学到了很多硬技能，如果我只是管理团队，我不一定有时间去学。所以这实际上是它给我的最好东西。我认为如果将来我再次管理团队，它会让我对设计过程的变化有同理心和理解。我认为这在当下非常重要，因为团队的工作方式非常不同。如果你不以那种方式工作，或者不总是测试所有工具和尝试新东西，实际上很难产生同理心。

Yeah, I have takes on this. So, this past year at Anthropic, I joined as an IC at first. And then I managed a team for a few months in an org structure that sort of needed it. And now I'm actually back to doing full-time IC work. I joined Anthropic as an IC because I was just really excited about the kind of work that there was to be done as an IC here, but also because I was feeling like I sort of want to be close to the work and I think this feels like a really important time to do it before I ascend the corporate ranks. And I was having these questions and doubts about like is middle management like is that safe in the future? Is the way that we're working actually going to be a job that persists into the future, or should I try something else and get my hands dirty kind of thing. And to be totally fair, I actually love both sides of the coin. I loved managing people. I love setting up teams and being at that level, but I also just really loved IC work. I was sort of a reluctant manager when I did it, and I was like okay I'll do it. So I love both sides of the coin pretty equally. But I think actually what being an IC across this past year has taught me is that it actually gave me a lot of skills that I don't think I would have gained if I was just managing throughout this year. Like the design process has changed so much in this past year, and I feel like I've just picked up so many hard skills that I wouldn't have necessarily had the time to do if I was just managing a team. So that's actually the best thing it's afforded me. And I think at any point if I'm managing a team again, I think it will give me the empathy and understanding of how the design process has changed. And I think that's actually a really important thing right now because the teams are working so differently. I think it's actually pretty hard to empathize if you are not working in that way or you're not always testing all the tools and trying stuff.

你之前是 Figma 的设计总监，对吧？你的团队有多大？

And so you were previously a director of design at Figma, right? How big was your team?

最多的时候大概有 12 到 15 名设计师，还有几位经理。

At the max I probably had, I think 12, 15 designers or so and I had a few managers as well.

所以你之前觉得中层管理可能不会持久。你现在怎么看？你认为设计管理会长期存在，还是所有人都会变成独立贡献者？

So you had this sense that middle management might not last. What's your current feeling? Do you think design management is a thing that persists long term or do you think everyone turns into IC?

我认为只要有一个团队，有人来管理团队就是有帮助的。经理确实有真正的价值，但取决于经理的形态和他们实际做什么。我现在对有用经理的理解是：不是纯粹的人员管理——比如只帮你规划、指导职业发展、开一对一、确保你工作开心——我觉得那种角色已经没那么重要了。但那些既能给团队方向，又能做一些人员管理的人，两者结合，我认为是未来管理的样子，至少目前是这样。这个人要能真正在工作和方向上与团队互动，同时为他们创造最佳工作环境。

I think as long as there is a team of people, it helps to have somebody who is managing a team. There is real value in managers. It depends on the shape of the manager and what they actually do. But the way I think about what a helpful manager is these days is somebody who is not just pure people management — like just setting you up, helping you in your career, having one-on-ones, making sure you feel good at work. I think that is kind of not a thing as much anymore. But somebody who can really function as giving the team direction as well as doing some of the people management stuff tied together — I think that is the future of what managing looks like, at least for now. Somebody who can really engage with the team in terms of the work and giving direction there, as well as creating the environment for them to do their best work.

你觉得自己长期会回到管理岗位吗？

And do you see yourself going back into management long term?

很可能会。我真的很喜欢帮助团队打造最好的产品。我的座右铭是“不惜一切”。如果团队需要有人给方向、搭建团队，那可以是我；如果团队只需要有人执行，那也可以是我。

I probably will. I really just love helping a team build the best product possible. My motto is whatever it takes. If the team needs somebody to give direction and set up the team, that could be me. If the team just needs somebody to execute, that could be me as well.

我听到给设计师尤其是管理者的建议是：你几乎需要回到独立贡献者角色，才能真正理解正在发生什么、变化有多大，这样才能成为更好的管理者。

The advice I'm hearing for people in design that are especially managers is you almost need to move back into IC in order to truly understand what is happening and how much it's changing so that you can be a better manager.

我也这么认为。传统上，在工程领域，当他们招聘工程经理甚至有时是总监时，他们会要求经理轮岗几个月，接手一些任务，真正理解技术如何运作，然后才成为全职经理。我认为设计可能也需要类似的做法。过去，设计更偏向人员管理。

I think so. Traditionally, in engineering disciplines, when they hire an EM or even sometimes directors, they actually make the EM take a rotation for a few months and pick up a few tasks to really understand how the technology works before they become a full-time manager. I think design probably needs to do something similar. In the past, design has been much more people management oriented.

当你回到独立贡献者设计师角色时，你觉得最生疏的是什么？

What did you find yourself most rusty in when you went back to IC designer?

实际上是做设计评审——接受批评。很难接受批评性反馈，而且还要经常听，因为这是设计师必须做的事。分享作品、向团队展示，然后不断接受大量批评性反馈，这是一件相当脆弱的事情。

Actually doing crits — getting criticized. It is hard to get critical feedback and to hear it on such a regular basis because that's the thing you have to do as a designer. It's a pretty vulnerable exercise to share work and present it with your team and then also get a lot of critical feedback and take that all the time.

所以你现在在 Anthropic 领导 Co-work 的设计，对吗？

So currently you're leading design on Co-work at Anthropic, is that right?

是的。

Yeah.

Boris 最近上过播客，谈到关于 Co-work 应该是什么有很多争论，最后他说就让它像产品里的一个终端——一个花哨的终端。你能分享一下你们是如何确定这个体验的吗？

Boris was on the pod recently and talked about how there's a lot of debate about what Co-work should be, and in the end, let's just make it like a terminal basically in the product — a fancy terminal. Is there anything you could share about the process of landing on where you landed for that experience?

具体到 Co-work，我们内部有很多不同的原型，尝试了很多东西，并不确定什么时候能真正准备好发布。然后突然之间所有事情都凑到一起了，我们就说：“好，我们很快就要发布了。”

With Co-work specifically, we had a bunch of different prototypes internally of what that could look like. We tried a lot of things, and we weren't really sure when it was actually going to be ready to ship. Then it was sort of everything all at once. We were like, 'Okay, we're going to ship it soon.'

只用了 10 天开发。

It was 10 days of building.

实际上比那更长。总体上是用了 10 天把内部已有的东西变成可以对外发布的状态。我们之前已经构建了一段时间，但不确定最终形态。最终形态的由来是：我们在不同的智能体框架上做了很多内部探索，把最终出现在 Co-work 中的各种交互的小部分都做了原型。比如当 Claude 给你一个待办事项列表时，我们尝试了很多不同的形式；它向你展示不同选择题的方式，我们也试了很多形式；我们还尝试了很多不同的方法来教用户了解用例。我不确定我们是否找到了最好的形式，但本质上，这些都是在内部已经有效、人们喜欢的东西，我们觉得通过发布可以获得更多信号。所以强迫自己在 10 天内发布，就是把已有的东西放出去，然后从那里迭代，我们现在也在这样做。

It was definitely longer than that. Overall it was like 10 days to get it from what we had internally to something we were ready to ship externally. We'd been building it for a while, but we weren't really sure about the actual form it was going to take. The way it got there is there were a lot of different other explorations we had internally on top of different agent harnesses. We had prototyped little parts of the different interactions that ended up in Co-work. Things like when Claude gives you a to-do list, we tried a bunch of different form factors for that. We tried a bunch of different form factors for the way it presents you different multiple choice questions. We tried a bunch of different ways to teach people what the use cases are. I don't know if we landed on the best form factor ever, but essentially it was stuff that was already working internally that people liked, and we thought we were going to get some more signal on by releasing it. So forcing ourselves to release it within that 10 days, it was just sort of whatever we had, let's put it out there and then iterate from there, which is what we're doing.

发布后它引爆了互联网，所以效果不错。

And it blew up the internet when you launched it, so it worked out.

是的。

Yeah.

现在的 Co-work 中，有没有哪个功能是你最自豪的，或者迫不及待想修复和改进的？

Is there a feature of Co-work today that you're either most proud of or just can't wait to fix and improve?

老实说，我最自豪的是我们真的把它发布了，推了出去。我不知道有没有什么具体的东西，因为当你长时间做一个东西，尤其是作为设计师，我只能看到缺陷。但有很多让我兴奋的东西。我们一直在迭代，尤其是首页，让它感觉更像“这些是你可以给 Claude 的任务，以及 Claude 正在处理的任务”。这应该很快就会推出——可能在这个节目播出时已经推出了。

Honestly, I'm just most proud of us actually shipping it, putting it out there. I don't know if there's one specific thing yet because when you work on something so long, especially as a designer, all I can do is see flaws. But there's a lot of stuff I'm excited about. We have been iterating especially on the homepage to make it feel more like 'these are tasks you can give Claude and tasks that Claude is working on.' That should actually be rolling out — it might already be rolled out by the time this airs.

我看到这个小小的随机化功能，点击它就会给你各种不同的想法。

I see this little randomizer thing where you click it and it gives you all these different ideas.

是的，是的。

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

当你真正开始用 Claude 处理事情时，它感觉更像一个待办清单。就像这些是 Claude 正在做的事情，这些是需要你关注的事情。我觉得这里有机会让它更像你和 Claude 之间共享的待办清单。所以我很期待继续迭代。另外，我也很兴奋去思考这个产品的真正形态是什么？它是否永远被困在屏幕里，还是说它会延伸到不同的工作界面上？

And then so when you actually start to work with Claude on stuff, it feels more like a to-do list. Like it feels more like these are things Claude's working on. Um these are things that Claude needs your attention on. And I think there's just a there's an opportunity here to make it feel much more like this like shared to-do list between you and Claude. So excited to iterate on that. And then I'm also excited to think more about uh yeah like what is the actual true form factor of this? like is it stuck in the screen always or how does this sort of like reach out to the different surfaces that it's working with?

我很高兴你分享说这件事不是仅仅 10 天就完成的。人们总是抛出这样的数字：我们 10 天就做出来了。而你的意思是，之前花了时间思考方向、做原型、模拟、尝试各种东西。然后才说，好了，现在我们知道自己想要什么了，开始构建并发布吧。

I love that you shared that it wasn't just 10 days to do this thing. There's like these numbers that people throw out there. We build it in 10 days. And your point is like there was time spent thinking about what direction it should go and prototyping, mocking, trying stuff. And then it's like, okay, now we know what we want it to be. Let's build it and ship it.

是的。我觉得不知为何，“只用了 10 天”成了从所有协同工作公告中传开的爆点。但其实有很多不同的探索，很多人参与了协同工作的不同部分。真的不只是 10 天，而且有很多不同的人参与。这个想法反复出现，但总不是合适的时机，或者有各种变体，然后突然之间时机对了，感觉一直都很明显，但走到这一步经历了漫长的旅程。

Yeah. I think for some reason that became like the viral thing that got taken away from all of the the sort of co-work announcements is that it only took 10 days. But I think there there have just been so many different explorations uh and people that have worked on different pieces of co-work yeah it was it was not just 10 days and there was a lot of different people involved. It's it's one of those things where it's like the the idea kept coming back and it's like never the right moment or there's like different variations of it and then all of a sudden it's the right moment and it feels like it was so obvious all along but there was a long long journey to get there.

顺便说一下，对于不太了解协同工作的人，我的理解是它就像有手的 Claude，可以在你的电脑上操作东西。

And by the way for people that don't know much about co work is like the way I think about it it's like clawed with hands where you could do stuff on your computer.

那你会怎么用一两句话描述它？

Is that is what's how would you describe it just like in a sentence or two?

这是个很好的描述。我其实没听过这个说法，但我很喜欢。我可能会更常用“有手的 Claude”这个说法。我也把它想象成 Claude，但 Claude 非常擅长把你所有的垃圾变成好东西。比如我最喜欢的一个协同工作用例就是给它一个装满我东西的文件夹，不管里面是什么，我都能从中提取出好东西。

That's a good description. I actually haven't heard that but I like that. I might use it more often as clawed with hands. I also think about it as like it's like Claude, but Claude is really good at taking all your garbage and then turning it into something nice. Like I think one of my favorite like any sort of use case that I I really like out of co-work is just like giving it a folder of my stuff and it doesn't really matter what's in that folder but I'm able to extract something good out of it.

我做过很多次了。好了，回到管理、作为经理以及设计师的角色。我想聊一下招聘。看到设计师的角色变化如此之大，你现在会寻找哪些新的特质？也就是说，你现在招聘设计师时，你认为哪些特质对他们在这个新世界中取得成功至关重要？

I've done that many times. Okay, coming back to managing and being a manager and the role of a designer. I want talk about hiring for a little bit. So, seeing how much is changing in the role of a designer, what do you look for that's maybe new? Like what do you now look for when you're hiring designers that you think is really important for them to be successful in this new world?

嗯，我认为在我所处的这种特定环境中，有一种韧性和随遇而安的感觉。我觉得这非常重要，因为我们周围变化如此之大，你必须愿意适应，尝试新方法、新工具，学习新东西，而不是固守旧流程和旧方式。不过，我也想到目前有三种类型的人让我特别感兴趣。我觉得以前这些人就已经很有趣了，但在这个时代尤其重要。第一种我称之为“强通才”。不是那种什么都懂一点的普通通才，而是像“块状”的人，在 T 型框架中，他们在几个核心技能上非常出色，比如达到 80% 的水平。说实话，这很罕见，也很难招到。但我喜欢这样，因为设计师的角色已经在扩展和延伸，对吧？我们都变得更像 PM，更像工程师。所以如果你已经在几个不同领域拥有强大技能，就很容易灵活调整并扩展你的角色。这让我很兴奋。就是那种在很多事情上都很出色的人。再次强调，要求很高。另一种让我兴奋的是 T 型框架中的“深度专家”，就是 T 型人才，但 T 的尖端可能比大多数人更深。比如行业前 10% 的人。同样非常难找。我很幸运，在有些地方工作，能负担得起并真正招到这样的人。最后一种可能是我们都在忽视的，我称之为“工艺新人”。就是早期职业生涯的人，但感觉比实际年龄更睿智、更有经验，同时非常谦逊、渴望学习。我认为这类人现在很有趣，因为大多数公司只招资深人才，那些有经验、做过事的人。但鉴于角色和期望的变化，我认为拥有一个几乎像白纸一样、学习极快、渴望学习新方法、脑子里没有固化流程和习惯的人，非常有价值。所以我觉得我们很多人都在忽视这类人，但我对他们非常兴奋。

Well, I do think working specifically in the envir kind of environment that I do there there's just like a sense of like resilience and like roll with it kind of thing. Um that I think is really important because yeah so much is changing around us and you have to be really willing to adapt to try out new methods to try out new tools and learn stuff as opposed to just like be stuck in the old processes and the old ways. Um, but then I think about also there's probably three archetypes of folks that are really interesting to me right now. Um, and I think these folks were already interesting to me before, but I feel like is in this era feels especially important. Um, so the first one I would call is like strong generalists. Um, so not just like regular generalists where they're like kind of good at a lot of things, but like people that are like almost like block shaped, you know, in that T-shaped framework where it's like they're really good at like a few core skills, like 80th percentile good. I think this is like pretty rare and hard to hire for to be honest. But I like this because the design role we've already seen is kind of like is stretching and spanning, right? Like we're all becoming more PM shape. we're be all becoming engineering shaped. Um, and so if you already have strong skills in a few different buckets, it's really easy for you to sort of like flex around and expand your expand your role. So that's really exciting to me. It's just somebody who is really good at a bunch of things. Again, a huge ask. Um, and then the other person that's really exciting to me is in that T-shaped framework, like a a deep specialist, like someone who's is T-shaped, but like the the the tip of the tea probably is like goes down farther than most other people. So, folks that are maybe like the top, you know, like 10% in the industry and whatnot. again, super hard to find. And I feel very lucky that like, you know, working at at some of these places, like folks like these, you you can sort of afford to hire them and and and actually bring them on board. Um, and then my last one is probably the one that I think we're all overlooking, which is what I call the craft newrad. Um, it's just somebody who is like early career and uh feels kind of like wise and experienced beyond their years, but is also just like very humble and and and very eager to learn. I think this person is really interesting right now because I think most companies are just hiring like senior talent, like folks that have done things before, are super experienced, but given how much the roles are changing and what we're expected to do is changing, I think having somebody who almost has like a blank slate and is just like a really quick learner and is really eager to learn um new tactics and stuff like that and doesn't have like all these baked in processes and rituals in their mind, that's super valuable. Um, so I think those are the folks that I think a lot of us are just like overlooking, but I'm like really excited about.

太棒了。关于深度 T 型，能举个例子吗？比如设计师中，有什么技能是他们特别擅长的？

This is awesome. Uh, on the deep tea shape, what's an example of someone in design that has a like what's what's a skill that they're really good at?

有时有些设计师技术非常强，几乎相当于 50% 的软件工程师。这很有趣，尤其是现在，至少对我们来说，你直接与模型合作，所以拥有深厚的工程专业知识很有帮助。但另一种深度 T 型专家，比如他们可能非常擅长视觉设计，或者专门设计图标之类的。既然每个人都能做出任何东西，拥有那种深度专长感觉就像，哦，他们真的能帮助我们构建的东西脱颖而出。

Sometimes there's designers who are just like really technical in a way where they could be like 50% of soft they're they're basically a software engineer. That's really interesting especially because right now like a lot of it is at least for us it's like you know you're working with directly with the model so it can it helps when you have just like deep engineering expertise. Um, but another like deep kind of like specialist T is just, you know, maybe they're just really good at like visual design or or just like designing icons or something where things like that given that everybody can anybody can make anything, you know, having that deep specialist slant feels like, oh yeah, they can really help differentiate the things that we're building.

太棒了。好的。关于这种块状，我们播客请过马克·安德森，我们称之为 F 型或 E 型，就是有多个 T 型。

Awesome. Okay. And then this block shape, we had Mark Andrees on the podcast. We kind of called it the F Fshape or E shape where there's like multiple T thing.

侧向 F，侧向 E，我猜。这就是你描述的那种有很多你非常擅长的事情的情况吗？

Sideways F, sideways E, I guess. Is that what you're describing where there's like many things you're really really good at?

是的。是的。基本上就像，我不知道如果你几乎拥有他们的技能组合，它会看起来像一个方块，你知道，就像

Yeah. Yeah. And like basically like I don't know if you almost had their skill set, it would it would look like a block, you know, like

有这么多技能，就像茶被摊开了一样。好的。

there's so many skills that like the tea is spread out. Okay.

还有正确的应届毕业生。所以这就像一个渴望、开放、坚韧、非常聪明的人，我想这是很重要的一部分。

And the correct new grad. So this is just like someone that is uh eager like uh open-minded, gritty, very smart, I imagine, is a big part of it.

是的。

Yeah.

太棒了。

Awesome.

是的。是的。

Yeah. Yeah.

如果有人是新手设计师，比如一个年轻的设计师试图入行，试图成功，你会给他们什么建议，帮助他们有机会最终加入 Anthropic 之类的公司？

If someone's like a new design, like a young designer trying to break in, trying to be successful, what would your advice be to them to help them have a shot at at ends up joining Anthropic, for example?

我只会说，就像，做一堆东西，尝试一堆东西，构建实际的东西。我认为这可能会感觉……我不太了解现在设计教育或教育的状况，但至少从我上学的时候，一切都是非常理论化的，比如“我们要教你一些方法”之类的。但我知道的最好的、最出色的应届毕业生，就是那些使用技术、构建实际东西的人，他们不觉得自己经验少是限制。我认为有时候他们反而没有负担，因为我们在行业里待久了会有自我期望，但他们没有，他们觉得一切皆有可能。所以，就是做一堆东西，分享给别人，找到也这样做的人的社区。嗯，是的，我想我在这里还有一个呼吁：我上过一所学校，它在我毕业一段时间后启动了一个叫 Socratica 的项目，基本上他们的全部就是构建东西并展示，几乎像一个科学项目。我认为那里有一个很酷的运动，人们就是喜欢构建和做事。比如，有人做了一个 Claude 机器人项目，那是几年前的事了，他们组装运行 Claude 的机器人；还有另一个人，她只是想给波士顿的一辆公交车装上眼睛。这既有能动性——是的，我们可以做事——也有一个社区，人们尝试、构建并互相分享。所以，不管那是什么样子，考虑到某人来自或毕业于哪所学校，是的，做那种事情会让人脱颖而出。

I would just say just like build a bunch of stuff like try a bunch of stuff out, build build actual things. I I think that is that can feel I don't really know what the state of like design education or education is these days but at least from like back when I was in school like everything was very like theoretical and like here we're going to teach you some approaches and whatnot but like the best the best kind of like crack new grad folks I know are just like people who just like use the technology build actual things don't feel like limited by you know how little experience they might have. I think that sometimes they're actually unburdened by that cuz like we have expectations of ourselves after being in industry for so long, but they actually don't and they sort of feel like anything is possible. And so just like building a bunch of stuff and and sharing it with people and finding a community of folks that uh that also do that. Um yeah, I think my my one call here too is like I went to a school that started something called Socratica like much a few years after actually a while after I graduated and basically their whole thing is like building stuff and showcasing it almost like a science project and I think there's just been a really cool movement there of folks who just like build things and do things. Like for example, somebody built this like claude robot project. This was like a few years ago too where they were uh just assembling robots that were running on Claude and then somebody else did something where she just wanted to put googly eyes on a bus in Boston or something and there's just like a sense of of both like agency in terms of like yeah we can just do stuff but then also this community where people were just trying and building things and sharing things with each other. So whatever that looks like given that, you know, the school that someone's from or graduating from, yeah, doing that kind of stuff is is is the stuff that will make people stand out.

对于当前正在职业生涯中变得非常资深的设计师，你认为你需要变得技术化并学习编码，至少是构建，还是你认为你可以不依赖这个，而在其他方面变得更好，也能非常成功？

For current designers that are make career awesomely senior, do you think you need to get technical and learn to code, at least build, or do you think you could be really successful and just not lean into that and get better at other stuff?

我认为这肯定有帮助，也许不需要学习编码到从头构建东西的程度，但感觉现在设计师的词汇中越来越多的是实现一些东西。不过我想知道，随着模型和产品变得更好，我们可能会继续向上移动抽象层，你不需要知道每一行代码是如何工作的。但我想说的是，开始把编码工具纳入你的工具包，无论你是否真的变得技术化。我认为任何设计师都应该非常了解并知道如何使用可用的工具，而不是去学习 React 等等。

I think it definitely helps to maybe not like learn how to code so much that that uh you know you're building something from scratch but I it does feel like more and more of the designer vocabulary right now is implementing some stuff. I wonder though as you know the the models both the models and the products get better if like we I mean we probably will continue to like move up the abstraction layer and layers and you won't have to actually know how you know each single line of code will work but I think what I would say is like start to bring that into your like toolkit the coding tools whether or not it's like you're actually becoming technical I think any designer should just be really aware and like know how to use the tools that are at and as opposed to maybe like learning and like going off and like you know learning react or or etc etc.

你觉得 Claude 或 Claude Code 作为设计师有多好？你会雇佣 Claude 作为设计师吗，还是说它还没到那个水平？

How good of a designer is Claude would you say or Claude code however you want to like would you hire Claude as a designer or is like not there yet?

我认为 Claude 还没到那个水平。我不认为 Claude 在作为可雇佣的设计师方面已经成熟。它还不是强大的通才、深度的专才或出色的新人。我认为它在初稿和呈现一堆不同想法方面相当不错，但还没有什么让人觉得特别和可雇佣。

I don't think Claude is there yet. I don't think Claude is there yet in terms of a designer you would hire. I think it is it is not yet the strong generalist or the deep specialist or the crack new. I think it's it's pretty good at a first pass and at presenting a bunch of different ideas to you, but uh nothing there quite feels like yeah special and hirable yet,

这对设计师来说是个好消息，因为它目前在这方面还很差。我很好奇它能在这方面变得多好。这是一个很大的开放性问题。

which is good news for designers for now that it sucks at this for now. And I'm so curious to see how good it could get at this. That's like such a big open question is

它能否产生令人惊叹的新颖独特的创意体验，还是永远无法像人类设计师那样好？我的意思是，它甚至在去年左右已经进步了很多。所以，是的。

can it pump out amazing novel unique creative experiences or is this just never going to be that good as a as a human designer? I mean, it's gotten a lot better in the last year or so even. So, yeah.

有几个管理方面的，我不知道，仪式或观点，我从和你一起工作的人那里听说过，我想提一下。一个是你的一个热门观点：管理者的低杠杆时间根本不存在，你可以从人们认为低杠杆的事情中获得很多好处。你能谈谈这个吗？

There's a couple management uh I don't know, rituals or takes you have that I've heard from folks that you work with that I want to touch on. One is that you have this hot take that low leverage time for a manager is is just not a thing that there's a lot of benefit you can get out of things that people consider low leverage. Can you talk about that?

是的。嗯，我记得刚开始当经理的时候，我从课程或书里得到的一条建议是：既然你是经理，你必须优先安排时间，分类工作。有一个 2x2 矩阵，我不记得具体内容了，但基本上就是说，这些是只有我能做的事，这些是别人也能做的事，其他都是低杠杆的，你不应该再做。很多低杠杆的事情就是那些非常琐碎、抠细节的事情，或者确实别人也能做。但当我想到我最尊敬的领导和管理者时，我认为他们最好的特质之一就是选择低杠杆的任务自己承担，而这实际上变成了非常高杠杆的事情，因为是他们在做。举个例子，当高级领导亲自测试产品，非常投入，他们吃自己的狗粮，复现 bug，花大量时间和工程师分享日志、抠细节等等。我认为这最终是非常高杠杆的，尽管花了很多琐碎的时间，因为它创造了与产品的熟悉度，我认为这非常好。它还营造了一种氛围：这位高级领导真的很关心，真正了解产品的里里外外，卷起袖子，提供反馈并与团队一起工作。

Yeah. Um yeah, I remember like first becoming a manager and I think one of the pieces like of advice that I either got from a course or a book or something is like yeah now that you're a manager you have to uh like really prioritize your time and categorize your work and there was like this 2 by two of like I I don't remember what it was in it but you essentially say like oh these are the things that only I can do these are the things anybody else can do and everything else you know like it's low leverage and you shouldn't do that anymore and a lot of the lowle leverage things were just like, you know, like things that are really nitpicky in the weeds or just like literally yes, probably somebody else could do those tasks. But when I think about like leaders and managers that I have respect the most, um I actually think some of the their best traits is that they choose like lowlever tasks that they take on themselves and that actually ends up being actually a very high lever thing because it's them who's doing it. Um, so one example is, uh, whenever you have like senior leaders who just like test the out of the product and they're just like so in tune with it. Um, and they dog food it, they repro the bugs, they spend a bunch of time with like engineers like sharing the logs and like nitpicking and stuff like that. Um, and I think that ends up being like super actually high leverage even though it's a lot of time of like nitty-gritty time because it creates this like familiarity with the product which I think is really good. Uh it also creates this vibe where it's like, oh yeah, the this senior leader really cares deeply and they actually know the ins and out of the product and they're rolling up their sleeves and they're giving this feedback and working with the team on it.

嗯，我也觉得类似的情况是，当一位高级领导愿意亲自修复一个 bug，比如我见过 Mike Krieger 自己提交 PR。这真的很棒，因为感觉就像：好吧，我们都在同一个团队，没有什么事是这个人不屑于做的。还有一件我喜欢的、更偏文化层面的事，就是有人会特意为别人制作周年纪念卡之类的东西，用 vibe code 做出特别棒的卡片。因为我觉得这恰恰说明，虽然 EA 或其他人也能做卡片，但这位领导是真心在乎团队，愿意付出这份努力。所以我努力去体现的就是，选择那些看似低杠杆、但值得我花时间的事情。

Um and I think similarly too what I've seen is like when a senior leader is able to like fix a bug now, you know, even like I think I've actually seen like Mike Krieger before like put in PRs himself. Um, and it's it's it's really nice cuz it's like, okay, cool. Like, we're all on this team together and nothing is like below this person. Um, and I think simil another thing that I love that's a little bit more cultural is when somebody like goes out of the way to like make somebody's like anniversary card or something. um and like vibe code them super something super nice or make them something a super nice card because I think it just shows that yeah it's like an EA or somebody can put together the card but this later is just somebody who cares so much about their team that they put in the effort. So that's something I try to embody is like choosing the like the the seemingly low-leverage tasks that are like worth my time.

是的，这太有意思了。你刚才说的，从某种意义上讲，低杠杆的事情往往影响最大，因为你的下属不会期望你花时间在这上面，所以低杠杆最终变成了高杠杆。

Yeah, that is so interesting. Like what you're saying there is in a sense like the low leverage stuff is the one is the stuff that often has the most impact because your reports wouldn't expect you to spend time on this thing and there's a like the low leverage ends up being high leverage.

对。而且我认为这正是让你的领导风格脱颖而出、让特定的人感到特别的原因。

Yeah. And I think it's what makes like your style of leadership stand out or feel special to a certain person.

太棒了。另一个我听说过的、关于你管理团队的方式，就是你鼓励团队成员互相调侃。表面上这听起来不像一个美好的环境，但另一方面，我经常听说你建立的团队是最快乐、表现最好的。谈谈这种调侃的想法，以及你从中得到的关于打造优秀团队的启示吧。

Amazing. Another uh I don't know ritual and kind of way of running teams that I heard about you is uh you encourage uh team members roasting each other which on the surface doesn't sound like a wonderful environment but uh on the other hand I hear constantly that the teams that you've built are just the happiest the highest performing teams. Talk about I guess this idea of roasting and encouraging that and just what you've learned about building awesome teams.

是的，我觉得并不是说“嘿，你们应该互相调侃”，我不是在强迫大家。但当我思考团队中的心理安全感和人们之间的融洽关系时，想想你的朋友，你总是愿意稍微越界去调侃他们。你经常调侃朋友，但可能不会经常调侃同事，因为这一切都关乎舒适和安全，对吧？所以，并不是说“我希望我的团队互相调侃”，而是当团队成员感到自在、能互相开点玩笑时，这其实是一个很好的信号。而且，当大家对你这个领导也有同样的感觉时，也是一个好信号——他们不那么怕你，觉得有安全感，知道说了什么也不会被炒鱿鱼。举个例子，在我上一个团队，他们有时会拿我在评审会上说的话开玩笑，比如我常说的某些短语。

Yeah, I think it's not that I'm like, "Yo, you should roast each other," you know, like I'm not like forcing it in that way or anything. Um, but when I think about the sort of psychological safety and teams and like people that just get along with each other, like when you think about your friends, you know, you're you're always sort of willing to like push the boundaries a little bit and like roast them. Like you're roasting your friends a lot, but you actually might not be roasting your co-workers a lot because you it's it's all just about like comfort and and safety, right? So, it's not that I'm like, "Oh, I want my teams to roast each other." But I think it can be a really good sign when uh the people on your team kind of feel comfortable just like kind of poking fun at each other a little bit. Um, and I think that also can be a good sign when folks also feel the same way about like you as a leader where it's like there's just an element of like they don't they don't fear you as much, but they and they feel like there's a sense of safety where if they say something, they're not going to get fired. Um, so an example of this is like with my last team, I feel like they would make fun of things that I would say at crits sometimes, like certain phrases I would say.

举个例子？

What's an example of that?

嗯，我老是会说：“好，下一步是什么？”还有“我们怎么跟进这个？”然后他们就会模仿我说：“好，下一步是什么？”他们就这样学我。我觉得这显示出一种状态：这些人不一定怕我，他们知道信任我，他们可以信任我。而且他们彼此之间、以及和我之间，对个人生活有足够的了解，知道哪些界限在哪里。

I don't like I Oh, I would always be like, "Okay, like what are next steps?" And like, "How do we follow up on this?" And then they'd be like, "Okay, like what are next steps?" Um, and they would sort of channel me in that way. Yeah. I just think it shows a level of like, "Okay, these people are like not necessarily afraid of me. they know that they trust me. They can they can trust me. Um, and it's it's and then they sort of like know enough about each other and me like personally in our personal lives to be able to like know sort of where those boundaries are.

但与此同时，我觉得你触及的那个领域是：作为管理者，你是否和下属做朋友？这通常是别人告诉你不要做的事。我平衡这一点的方法是，你必须建立一种心理安全感的基线，让大家彼此之间、和你之间都感到自在，但同时也要让他们知道你有着非常高的标准。这两件事看似矛盾，但实际上配合得很好。因为一旦有了心理安全感，人们彼此信任，你施加高标准反而可能更容易，因为你可以毫无畏惧地去做。我有点把它类比为做一个严格的家长：我的团队知道我会一直在那里，不会一时兴起就解雇他们，但同时他们也明白我希望他们做到最好，我有高标准，我和他们一起努力做出最棒的作品。所以，我需要达成的平衡就是：能否创造一个环境，让团队既能自在地调侃你，同时又知道他们必须做出优秀的工作，并且他们会和你一起做出优秀的工作。

Um, but at the same time, I think the the the thing that you sort of air into in that territory is like are you as your as a manager, are you friends with your reports, which is I think the thing people tell you like not to do. And so the way I think about balancing this out is like this creates like the you have to create this sort of like uh baseline of psychological safety and people feel comfortable both with each other and with you, but you also have to make sure that you they know that you have really high standards. Um, and I think these two things can feel like they're at tension, but I think they're actually they work really well together because it's like once you have that psychological safety, you have people trusting each other and you applying the high standards actually I think becomes potentially easier because you can do it without fear. I think um and I sort of think about this from the approach of like kind of like being a tough parent a little bit, you know? It's like, oh yeah, like they my team, I work with them in a way where they know I'm always going to be there. Um, and I'm not just going to fire them on a whim or something, but at the same time, they also know that I want the best for them, you know, and that I have high standards and that, you know, I I'm working with them to to make the best work possible. And so yeah, that's the balance I need to strike is like can you create this environment of one where your team feels comfortable roasting you but at the same time like they know they have to be doing great work and they and they will do great work with you.

这真是绝妙的建议。有趣的是，这种管理风格反复出现，让我想起了“彻底的坦诚”——就是深切关怀与直接挑战的结合。

That is awesome advice. It's interesting how often this this uh just like management style comes back or management uh good management it comes back reminds me of what was it candid radical cander just this combination of caring deeply and challenging directly. Yeah.

对，我在这里听到的就是：确保人们知道你深切关心他们，同时也要非常直接，并保持高标准。

And that's kind of what I hear here is just make sure people know that you care deeply about them, but also be very direct and have high standards.

是的，是的。

Yeah. Yeah.

太有趣了。好，也许最后一个问题。我一直在寻找人们工作中发现有用的有趣框架、方法和流程，我听说你非常喜欢一个叫“可读性框架”的东西。

So interesting. Okay. Maybe a final question. I'm always looking for interesting frameworks and methods and processes that people have found useful in their work and I hear you're a big fan of something called the legibility framework.

谈谈这个框架，谈谈你怎么用它，为什么它这么有价值。嗯，这个框架我大概去年在 Twitter 上看到的，是 SPC 的合伙人 Evan Tana 提出的，他是个 BC。它基本上是一个 2x2 矩阵，我觉得它没有引起太多关注，但我一旦看到它，就忍不住一直想。在这个 2x2 矩阵中，创始人可以是“不可读”或“可读”的，想法也可以是“不可读”或“可读”的。他基本上是说，如果创始人和想法都非常“可读”，那么这个想法可能并不新颖，别人已经打算去实施它了，你并没有发现什么新东西。但真正有趣的地方在于，当想法本身是“不可读”的时候。

Talk about this. Talk about how you use it, why it's so valuable. Yeah, this framework I think I saw it on Twitter maybe last year or something and it was Evan Tana who is a partner at SPC uh he's a BC so it it basically is this like 2 by 2 I don't think it like got so much attention but I once I started seeing it I like actually couldn't stop thinking about it so um on the 2 by 2 PBS has like founders like founders can be either illegible or legible and then ideas can either be illegible or legible. Um, and basically he was saying that like, okay, if if both the founder and idea is like super legible, the idea is probably not that novel and somebody's already like they're already going to implement it or or or do it and you're actually not finding something new. Um, but then where it gets really interesting is where like the idea itself is illegible.

他说的“难以辨认”是指，前沿的东西人们可能还看不懂，或者讲述的方式没有以最易懂的方式呈现。我认为这显然是 VC 的运作方式——寻找别人看不到的机会，然后推向世界。但我也觉得，设计师的角色，至少在 Anthropic 这样的前沿实验室，就是发现那些“难以辨认”的想法，理解其中的内容，然后通过故事叙述或实际的用户体验和形态，将其转化并呈现出来。当我提到翻看 Slack 看大家做的东西时，我就是在做这件事。我在寻找那些有能量但尚未清晰的想法，值得我在工作中深入思考。

And by illegible he means like, oh, it's sort of like, really, you know, on the frontier people might not get it yet, or like the way it's being told, it just doesn't, it's not like being told in the way that makes the most sense to people. And I think this is obviously a good way for a VC to operate because you're trying to look for the opportunities that people don't see and put them out there in the world. But I also think that part of the role of the designer, at least at a frontier lab at Anthropic, is kind of spotting the ideas that are illegible and trying to understand what's there and how to take that and transform it, whether it's through storytelling or through the actual UX and the form factor, and put it out there. And I think when I mentioned going through Slack and looking at all the stuff that people are making, that's kind of what I'm doing. I'm trying to see, oh yeah, what are the ideas that are really, that there's some energy there around but might not make sense yet, that are worth me thinking about more in my work.

有一个很好的例子与 Claude Code 相关。去年年中有人做了一个内部原型，叫 Cloud Studio。它本质上是一个密集而强大的界面，构建在某个智能体框架之上，当时可能就叫 Claude Code。它有很多显示面板，展示 Claude 的知识、技能以及正在做的事情，并预览输出。作为设计师，我一开始完全看不懂。但后来我看到研究团队和内部人员都对它充满热情，我就觉得这里面肯定有东西，只是我还没理解。这确实是一个“难以辨认”的想法。最终，从这个原型中诞生了技能框架和那些指导 Claude 如何做事的 Markdown 文件。我并没有直接参与那个原型，是开发团队从中提炼出来的。但后来当我设计 Claude Code 时，思考这些功能的形式，我参考了那个原型中人们觉得有用的信息，比如 Claude 的计划、待办事项、上下文和处理的文件，我把这些元素融入了 Claude Code。所以，我认为设计师在内部审视原型时，可以更像 VC 那样思考。

There's one good example actually that ties to Claude Code. There was this internal prototype that we called Cloud Studio that I think somebody built partway through last year. And it essentially was just this really kind of dense powerful interface that was built on top of some agentic harness. It might have been Claude Code at that point in time too. And it had all these displays showing you all this knowledge and all these skills and things Claude was doing and previewing its outputs. And I think to a designer, I looked at it and I was like, this is like, I don't know what's going on. I don't really get it. But then I sort of saw the folks in research, the folks building it, and just folks internally, there's just a lot of energy around it and I was like, cool. I think there's something here, but I just don't understand it yet. And I think that really was an example of an illegible idea. And ultimately what came from it was the skills framework and the sort of markdown files that instruct Claude on how to do something. So that came out of that specific prototype that was not something I was directly involved in, and that was more of the folks working on this prototype extracted that out of it. But when it did come to working on Claude Code and I was thinking about what is the form factor for those things, seeing that prototype and the kinds of information that people found really helpful, like seeing Claude's plan and to-dos, seeing Claude's context and the files that it was going through, those kinds of things are things that I ended up pulling out of that prototype into Claude Code. So yeah, I think about how can designers almost be more like VCs in this way internally only when we're looking at prototypes.

这非常有趣。我最近和 VC Terrence Rohan 做了一个研究项目，我们观察了那些早期加入并最终取得巨大成功的公司（如 Palantir、Stripe、Linear、Notion）的人，他们有什么共同模式。其中一个因素是：这个想法疯狂到所有人都在嘲笑它，说这不可能，你永远做不到，这是最疯狂的事。为什么你会这么想？比如 OpenAI 就是其中之一，当时只是个做研究的小实验室。当然，不是每次都会成功，也不是每个疯狂的想法都会好。但我觉得你说的就是：关注那些让你感兴趣但还不完全清楚的东西。也许你就是那个能把它整合起来的人。

This is super interesting. I did a research project recently with this guy Terrence Rohan, a VC actually. We looked at what are patterns across people that have joined companies very early that ended up being massive successes like Palantir and Stripe and Linear and Notion, all these companies. People that have joined many of these companies early, what were they looking for? One of the factors was the idea is so crazy that everyone's laughing at this. This is impossible, you're never going to do this, this is the craziest thing. Why would you even think? Like OpenAI actually was one of them, just like some research lab doing some stuff. So it's interesting that, and it's not like every time this will work and it's not like every crazy idea that sounds makes no sense will be good. But I think what you're saying is pay attention to stuff that's interesting to you and isn't totally clear. Maybe you can be the person that helps pull it together.

是的。而且，如果周围有能量，即使我不完全理解那是什么，也要深入挖掘，去理解它。

Yeah. But also, if there is some energy around it but I don't quite always understand what the energy is, to dive deeper and try to understand what that is.

对。因为那些被早期想法吸引的人，往往自己也说不清为什么。

Yeah. Because I think people who often gravitate towards these early ideas, they can't always articulate why.

这就需要你去深入挖掘并理解它。

And it's sort of up to you to dive deeper and understand that.

这是其中之一。我们发现了三个模式。另一个是：即使你不理解，也要关注那些对某件事非常兴奋的人。

That's one of them. There were three patterns we found. One of the other ones was: just pay attention to people getting very excited about this thing even if you don't get it.

嗯。听起来很疯狂。太有趣了。那第三个呢？

Mh. And it's like sounds crazy. That's so interesting. Okay. And then what was the other one?

哦，另一个是创始人属于顶尖 1%。Anthropic 的每个人都是如此，所以你们已经具备了。

Oh, the founders are just like top 1% was the other piece there, which everyone at Anthropic has. So you got that one.

Jenny，我们正经历一个疯狂的时代，变化如此之大。在我们进入激动人心的快问快答环节之前，还有什么我应该问你的，你想对听众强调的吗？

Jenny, what a crazy time we're living through. So much change. Okay, before we get to our very exciting lightning round, is there anything else that I should have asked you that you want to leave listeners with, that you want to double down on?

我想特别感谢 Anthropic 设计团队。他们非常谦逊，不常活跃在社交媒体上，但做了很多出色的工作，尤其是在这个工作方式快速变化的时期。团队非常有韧性，成员涵盖从技术原型高手到高工艺交付专家，产出的东西非常棒。我们全年都在招聘。所以我想提一下，如果我没有把内部工作方式说得太吓人，如果这听起来更令人兴奋而不是可怕，欢迎联系。

I think I just want to call out the Anthropic Design team and shout them out, just because it's a team of folks that are really humble and they're not always allowed on social, but they're doing a lot of really great work, especially through this time where our jobs are changing so much. The team is so resilient and they sort of span this whole spectrum of people who are really technical and prototypy to all the way to folks that are really high craft and delivering stuff that's going out the door and is fabulous. And we are hiring throughout the year. So I just wanted to call that out. If I didn't scare you with the way that we work internally at Anthropic, if that sounds more exciting than terrifying, would love to connect.

听起来令人兴奋的是能接触到这些 Slack 频道和正在构建的功能吧？

What sounds exciting is getting access to these Slacks or all the features being built?

是的，这是核心福利。

Yeah, that's the core benefit.

我们现在就去问问超级智能该投资哪里吧。开个玩笑。关于招聘，申请者有什么需要特别注意的吗？

Let's talk to super intelligence right now and tell me where I should invest. I'm just joking. And then in terms of hiring, is there anything specific that people should think about if they want to apply?

可以想想我提到的那些类型，特别是“强通才”和“深专才”。我们对这类人很感兴趣。但总的来说，那些认同这些类型的人，或者对技术充满热情、有大量构建经验、想站在前沿的人，都欢迎。

Think a little bit about the archetypes that I mentioned, especially the strong generalist and the deep specialist. Those folks we're really excited about. But generally, folks who feel like those archetypes resonate with them, but also folks that are just really excited about the technology, have been building a lot, and sort of want to be on the frontier.

太棒了。

Amazing.

好了，至此我们进入了非常激动人心的快问快答环节，我们准备了五个问题。Jenny，你准备好了吗？

Well, with that, we've reached our very exciting lightning round and we got five questions for you. Jenny, are you ready?

好的，我准备好了。

All right, I'm ready.

开始。哪两三本书是你最常向别人推荐的？

Here we go. What are two or three books that you find yourself recommending most to other people?

第一本是罗伯特·卡罗的《权力掮客》，推荐这本书有点激进，因为它有 1100 页。但我认为在这个注意力持续时间很短的时代，这本书真的值得从头到尾读完。因为很少有传记或回忆录能涵盖一个人的整个一生，让你看到一个人在那几十年里是如何变化的。而且这个人也很有争议，能读到对罗伯特·摩斯如此细致入微的描绘很好。我觉得我们因为太关注当下，失去了很多这种长线思考。所以它提醒我们职业生涯很长，也让人理解一个人是如何高效做成事的。所以是《权力掮客》。我向很多人推荐的第二本书是比尔·海耶斯写的《失眠城市》，他是科学家奥利弗·萨克斯在萨克斯去世时的伴侣。这是一本非常优美、空灵的回忆录，记录了萨克斯最后的日子和他们的爱情故事。我觉得这和你的播客内容关系不大，Lenny，但这确实是我非常喜欢的一本书。它让你思考死亡，也思考爱和生活之类的东西。所以这是我最喜欢的书之一。

The first one is The Power Broker by Robert Caro, which is an incredibly aggressive recommendation given that it's like 1100 pages. But I think in this era when our attention spans are so short, this is actually worth reading end to end. Because there are very few collections or memoirs that span someone's entire life and you sort of see how somebody changes throughout those decades. And it's also somebody who's really controversial too, and it's nice to read a really nuanced view of somebody, Robert Moses. I think we just lose out on some of this long arc thinking because we're thinking so much about right now. So it's just an important reminder that careers are long, and it's also really good for understanding how somebody just gets things done really well. So, Power Broker. The second one that I recommend to a lot of people is a book called Insomniac City, written by Bill Hayes, who was the partner of the scientist Oliver Sacks around the time that Oliver Sacks died. And it's this really beautiful, ethereal memoir of all of Sacks's last days and their sort of love story. I think this has very little to do with the stuff on your podcast, Lenny, but it's just a book that I really love. And it makes you think about mortality, but also about love and life and stuff like that. So that's one of my favorite books.

我的目标不是——你知道，我们试图培养文艺复兴式的人。所以这些其他内容都很棒。

My goal here isn't, you know, I'm trying to create—we're trying to create Renaissance humans. So all of this other stuff is excellent.

有意思。我看到著名设计领袖 Julie Zhuo 最近在读《权力掮客》。不知道怎么回事，这本书在设计中传播开了。

Cool. Interestingly, I saw Julie Zhuo, famed design leader, was reading The Power Broker recently. I don't know what's going on over here, spreading in design.

好的。你最近有没有特别喜欢的一部电影或电视剧？

Okay. Do you have a favorite recent movie or TV show that you really enjoyed?

我最近看了《A Sentimental Value》。是在飞机上看的，这正是导演希望观众观看的方式。这是一部挪威电影，导演和《世界上最糟糕的人》是同一个。我觉得节奏、剧本、人物关系都非常细腻优美。基本上是关于一个家庭的家庭剧，但也关于他们住了一辈子的房子。很美，因为房子本身就像一个角色。我不知道还能说什么，但这是一部非常好的电影。然后我显然也会推荐《The Pitt》第二季。你知道，我们都在看。我觉得大家都喜欢看那些在自己的工作上非常能干的人做事。

I watched A Sentimental Value recently. I watched it on a plane, which is how directors want you to watch their films. But it's a Norwegian film by the same director who did The Worst Person in the World. I think the pacing, the writing, the relationship between the characters is just really subtle and beautiful. It's basically about this family, a family drama, but also about this house that they lived in their entire lives. It's beautiful because the house is sort of a character. So I don't know what else to say about that, but that was a really good movie. And then I would also recommend obviously The Pitt season 2. You know, we're on that. I think everybody just likes to watch people who are really competent at their jobs do something.

想象一下在那部剧里当演员，得学多少东西，记住所有这些术语。

Imagine being an actor on that show, just how much you have to learn and memorize all these terms.

是啊。而且节奏也很快。他们一个镜头里做那么多事，动作也很多。当演员真的很难。

Yeah. It just also seems really fast-paced, too. Like they do so much stuff in one shot and there's just so much movement and stuff like that. Seems really hard to be an actor.

我最近才意识到诺亚·怀尔以前在《急诊室的故事》里演年轻人，现在他成了这部剧的头儿。

And I only recently realized Noah Wyle was in ER as a younger person and now he's like the head of this.

是啊。

Yeah.

天哪。好的。你最近发现的最喜欢的产品是什么，不能是 Co-Work。

Oh man. Okay. Favorite product you've recently discovered that you really love, cannot be co-work.

其实不是我最近发现的。但自从它推出以来，我基本上已经用了两年。而且我最近发现了它新的好处。对于不了解 Retro 的人来说，它是一个小型社区照片分享应用，你只能分享每周的照片，而不是所有时间的。它基本上没有社交媒体的那些东西。你看不到点赞数，没有广告等等。但一个很好的地方是，我现在用了两年，可以回顾每一年，看到比如两年前的这周我在做什么，它基本上成了我度过每周的一种特别方式。

Not one that I actually discovered recently. But I've been using it for basically two years now since it came out. And I think I discovered new benefits of it recently. So for folks who don't know about Retro, it's sort of this small community photo sharing app in which you can only share photos from each week from a given week as opposed to all time. And it basically has none of the social media stuff. You can't really see counts, there are no ads, etc. But one really nice thing is now that I've been using it for 2 years, I can now look back at each year and see like, oh yeah, this week two years ago I was doing this, and it's become this really special way to live through each week of my life basically.

哇。而且如果你在培养自己的设计品味，它也是一个制作精美的应用。

Wow. And it's also a beautifully crafted app if you're looking for building your own taste in design.

是啊。设计师们喜欢 Retro。

Yeah. Designers love Retro.

我能看出来。好的。你有没有一个经常在工作中或生活中用到的座右铭？

I could see that. Okay. Do you have a favorite life motto that you often come back to in work or in life?

有。不确定是不是我最喜欢的座右铭，但我经常发现自己说的一句话就是：顺其自然。

Yeah. Not sure if it's my favorite life motto, but one thing I do catch myself saying a lot is just, it is what it is.

我爸爸总这么说。我喜欢。

My dad says that all the time. I love it.

是啊。

Yeah.

听起来很消极，但我保证不是。我觉得考虑到现在世界上发生这么多事，尤其是行业里等等，你无法控制一切，所以有时候“顺其自然”能带来你继续前进所需的轻松感。

It sounds super defeatist, but I promise it's not. I think given how much stuff is going on in the world right now and especially with the industry and whatnot, you can't control everything and so sometimes it is what it is just brings the levity you need to move forward.

我之前参加了一个 10 天的冥想静修，回来之后就觉得，爸爸，你一直是对的。这就是一切的答案。顺其自然。不要执着，不要试图改变。就是顺其自然。

I went to a 10-day meditation retreat a while ago and I came back from it and it's like, dad, you've been right all along. This is the whole answer to it all. It is what it is. You can't, don't cling, don't try to change. Just it is what it is.

顺其自然。这里面有很深的道理。我当时想，好吧，比我想象的还要有智慧。

It is what it is. There's so much depth to that. I was like, okay, smarter than I even thought.

好的，最后一个问题。回到 Co-Work，有没有什么令人惊叹的用例，就是那种“哇，Co-Work 居然能做到这个”的感觉，无论是你自己用的还是听别人用的？

Okay, final question. Coming back to co-work, is there a mind-blowing use case, something just like, wow, that's so cool that Co-work can do that, either something you use it for or you've heard somebody using it for?

我特别喜欢的一点是内省。我有一个本地笔记文件夹，用 iA Writer 之类的工具，基本上就是随便写，多年来收集了很多不同的笔记，涵盖各种内容，比如一对一会议笔记、随机想法、小备忘录、面试笔记等等。我最喜欢的一点，我觉得很酷，就是用 Co-Work 来分析这些笔记，从中获得洞见，并实际创造东西。所以任何时候我能学到关于自己的新东西，我都喜欢。

One thing I really like is just introspection. And so I have this folder of local notes that I use like iA Writer for, and I basically just write whatever and over the years have collected a bunch of different notes, and they span all different things like one-on-one notes, random thoughts, kind of like tiny memos, interview notes, etc. And my favorite thing, it's cool to me, is just using Co-Work to analyze that and have insights out of it and actually create things out of it. So anytime I can learn something new about myself, I love that.

但我觉得前几天我做的一件很实用的事是关于招聘的。我当时想，‘嗯，我想梳理一下我在设计工艺方面看重什么，因为我觉得很多人其实很难说清楚这一点。’然后我就让它读了我所有的笔记，包括面试笔记、其他我在意的东西、备忘录等等我过去写的东西，然后它帮我生成了一份评估标准。这种自我反思，就像‘哦，我甚至都没意识到自己一直在潜移默化地表达这些特质’——对我来说真的很酷。

But I think a very practical thing I did with it the other day was along the lines of hiring. I was like, 'Oh yeah, I want to sort of articulate what it is that I look for in design craft because I think actually a lot of people struggle to articulate that.' And I just had it read through all of my notes, both interview notes and other things that I cared about and memos and stuff like that I've written in the past, and then it made me this rubric for evaluating that. So that kind of introspection where it's like, 'Oh, I wouldn't have realized even these things about myself that I've been putting out there implicitly' — that's been really cool for me.

这太酷了。所以，为了让听众更清楚，你有一个文件夹，里面有你写过的所有东西——一对一谈话、会议记录，比如你们能不能用 Granola 之类的工具，或者会议转录——然后问它。我本来想问你是怎么提示的，但其实就是让它读我写过的所有东西，然后帮我理解我对设计的看法。

That is so cool. So, just to make this very clear for people, you have a folder with all these things you've written — one-on-ones, meetings, like you could do, I don't know if you all are allowed to use Granola, something like that, like meeting transcripts — and ask it. And it's like I was gonna ask what prompt you use, but it's just like read all these things I've written and help me probably just like understand how I feel about what is design.

对，基本上就是，‘嘿，这个文件夹里有一堆面试笔记和关于设计工艺的笔记。读一下，然后帮我写一份备忘录式的评估标准，用来衡量我在面试中如何评估工艺。’

Yeah, basically I think it was like, 'Hey, I have a bunch of interview notes and a bunch of notes related to design craft in this folder. Read it and then help me craft a memo rubric for how I assess craft in interviews.'

太酷了。

So cool.

是啊。

Yeah.

Jenny，这太棒了。真是个好时代。

Jenny, this was awesome. What a time to be alive.

真是个好时代。

What a time.

最后两个问题。如果大家想联系你，可以在网上哪里找到你？听众怎样才能帮到你？

Two final questions. Where can folks find you online if they want to reach out and how can listeners be useful to you?

嗯。我现在用 Twitter/X，就是现在大家叫的那个。账号是 @jenny_wen。那可能是最好的地方。LinkedIn 上我不太活跃。所以那是首选。至于大家怎么帮我？请给我们发送产品反馈。你知道，我们正在做 Co-Work 或者任何与云相关的东西。尽管把反馈发给我们。我们很乐意为你改进产品。

Yeah. I'm on Twitter/X, as we're calling it these days. It's @jenny_wen. That's probably the best place. Not really on LinkedIn as much. So that's the best place. And how can folks be helpful to me? Send us your product feedback. You know, like we're working on Co-Work or anything cloud-related really. Just send us your feedback. We'd love to make it better for you.

Jenny，非常感谢你来做客。

Jenny, thank you so much for being here.

嗯，当然。和 Lenny 聊天很开心。

Yeah, of course. It was great chatting with Lenny.

非常愉快。Jenny，谢谢。大家再见。

It was wonderful. Jenny, thank you. Bye, everyone.

非常感谢您的收听。如果您觉得本期内容有价值，可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或您喜欢的播客应用上订阅本节目。也请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，这能帮助其他听众找到这个播客。您可以在 lennispodcast.com 找到所有往期节目或了解更多信息。下期再见。

Thank you so much for listening. If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast. You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennispodcast.com. See you in the next episode.