Molly Graham：AI 转型中隐藏的悲伤、倦怠与机遇

我们一直在聊你那个著名的“送出你的乐高”职业建议，以及这个建议如何适用于当今这个非常奇怪的 AI 世界。

So, we've been chatting about your famous giveaway, your Legos career advice. This idea of how this advice applies in today's very strange AI world.

现在的叙事简直就是，好吧，我们雇了这个新员工。这个新员工是你见过的最聪明的员工。我要你把你知道的一切都倾囊相授给这个员工，然后他们会在 6 个月后取代你的工作。谁会想这么做？

The narrative right now is literally like, okay, we hired this new employee. This new employee is the smartest employee that you have ever met. I want you to pour every single thing that you know into this employee and then they're going to take your job in 6 months. Like, who the wants to do that?

莫莉，这里有个大问题。在 AI 领域，有没有哪些乐高是不应该送出去的？

Here's the big question, Molly. Are there any Legos you should not give away in AI land?

我觉得我们得加个前提。有些乐高是不应该送出去的。有些工作就是不应该外包。

I think we got to caveat this. There are some Legos that shouldn't be given away. There's just some work that shouldn't be outsourced.

这与你多年来的建议有很大的不同。

There's a radical departure from your advice over the many years.

你个人在某些事情上非常出色。不要把它外包给这些奇怪的机器人，你知道，它们实际上就是暑期实习生。

You individually are phenomenal at a set of things. Don't outsource it to these weird robots that, you know, are effectively summer interns.

不管我们喜不喜欢，AI 正在夺走我们很多乐高。我们被鼓励把乐高送给 AI。你请过一个人，他谈到工作过去是划船，现在是掌舵，我当时就想，我觉得现在世界上有很多人就像，我不想掌舵。

AI is taking a lot of our Legos whether we like it or not. And we're being encouraged to give away our Legos to AI. You had someone on who talked about like the job used to be rowing and now it's steering and I was like I feel like there's a lot of people out in the world right now that are like I don't want to steer.

我从很多工程师那里听到，就像我真的很怀念过去的样子。

I've heard from a lot of engineers just like I really miss what it used to be.

改变很糟糕。它也可以很棒，但我们不必对此过于乐观。我们也可以直接说这很难。

Change sucks. It also can be awesome but we don't have to be fluffy bunnies about this. We can also just say this is hard.

这几乎是一场关于 AI 应该做什么的讨论？你希望 AI 参与哪些方面，不希望它参与哪些方面？如果你相信你的工作会一直存在，只是每 6 年看起来会完全不同，你会怎么做？

This is almost a discussion around what should AI do? Where do you want AI to be involved and where you not want it involved? What would you do if you believed your job was always going to exist? It was just going to look completely different every 6 years.

今天，我的嘉宾是莫莉·格雷厄姆。这是莫莉第二次来到播客。天哪，这是一次强有力的对话。这次对话的框架是她经典的“送出你的乐高”职业建议。但在 AI 世界里，莫莉过去 13 年的建议一直是，随着公司的发展，如果你把你的项目、团队和职责交给别人，而不是试图抓住它们，你的职业生涯会更好，这是我们自然想做的。本质上，就是送出你的乐高。在给出这个建议 13 年，并在过去十年为这么多人解锁了如此多的动力之后，莫莉意识到它不再正确。当你把乐高送给 AI 时，现在情况更加微妙和复杂。因此，在这次对话中，我们试图弄清这个问题。你应该继续送出哪些乐高？哪些乐高应该保留？如果你不熟悉莫莉，她花了 20 多年帮助组织及其内部人员应对增长和变化。她曾在谷歌、Facebook、Quip 和 Chan Zuckerberg Initiative 担任领导职务。如今，她主持 TED 的 WorkLife 播客，这是她从亚当·格兰特手中接过的。她还运营着一个非常重要的领导力社区，叫做 Glue Club，并撰写一份名为《Lessons》的通讯。现在，在我们开始之前，我注意到很多人没有听完我们的完整剧集，错过了一些最精彩的内容。所以，为了帮助你，我们刚刚创建了一个新的 Lenny's Most Replayed Moments YouTube 频道，正好有这个，我们长篇剧集中被重看和分享最多的片段。你现在可以在 lennispodcast.com/mostreplayedmoments 查看并订阅该频道。描述中也有链接。最后，别忘了查看 lenniesprob.com，免费获得一年世界上最热门、最精美制作的 AI 和非 AI 产品。那是 lenny'sprobass.com。有了这些，我为你带来莫莉·格雷厄姆。莫莉，非常感谢你来到这里，欢迎回到播客。

Today, my guest is Molly Graham. This is Molly's second visit to the podcast. And man, this is a powerful conversation. The frame for this conversation is her classic give away your Legos career advice. But in an AI world, Molly's advice for the last 13 years has been that your career will be better off if you give away your projects and your teams and your responsibilities to other people as your company grows versus trying to hold on to it, which is what we naturally want to do. Essentially, to give away your Legos. After 13 years of giving this advice and it unlocking so much wind for so many people over the past decade, Molly has realized that it is no longer true. when you are giving away your Legos to AI, it's a lot more nuanced and complicated now. And so in this conversation, we try to get to the bottom of this question. What Lego should you still be giving away? And what Lego should you keep? If you're not familiar with Molly, she has spent 20 plus years helping organizations and the humans inside them navigate growth and change. She's held leadership roles at Google and Facebook and Quip and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. These days, she hosts Ted's work life podcast, which she took over from Adam Grand. She also runs an incredibly important leadership community called Glue Club and writes a newsletter called Lessons. Now, before we get into it, I noticed a lot of people don't finish our full episodes and miss some of the best stuff. So, to help you, we've just created a new Lenny's Most Replayed Moments YouTube channel that has exactly this, the most rewatched and shared segments from our long- form episodes. You can now check it out and subscribe to the channel at lennispodcast.com/mostreplayed moments. There's also a link in the description. Finally, don't forget to check out lenniesprob.com for a free year of the hottest and most beautifully crafted AI and nonI products in the world. That's lenny'sprobass.com. With that, I bring you Molly Graham. Molly, thank you so much for being here and welcome back to the podcast.

谢谢邀请我，莱尼。我很兴奋能回来。

Thanks for having me, Lenny. I'm excited to be back.

呃，我更兴奋你能回来。让我为这次稍微不寻常的对话添加一点背景。所以，过去几个月我们一直在聊你那个著名的、呃，臭名昭著的“送出你的乐高”职业建议，这个问题出现了，我知道你从其他人那里听到很多。这个建议如何适用于当今这个非常奇怪的 AI 世界，AI 正在夺走我们很多乐高，不管我们喜不喜欢，我们被鼓励把乐高送给 AI。人们害怕 AI 夺走他们的乐高。所以，呃，问题就是这个建议现在如何适用于 AI 世界。我知道这对你来说是一个持续思考的过程，但你实际上有很多非常有趣的见解和看法，关于如何在当今这个非常奇怪的世界中思考这个建议。所以，我们将进行一次对话，看看它会走向何方。本集由我们本季度的呈现赞助商 WorkOS 赞助。OpenAI、Anthropic、Cursor、Replet、Sierra、Clay 以及数百家其他成功公司有什么共同点？它们都由 WorkOS 提供支持。如果你正在为企业构建产品，你已经感受到了集成单点登录、SCIM、RBAC、审计日志以及大公司所需的其他功能的痛苦。WorkOS 将这些交易障碍转化为即插即用的 API，拥有专为 B2B SaaS 构建的现代开发者平台。实际上，我投资的每一家开始向高端市场扩张的初创公司最终都会与 WorkOS 合作。那是因为他们是最好的。无论你是试图赢得第一个企业客户的种子期初创公司，还是正在全球扩张的独角兽，WorkOS 都是成为企业就绪并解锁增长的最快途径。它本质上是企业功能的 Stripe。访问 works.com 开始使用，或者直接联系他们的 Slack，那里有真正的工程师等待回答你的问题。WorkOS 允许你通过令人愉快的 API、全面的文档和流畅的开发者体验更快地构建。前往 works.com 让你的应用今天就成为企业就绪。我想说，作为第一步，让我们提醒人们这个建议是什么。呃，我想大多数人都听说过。很多人可能就像，“哦，是的，我大概明白这个想法。”所以解释一下“送出你的乐高”的原始想法。

Uh, I'm even more excited to have you back. Let me add a little context to this slightly unusual conversation we're gonna have. So, we've been chatting over the past couple months about your famous uh infamous giveaway your Legos career advice and this question came up and I know you're hearing this a lot from other people. This idea of how this advice applies in today's very uh strange AI world where AI is taking a lot of our Legos whether we like it or not and we're being encouraged to give our legos to AI. People are afraid about AI taking their legs. And so, uh, the question is just how this advice now applies in a world of AI. And I know this is kind of an ongoing thought process for you, but you actually have a lot of really interesting insights and takes on how to think about this advice now in today's very strange world. And so, we're going to have a conversation about it, see where it goes. This episode is brought to you by our season's presenting sponsor, WorkOS. What do OpenAI, Anthropic, Cursor, Replet, Sierra, Clay, and hundreds of other winning companies all have in common? They are all powered by work OS. If you're building a product for the enterprise, you've felt the pain of integrating single sign on, skim, arback, audit, logs, and other features required by large companies. Work OS turns those deal blockers into drop-in APIs with a modern developer platform built specifically for B2B SAS. Literally every startup that I'm an investor in that starts to expand up market ends up working with Work OS. And that's because they are the best. Whether you are seedstage startup trying to land your first enterprise customer or a unicorn expanding globally, work OS is the fastest path to becoming enterprise ready and unblocking growth. It's essentially Stripe for enterprise features. Visit works.com to get started or just hit up their Slack where they have actual engineers waiting to answer your questions. Work OS allows you to build faster with delightful APIs, comprehensive docs, and a smooth developer experience. Go to works.com to make your app enterprise ready today. I'd say as a first step, let's remind people what this advice is. Uh I imagine most people have heard it. A lot of people probably like, "Oh yeah, I kind of get the idea." So explain kind of the original uh idea of giving away your Legos.

它实际上始于我在谷歌和 Facebook 的时候，最初是我给为我工作的人做的一个小演讲，背景是，我加入谷歌时它已经相当大了。2007 年大约有 10,000 名员工，但我的部门在九个月内从 25 人增长到 125 人。所以那是我第一次经历真正的快速扩张，然后我去了 Facebook，我加入时 Facebook 相对较小。

It actually started when I was at Google and Facebook and it started as a a little talk that I would give people that worked for me and for context like Google was pretty big when I joined. It was like 10,000 employees in 2007 but my department grew from 25 people to 125 people in nine months. So that was my first experience with like really rapid scale and then I went to Facebook and Facebook was relatively small when I joined.

当时是 500 名员工和 8000 万用户，比 MySpace 还小，这个背景值得记住。我在那里时，显然经历了巨大的增长曲线。5 年后我离开时，公司有 5500 名员工和超过 10 亿用户。所以从 Scaling（规模扩张）的角度看，那段经历简直疯狂。

It was 500 employees and 80 million users, smaller than MySpace, which is always good context to remember. And while I was there, obviously a huge growth curve. I left 5 years later; it was 5,500 employees and over a billion users. So that experience was nuts from a scaling perspective.

我在 Google 目睹、后来在 Facebook 真正见证的是，这种经历对人们来说有多艰难、多可怕。我看到很多人从「你做出一个东西」开始——你加入，成为拥有那个博客、拥有技术栈那一部分、做出那个产品的人——并围绕它建立身份认同。你就是那个人，不管那是什么。然后 Scaling（规模扩张）的本质就是，你周围的一切都在变。有人来了，你的经理说：「嘿，你需要把你整个身份认同所系的那个东西交给别人，然后去做别的事。」你的第一反应是：「什么？不，我不想交出去。我擅长这个。我知道怎么做。而且我觉得这很有趣，万一这是唯一有趣的事呢？」所以你看到人们有这种紧抓不放的倾向。

And what I witnessed at Google and then really witnessed at Facebook was how hard and scary that experience was for people. I watched a lot of folks go from building a thing—you show up and you become the person that owns the blog or owns this part of the stack or built that product—and you build an identity around it. You're that person, whatever that is. And then the nature of scale is that everything around you changes. Somebody shows up and your manager says, "Hey, you need to hand that thing that you've built your whole identity around to someone else and go on to doing something else." And your first instinct is like, "What? No, I don't want to give it away. I'm good at this. I know how to do this. I also think it's fun, and what if it's the only fun thing to do?" So you witness people having this tendency to hold on.

所以我开始对我团队里的人说：「嘿，这种变化正在发生，你可能会这样感觉——你可能会感到领地意识，想要紧抓不放。」而实际上最重要的事情是放手，随着公司的发展而进化。我的大脑是个很奇怪的地方。我是看《布偶秀》长大的，所以我总觉得脑子里有很多小怪物在跳舞唱歌。但这就是为什么我总能冒出比喻。我总用这个比喻：一群幼儿园小朋友，有人在你面前倒了一堆乐高。一开始很好玩，有点应接不暇，然后你开始搭建。而「交出你的乐高」这部分，就像别人出现，试图从你手里拿走那座塔时的那种感觉，幼儿园小朋友的反应是「滚开」。你懂我的意思吗？就像把别人推开。但实际上，如果你有多个人，就意味着你可以去搭建新的、好玩的东西。你可以从零开始，可以学到东西。但面对变化时，人类的本能就是紧抓不放、抗拒变化，变得有领地意识，诸如此类。

So what I started to do with people on my team was say, "Hey, this change is happening and here's how you might feel—you might feel territorial and want to hold on." And actually the most important thing to do is to give things away, to evolve as the company is evolving. And my brain is a really weird place. I grew up on the Muppets, so I always think there's just a lot of tiny monsters dancing around singing songs in my head. But that is why metaphors come out for me. And so I always use this metaphor of a bunch of kindergarteners and somebody dumps a pile of Legos in front of you. At first it's fun, a little overwhelming, then you start building. And the give-away-your-Legos part is like that feeling when somebody else shows up and they try to take the tower out of your hands, and the kindergartener response is like, "Get out of here." You know what I mean? It's like shoving someone away. When actually, if you get multiple people, it means oh, you can go build something new and fun. You can start from scratch and you can learn something. But the natural human instinct in the face of change is to hold on to things and to resist the change, to be territorial and all of those things.

总之，我开始给我团队里的人做这个演讲，帮他们理解那种变化和即将到来的东西。后来我把它发给了 First Round 的朋友们，他们当时正在做 First Round Review。说清楚一点，这是 13 年前的事了。我在 Facebook 时，那是 20 多年前。我把它发给 First Round，我们发表了。我本来会说，我是在对经历类似 Facebook 体验的人讲话。我本来会说：「嘿，这篇文章是给 2013 年那些正在爆发的 Stripe 或 Slack 之类的公司看的，是为了让这件事正常化：这就是它的感觉，这就是你要做的，才能跟上公司增长的速度。」但文章发表后发生的是，我收到了来自世界各地的邮件。我收到了来自 Safeway 这类公司的人的邮件，有位女士——我还记得这封邮件——写信给我说：「这对我太有帮助了。它完美地描述了我一直在团队里经历的事情。」我还收到一封邮件，我记得非常清楚，来自尼日利亚的一位创始人，他说：「我的团队今年从两个人变成四个人，『交出你的乐高』对我来说太有价值了。这正是我一直以来的感受。」我的第一反应是，我不是为你写的。这不是给你看的。但我的第二个反应是，哇，这关乎的东西比身处快速 Scaling（规模扩张）中的感受要大得多。

So anyway, I started giving this talk to folks on my team to help them understand that change and what was coming. And then eventually I sent it out to my friends at First Round who were building the First Round Review at the time. And just to be clear, this is now 13 years ago. The talk I was—when I was at Facebook, it was over 20 years ago. And I sent it to First Round and we published it. And I would have said I was speaking to folks going through a Facebook-like experience. I would have said, "Hey, this is an article that is for the Stripes or the Slacks or whoever was blowing up in 2013, to normalize, hey, this is what it feels like and this is what you have to do to grow as fast as your company is growing." But what happened when it was published is that I got emails from all over the world. I got emails from people at companies like Safeway, where this woman—I still remember this email—wrote me and was like, "This was so helpful to me. This perfectly describes what I've been going through on my team." And I got an email again, I remember it very vividly, from a founder in Nigeria who was like, "My team went from two people to four people this year and give away your Legos is so valuable to me. This is exactly what I've been feeling." And my first reaction was like, I didn't write this for you. This was not meant for you. But my second one was, whoa, this is about something much bigger than just what it feels like to be inside of rapid scale.

从根本上说，我认为「乐高」这个信息是关于变化的。它关乎一个事实：当你经历变化时，很多事情会发生在你身上。这是一种非常具体的体验，我想这就是为什么它最终如此普遍适用。而且很疯狂——我至今仍收到关于它的邮件，每个月好几封。所以它以某种方式持续了下来，再说一次，我原以为我只是给经历疯狂快速变化的人发了一封便条。我在一个 First Round 活动上，大概是去年吧，他们在谈论人们写的各种文章，我想它可能是 First Round Review 上最受欢迎的第一或第二篇文章。

And fundamentally, I think the Legos message is about change. It's about the fact that when you go through change, a lot happens to you. It's a very specific experience, and I think that's why it ended up being so universal. And it is crazy—I still get emails about it, multiple emails a month about it to this day. So it's lasted in a way that, again, I just thought I was sending out a note to folks going through crazy rapid change. I was at a First Round event, I don't know, a year ago or something, and they were talking about all the different posts people have written, and I think it's one of the maybe the first or second most popular post on the First Round Review.

它确实名列前茅，而且传播的方式我想我们谁都没想象到。

It's up there and it's traveled in ways that I don't think any of us imagined it would.

好，那我们来谈谈在如今这个非常奇怪的 AI 世界里，这个建议中还有哪些依然成立。哪些依然成立？根据你所看到的，这个建议中还有哪些是正确的？

Okay, so let's talk about what still holds true in this advice in today's very strange AI world. What still holds true? What's still correct about this advice based on what you're seeing?

这篇文章疯狂的一点是，我今天仍然收到很多关于它的邮件。我仍然被邀请去每一家快速成长的公司演讲。所以我认为，对于任何正在经历快速 Scaling（规模扩张）的人来说，「乐高」仍然非常相关。但有趣的是，大概两年前开始发生的是，我从管理者那里收到的来信更多了，从领导者那里收到的关于「乐高」的来信也更多了——只是有更多人在公司内部应对变化。我认为这正是今天依然成立、而且实际上变得更加普遍的事情。

One thing that's crazy about this article is I still get so many emails about it today. I still get asked to give speeches at every fast-growing company. So I think for anybody that's going through rapid scale, Legos is still really relevant. But the interesting thing is what started to happen, probably like two years ago, is I got more inbound from managers and more inbound from leaders about Legos—just more people grappling with change inside their companies. And I think that is the thing that really holds true today and actually has just become more universal.

我以前去某家公司演讲前，真的会查这家公司增长有多快。我会问营收增长和员工人数增长，因为这能帮我理解该如何对员工讲话，我现在仍然这么做。但同样变得非常清楚的是，世界上每一家公司现在都在经历各种形式和类型的巨大变化。而这正是「乐高」的根本信息：你如何应对变化，你如何在变化面前做最好的自己。所以我觉得，今天依然成立、和 10 年或 15 年前一样成立的第一件事就是：变化真的既可怕又艰难。我总说——有人曾让我用一句话总结「乐高」那篇文章。他们说：「Molly，这太长了，给我精简版。」我说了两件事。不幸的是，他们没得到一句话，得到了两句。

I used to really check before I went and did a speech at some company how fast the company was growing. I would ask about revenue growth and about headcount growth because that just helps me contextualize how I should speak to employees, and I still do that. But it's also become really clear that every single company in the world is going through enormous change of varying shapes and kinds right now. And that is the fundamental underlying message of Legos: how do you deal with change and how do you be your best self in the face of change. So I feel like the number one thing that is true today as true as it was 10 or 15 years ago is the change is really scary and hard. And I always say—somebody once asked me to summarize the Legos article in one sentence. They're like, "Molly, this is too long, give me the cliff notes." And I said two things. Unfortunately they didn't get one sentence, they got two.

这两句话是：第一，面对快速成长和变化，你的主要工作就是让自己变得无关紧要，因为这是你为接下来任何事情做好准备的唯一方式。第二点建议，或者说第二个总结，就是别担心，一切都会好起来的。

The two sentences were number one, your main job in the face of rapid growth and change is to make yourself irrelevant because it is the only way that you can be prepared for whatever is coming next. And the second piece of advice or sort of second summary of it was don't worry, it's all going to be okay.

我一直觉得那篇乐高文章和我做的演讲就像一种集体治疗。它们就像一个巨大的拥抱。是的，感觉混乱、不堪重负、压力山大，但另一边全是机会。我认为“别担心，一切都会好起来的”真的是每个人都需要听到的，变化是可怕和艰难的，但这并不一定意味着世界末日。

I always feel like the Legos article and the speeches I give are like a form of group therapy. They're like just a giant hug. Like yes, it feels chaotic and overwhelming and stressful, but there's all this opportunity on the other side. And I think that the don't worry, it's all going to be okay is really something everybody needs to hear that like change is scary and hard, but it doesn't necessarily mean the world is ending.

我认为第二点是，变化伴随着这一系列不可思议的情绪，就像疯狂的过山车，我们谈论得不够多。我想这就是为什么我最初在 Facebook 和我的团队里开始谈论乐高的原因，我只是想让大家觉得这些感受是正常的，你可能会感受到所有这些情绪，而你周围的人也有同样的感受，对吧？这不会让你发疯，也不会让你崩溃之类的。这也不意味着出了什么问题。实际上，这意味着所有正确的事情都在发生。

I think this the second piece of that is that change comes with this incredible set of emotions like this wild roller coaster um that we don't talk about enough. And I think that was a lot of why I first started talking about Legos like at Facebook and on my teams was I just wanted to normalize for people what it felt like that that you might feel all these feelings and that that was what everyone around you was feeling, right? That it didn't make you crazy and it didn't make you broken or something like that. It also didn't mean anything was wrong. It actually meant that all the right things were happening.

我认为这在今天非常真实。比如当我四处旅行和领导者交谈时，我知道你和我将会讨论这个，但我听到的很多是悲伤和所有这些不同的情绪。在 AI 带来的混乱和变化的时刻，显然有兴奋和喜悦，但也有很多悲伤。有很多不堪重负，你知道，这些都会表现出来。有些表现为倦怠，但就像现在人们身上发生了太多事情。你现在真的无法在不谈论这些、不将其正常化的情况下进行领导。我认为这是给予的重要部分，或者就像我今天就是在帮助人们理解，这些情绪只是你的身体和身份对变化做出反应的一部分。

And I think that is very real today. Like when I travel around and I'm talking to leaders, um, and I know you and I are going to talk about this, but a lot of what I'm hearing is is grief and all these different emotions. There's obviously like excitement and um joy in in this moment of of chaos and change with AI, but there is a lot of sadness. There's a lot of overwhelm that all, you know, manifests. Some of it manifests in burnout, but it's like there is just a lot going on for people right now. And you really can't lead right now without talking about that um and without normalizing that. And I think that's like such a big part of the giveaway or like I was, you know, today is just like helping people understand that these emotions are just part of sort of your body and your identity reacting to change.

另外两件事，我仍然觉得是真的，我在文章里谈过，之后也谈过很多，其中之一是我对身处快速成长公司的人说的：未来将由学习的人定义，而不是知道的人。你知道，我总是说，你到明天能学到的东西远比今天你知道的东西重要得多。在 AI 时代，这句话再正确不过了。你明白我的意思吗？就像我们六个月前以为我们知道的一切，都扔出窗外吧。今天有新的真理。

The other two things I would say that really do still feel true to me that I both talk about in the article and have talked about a lot since is like one of the things I say to people that are inside of a really rapidly growing company is the future will be defined by the people that learn not the people that know. You know, I always say like what you can learn by tomorrow matters way more than what you know today. And like never has a truer sentence been said than like about the age of AI. Do you know what I mean? like whatever we thought we knew six months ago, like toss it out the window. Something new is true today.

但我过去常对人们说，我想我做这些演讲时仍然会说，你去看看你公司增长有多快的图表，对吧？你去看看那条曲线，你知道，在 Facebook 感觉我们都要掉下去了。那是你公司增长有多快的图表。是的。但它也是你的工作增长有多快的图表，对吧？你周围每一件事增长和变化有多快，这意味着它也是你需要成长多快的图表。

But what I used to say to people and I still say I guess when I when I do these speeches is like you go look at that graph of how fast your company is growing, right? You go look at like that curve, you know, and at Facebook it was like felt like we were falling off of it. That is the graph of how fast your company is growing. Yes. But it is also the graph of how fast uh your job is growing, right? how fast every single thing around you is growing and changing, which means it's also the graph of how fast you need to grow.

我认为在变化的世界里，理解这一点非常重要，那就是原地不动，对吧？感觉安全。感觉像是抓住你知道的东西，因为至少那不是，你知道，可怕和未知的。但实际上，原地不动是最不安全的事情。基本上你注定会落后。

And I think that is such an important thing to understand inside of a a world of change, which is that standing still, right? It feels safe. It feels like hold on to what you know, you know, because that that at least it's not, you know, scary and unknown. But actually standing still is like the least safe thing you can do. It's basically you're guaranteed to fall behind.

我在 Facebook 亲身感受到这一点，因为头两年我在人力资源部，你可以亲眼看到，前一年表现最好的人，如果他们不成长、不改变，如果他们不快速让团队进化，不到一年后他们就陷入困境，因为公司已经不同了。我认为 AI 也是如此。

Um and I saw this viscerally at Facebook when because the first two years I was in HR and um you could literally see like the highest performer one year if they didn't grow and change and if they didn't evolve their team fast enough, they were underwater like less than a year later because it was a different company. And I think this is happening with AI as well.

我们确实有这些本能，想要抓住我们知道的东西，捍卫我们知道的东西，为我们知道的东西而战，原因有很多。很多是好的。但未来将由那些愿意采取学习立场、投身于这种变化的人定义，尽管它可怕且未知。这个信息在这个疯狂的世界里仍然真实。

Um, which is that we do have these instincts to like hold on to what we know and to defend what we know and to fight for what we know for a bunch of different reasons. Many of them good. But the future is going to be defined by the people that are willing to just take the stance of learning and to throw themselves into this change, scary and unknown as it is. Um and that that message again remains true in this this wild wild world.

在我们讨论这个建议有何不同之前，当你回顾你总结的两点，第一是变得多余，然后第二是什么句子。

Before we get into just what how the advice is different which when you go back to your summary of the two kind of items that kind of summarized the idea one is become redundant and then two what was the second uh sentence.

第二点基本上是别担心，一切都会好起来的。

The second one is basically don't worry it's all going to be okay.

别担心。是的。好的。所以这些感觉不再一定正确了。我们将讨论这个，因为我认为正如你所说，这是人们担忧的核心。那曾经像是安慰，现在却像是，你确定吗？

Don't worry. Yeah. Okay. So those don't feel necessarily correct anymore. So we're going to get into that because I think that's as you said the core of people's concern. that was like comforting and now it's like well are you sure?

是的。

Yeah.

关于悲伤这部分，我想多花点时间。我在很多不同职业中都看到这一点。我做过这些调查，我们可能会稍微涉及，但就像工程师这个角色在两年内完全转变了。它曾经永远是一样的工作。写代码，坐在那里在各种 IDE 中写代码，不再是工作的一部分。现在是对你的 AI 说话来写代码。无论你在不在那里，这就是趋势。它将 100% 是写这个东西，构建这个东西。我曾经是一名工程师，后来转到产品，我非常怀念作为工程师的那种心流状态，只是坐在那里编码、构建。现在那已经消失了。你不再坐在那里构建东西。你只是等待智能体运行然后检查。你可能有上百个不同的智能体，这就像一个非常奇怪的新工作。我听到很多工程师说，我真的很怀念过去的样子。

Um this grief piece just to spend a little more time here. I've been I've been seeing this a lot in a lot of different professions. I've done these surveys that um we might get into a little bit but like just engineering as a role has completely transformed in two years. It's been like the same job forever. Writing code, sitting there writing code in various forms of idees, no longer part of the job. Now it's talking to your AI to write the code. Whether you're there or not, that's where it's all going. It's going to be 100% write this thing, build this thing. And I used to be an engineer and I moved into product and I was I was so missing that flow state of being an engineer, just sitting there coding, building. And now that's gone. You no longer sit there and just build a thing. You're just like waiting for agents to run and then checking. You probably have a hundred different agents and it's just like a very strange new job. And I've heard from a lot of engineers just like I really miss what it used to be.

是的。

Yeah.

关于这个还有什么吗，我不知道你从人们那里听到什么，就像，天哪，这太糟糕了。

Anything more there about just I don't know what you're hearing from folks about just like man this sucks.

不，这正是，这是一个完美的悲伤例子。

No, it's exactly um it's such a perfect example of like the grief.

大约两周前，我在一家发展很快的科技公司做演讲，之后有个人来找我。他在那家公司待了几年，所以经历了巨大的变化。他跟我说，他不再那么享受自己的角色了。我脑子里立刻想到，哦对，公司小的时候更有创造力，你享受那个阶段，现在结构更多了。于是我就跟他聊这个，聊了好一会儿。某种程度上，我想再去找他聊聊，因为我觉得第一次对话我漏掉了重点。其实，我想他谈的是他现在非常明显的悲伤，因为他不确定自己现在的工作是什么。这是什么？公司壮大了，所以他处在更结构化的环境里，而工程已经完全变了。他谈的很多内容是他多么怀念更亲力亲为的日子，这是一种说法。但我认为这种悲伤正在很多人身上发生。我觉得工程可能是人们工作真正发生转变的最直观领域之一。你上周请了一位嘉宾，她谈到工作过去是划船，现在是掌舵。

I was giving a speech about two weeks ago at a pretty fast-growing tech company, and this guy came up to me after. He'd been at the company for a couple of years, so it had gone through a huge amount of change. He was talking to me about the fact that he just wasn't enjoying his role as much anymore. My brain immediately went to, oh right, you enjoyed it when it was smaller and there was more creativity, and now there's more structure. So I was talking to him about that, and it took a while. To some extent, I want to go talk to him again because I feel like I missed it in the first conversation. Actually, I think what he was talking about was the grief that is very present for him now in the fact that he's not sure what his current job is. What is this? The company has grown, so he's in a more structured environment, and it's just the simple fact that engineering has totally changed. A lot of what he was talking about was how much he missed being more hands-on, which is one way of saying it. But I think that grief is happening for a lot of people. I think engineering is probably one of the most visceral areas where people's jobs have genuinely transformed. You had someone on last week who talked about how the job used to be rowing and now it's steering.

对，来自 OpenAI。她说工作过去是划船，现在像是掌舵。

Yeah, from OpenAI. She said the job used to be rowing and now it's like steering.

掌舵。我当时想，我觉得现在世界上有很多人会说，我不想掌舵。你懂我的意思吗？我想划船。我喜欢划船。或者，我的意思是，很难区分：我喜欢划船，还是我害怕划船是我唯一擅长的事，或者那是我所知道的，而我不知道自己能否擅长掌舵。我认为这在很多学科中都在发生。所以那种悲伤，首先，那种悲伤是真实存在的。前几天我跟一位产品负责人聊天，她说，我不知道，老兄，我们现在都应该是这些通用构建者，她说，我不——这有点孤独。她说，我怀念那些被稍微剥离的协作部分，因为现在我一直跟机器人一起工作。我就对她说，是啊，老兄，那很糟糕。先接受它吧。改变很糟糕，它也可以很棒，但我们不必对此过于乐观。我们也可以直接说这很难。

Steering. And I was like, I feel like there are a lot of people out in the world right now that are like, I don't want to steer. Do you know what I mean? I want to row. I like rowing. Or I mean, it can be hard to separate: I like rowing, or I'm scared that rowing is the only thing I'm ever going to be good at, or it's what I know and I don't know if I can be good at steering. And I think that's happening in a lot of disciplines. So that grief, first and foremost, that grief is really real. I was talking to a product leader just the other day who was like, I don't know, man, we're all supposed to be these universal builders now, and she was like, I don't—it's kind of lonely. She's like, I miss these parts of the collaboration that have been a little bit stripped away because now I'm working with robots all the time. And I just said to her, yeah, man, that sucks. Sit with it for a second. Change sucks. It also can be awesome, but we don't have to be fluffy bunnies about this. We can also just say this is hard.

仅仅说出你的感受，就有很大的力量。

There's so much power in just saying the thing that you're feeling.

我向上帝发誓，那篇乐高文章很大一部分作用就是——就像，这很难、很可怕，但会好起来的。

I swear to God that is a big chunk of what the Legos article did—just like, this is hard and scary, and it's going to be okay.

这个孤独感的部分非常重要，值得一谈。我请过 Fiona Fong 上播客，她领导 Claude Code，Claude Code 的工程团队。她是 Boris Journey 的老板。有趣的事实。她说了这个——我问她这个世界的缺点是什么，就是工程师过去习惯和一群工程师一起工作。团队过去是，你知道，五个工程师、十个工程师。现在团队更少，每个团队的工程师也更少。就像你整天都在跟智能体说话。所以不一样了。

This loneliness piece is such an important part to touch on. I had Fiona Fong on the podcast who leads Claude Code, the engineering team of Claude Code. She's Boris Journey's boss. Fun fact. And she said this exact—I asked her just what's the downside of this world, and it's engineers are used to work with a bunch of engineers. Teams used to be, you know, five engineers, 10 engineers. And now it's fewer teams, fewer engineers per team. And it's just like you're talking to agents all day. And so it's not the same.

不一样了。

It's not the same.

不一样了。我认为这实际上是那些负责组织架构、思考团队未来结构应该是什么样子的公司领导者需要思考的事情。你真的需要思考，因为，是的，也许你可以剥离所有人类，获得所有这些生产力，也许你获得效率，但你也得到悲伤的人类。你懂我的意思吗？那不会给任何人带来最好的工作。我觉得你关于小团队和小公司比大公司的人快乐得多的调查数据非常有趣。因为这与我在所有与领导者对话中看到的情况非常吻合。但对我来说，这也反映了我认为我们在这些大公司看到更多的情况，人们正在剥离管理层，生产力压力更大等等，人的空间更少，你知道，当你只专注于优化成本和机器人效率时，快乐和兴奋的空间就更少了，你知道吗？

It's not the same. And I think that's actually something that leaders of companies that are actually in charge of org structures and thinking about what the future structure of teams needs to look like. You actually need to think about it because, yeah, maybe you can strip out all the humans and you get all this productivity and maybe you get efficiency, but you also get sad humans. Do you know what I mean? And that doesn't lead to the best work for anyone. I thought your survey data around the fact that small teams and smaller companies are so much happier than people at the bigger companies was really interesting. Just because that very much resonates with what I see in all my conversations with leaders. But it also to me is a reflection of—I think we're seeing more at these bigger companies where people are stripping out management layers and there's a lot more pressure on productivity and things like that, and there's less room for the human, you know, there's less room for the joy and the excitement when all you're doing is focusing on optimizing cost and robot efficiency, you know?

是啊，老兄。这里有很多可谈的。有一个很酷的框架——我不知道，心智模型——Corey Doctorow 之前写过，他谈到半人马和反半人马。你听说过吗？

Yeah, man. There's so much to talk about here. There's this really cool framework—I don't know, mental model—that Corey Doctorow wrote about a while ago where he talks about the centaur and the reverse centaur. You heard of this?

没有，但我已经喜欢上了。

No, but I love it already.

所以，好吧。所以，我想我甚至不知道怎么发音。半人马。听起来对吗？半人马。好吧。所以，半人马是人的身体在像马这样的动物上面。抱歉。人的头、躯干，在上面。

So, okay. So, I think I don't know even how to pronounce it. Centaur. Does that sound right? Centaur. Okay. So, centaur is a human body on top of an animal like a horse. Sorry. A human head, torso, top.

显然，你读的希腊神话不够多。

Clearly, you do not read enough Greek mythology.

我刚看了《奥德赛》。我是万事通。你的孩子长大一点，你会读《闪电窃贼》系列，你就会懂了。

I just watched the Odyssey. I'm an expert on all things. Your kid is going to get older and you're going to read the Lightning Thief books and you'll get it.

《闪电窃贼》。好的。是的，我期待。好的。所以，这个想法是半人马是人的头控制动物的身体。反半人马是动物的头控制人的身体。所以，他的洞察是，我们想要的是我们控制的 AI。我们负责。它听我们的命令。很棒的人马。这是一种很酷的生活方式。我们需要避免和恐惧的是反半人马，即 AI 利用我们去做事情，比如 DoorDash 和 Uber 的人已经处于那个世界，不是最有趣的生活。它可能会扩展到知识工作，我认为这是很多人的恐惧。你只是这个东西，控制着智能体，这个差距在缩小，这里是人类仍然有价值的地方，然后 AI 告诉你在哪里构建、做什么，然后它做事情。所以，我一直在思考这个。

Lightning Thief. Okay. Yeah, I'll look forward to it. Okay. So, the idea is a centaur is a human head controlling an animal body. Reverse centaur is an animal head controlling a human body. So, the way he—his kind of insight here is what we want is AI that we control. We are in charge. It's doing our bidding. Awesome centaur. It's a cool way to live. What we need to avoid and fear is the reverse centaur where the AI is using us to do things like DoorDash people and Uber people are in that world already, not the funnest life. And it might expand to knowledge work and I think that's a lot of people's fears. You're just this thing that's just controlling agents and just this closing gap of here's where humans still are valuable and then AI is kind of telling you where to build and what to do and then it's doing the thing. So, I've been thinking a lot about that.

是的。我的意思是，我想谈谈这个的恐惧面和恐惧叙事，因为我认为这是这个阶段和这个时期真正不同的事情之一，因为很难告诉人们要拥抱变化，当他们说但是等等，另一边是什么？就像你告诉我要放下我的乐高。你告诉我要让自己变得无关紧要。你懂我的意思吗？就像我不相信另一边有工作。

Yeah. I mean, I want to get to the fear side of this and the fear narrative as well because I think that's one of the things that is really different in this stage and this sort of phase because it's really hard to tell people like lean into change when they're like but wait like what's on the other side? Like you're telling me to let go of my Legos. You're telling me to make myself irrelevant. Like you know what I mean? Like I don't believe there's a job on the other side.

我认为那种恐惧叙事，当然有些是真实的，但很多被严重夸大了，它正在制造一种相当有毒的环境，让人很难带着喜悦、兴奋或任何机会感去拥抱这种变化。我常说，现在的叙事就像：好吧，我们雇了这个新员工。这个新员工是你见过的最聪明的员工。这个员工比你聪明 10 倍，我要你把你所知道的一切都倾囊相授，然后六个月后他们就会抢走你的工作。谁会想这么做？你明白我的意思吗？没人想这么做。这对任何人来说都不是一个好叙事。顺便说一句，这也不是现实。就像目前，虽然没有很多数据——尽管你可能比我有更多数据——表明 AI 真的在抢走工作。我对所有打着 AI 旗号的裁员有很多不满，因为它们跟 AI 无关。它们只是管理不善的公司贴上 AI 标签，从中获得一些股价点数，而不是说‘哎呀，我们雇了太多人’。它们还在传播这种恐惧叙事，说所有这些工作、你的工作都要消失了，对吧？另一边没有工作。最好的之一，我接手了这个播客，叫《工作生活》，它让我能和人们进行这些非常有趣的对话，我做过的最好的对话之一是和一位名叫曼·索阿里的记者，她当了 30 年记者。你想谈谈一个人们预测了 30 年死亡的行业吗？新闻业。曼特什么都做过，比如她创办了 BBC，她很早就做音频，她做过这个疯狂的加密货币音频播客，她还是 TED 电台小时的主持人。所以，曼特在 30 年里在一个不断被颠覆的行业里建立了非常成功的职业生涯。从和她的交谈中，我基本上带着一个非常有趣的问题离开，这个问题完全不同于‘如果你相信你的工作会消失，你会怎么做？’而是‘如果你相信你的工作会一直存在，只是每六年看起来完全不同，你会怎么做？’我真希望这就是我们关于科技行业所有工作的对话，老实说，关于所有理论上会被 AI 取代的工作，形式肯定会改变。但在我们有真实证据之前，如果我们相信它们不会消失呢？它们只会自我重塑。

And I think that fear narrative, like I am sure some of it is real, but some of it is really overblown and it's creating a pretty toxic environment for people where it's so hard to lean into this change with joy or excitement or any sense of opportunity. I always say like the narrative right now is literally like okay we hired this new employee. This new employee is the smartest employee that you have ever met. This employee is like 10 times smarter than you and I want you to pour every single thing that you know into this employee and then they're going to take your job in six months. Like who the wants to do that? Do you know what I mean? No one wants to do that. Like that is not a good narrative for anyone. By the way, it's also not reality. Like as of right now, like there is not a lot of data, although you may have more than I do that says that AI is genuinely taking jobs away. Um, and I have a lot of beef to pick with all the AI branded layoffs out there because they're Like they're not about AI. Like they are about badly run companies slapping an AI label and getting some share points from that versus saying, "Whoops, we made we hired too many people." Um, and they're propagating this fear narrative that is like all these jobs are your job is going away, right? There is no job on the other side. One of the best, so I took over this podcast, which you know called work life and it's let me have all these really fun conversations with people and one of the best conversations I had uh was with this journalist named Man Soari and she has been a journalist for 30 years. You want to talk about an industry that people have been predicting the death of for 30 years, right? Journalism. And Minute has done everything like she started the BBC and she was uh super early in audio and she did this like crazy crypto audio podcast and she's also like she's the host of TED Radio Hour. So, Minute over 30 years has built a very successful career in an industry that is being constantly disrupted. And from talking to her, I basically walked away with this really interesting question that is totally different than, "What would you do if you believed your job was going to disappear?" It was, "What would you do if you believed your job was always going to exist? It was just going to look completely different every six years." And I just kind of wish that was the conversation we were having about all the jobs in tech and honestly all the jobs that are theoretically going to get taken by AI, which is like the form is definitely going to change. But until we have real evidence, what if we believe that they're not going away? They're just going to reinvent themselves.

这真是很棒的建议。而且这正是迄今为止一直在发生的事情。

That is awesome advice. And that's exactly what's been happening so far.

是的，

Yeah,

总是有这种恐惧，好吧，但 X 年后会不同，但实际上这正是一直在发生的事情。工程存在，不同的工作。实际上对工程师的需求比以往任何时候都多。

there's always this fear that, okay, but now it'll be different in X years, but that is actually exactly what's been happening. Engineering exists, different job. There's actually more demand than ever for engineers.

没错。你的数据说明了这一点。我当时想，‘谢谢你发布这些数据，莱尼。’

Exactly. Your data said that. And I was like, "Thank you for publishing this data, Lenny."

在我们进入建议部分，谈谈它如何演变之前，我想分享几件事，涉及你提到的人们的感受。所以，在我们讨论这个时，我会在屏幕上分享这些图片，展示人们现在的感受。回到那个点。嗯，我们连续两年做了调查，了解科技人士的感受以及他们对 AI 和所有这些事情的感受。所以我们现在有了随时间变化的趋势。我们看倦怠和乐观情绪。在 2025 年，44% 的人说他们感到倦怠。或者今年，55% 的人说他们感到倦怠。这是一个巨大的跳跃。一年内感到倦怠的人增加了 10%。这很合理。正如你所说，你现在基本上被期望做更多的工作，但可能没有更多的钱。现在就像，好吧，酷。你有了所有这些 AI。为什么你没有完成更多？看看所有其他团队移动得快多了。我们完蛋了。我们要倒闭了。我们必须更快。所以，这很合理。

Before we get into the advice kind of how it's evolved, there's a couple things I want to share which touch on things you mentioned about how people are feeling. So, I'll share these images on the screen as we talk about this of just people's feelings right now. Just to kind of come back to that point. Um, so we looked we did the survey for two years now in a row of how tech people are feeling and how they're feeling about AI and all these things. And so we have uh a trend now of over time how things are changing. And we look at burnout and optimism. And in 2025 44% of people said they feel burned out. LA or this year 55% of people said they are burned out. That's a huge jump. That's 10% increase in a year of people feeling burnt out. And it makes sense. as you said, you're basically now expected to do more work, but not probably more money. And now it's just like, okay, well cool. You got all these AI. Why aren't you getting more done? Look at all these other teams moving so much faster. We're screwed. We're going to go out of business. We got to move faster. So, so it makes sense.

我的意思是，我喜欢你做那个调查，因为我也认为每次你发布它，我都从中学到很多。而且它也是一个很好的现实检验，了解人们的感受，因为你的调查字面上说超过一半的人感到倦怠，这太疯狂了，而且是的，我相信。我认为倦怠来自很多不同的地方，对人们来说可能意味着很多不同的事情，但对我来说，我在数据中读到的是，第一，情绪是累人的，有很多疲惫试图理解 AI 中发生了什么，我的意思是现在的变化速度太疯狂了。嗯，既在技术变化方面，但我实际上认为叙事变化对人们来说也相当累人，比如‘哦，这个月这个重要，哦，下个月那个’，你知道，里面有一种折腾，相当累人。嗯，你知道，我和 OpenAI 的一个朋友发邮件，她说我们花了整整六个月才从那种代币最大化，像每个人都在激进生产力，到处使用 AI，转变到一种对话，像‘等等等等等等等等，这真的在起作用吗？因为它非常昂贵’，你知道，她说六个月，就花了这么长时间。所以如果你坐在里面，这意味着六个月前他们像‘一直用 AI，每天到处用’，现在他们像‘你用得好吗？’你知道，希拉里·吉德利也说了同样的话，她像‘你知道，六个月前每个人都像我如何让人们使用 AI，现在他们像我如何让人们使用 AI，像停止那么糟糕地使用 AI’，你知道，就像那种六个月的折腾，通常比那快得多，对人们来说是累人的。悲伤是累人的，更不用说我认为你在调查中提到的那种感觉，像‘我将被期望以同样的薪水做更多的工作’，那太累人了，我认为人们感觉被利用了，你知道，像‘这对我有什么好处？’嗯，像‘为什么这对我有趣？’嗯，‘我的机会是什么？’我认为特别是在大公司，有时感觉几乎是对抗性的，你知道，像‘我知道为什么这对我们的底线有好处，但提醒我为什么这对我有好处。’

I mean, I love that you do that survey because I also think I learn a ton from it every time you've published it. Um, and it's also just like a great reality check about how people are feeling because literally what your survey says is more than half the people are feeling burnt out which is like nuts and also yeah I believe it and I think you know I mean burnout comes from a lot of different places and can mean a lot of different things to people but to me what I read inside that data was like number one like emotions are tiring and there is a lot of exhaustion trying to understand what's going on in a I mean the rate of change right now is nuts. um both in terms of like obviously the technological change but I actually think the narrative change is also pretty exhausting for people like oh this month this is important oh next month this you know like there's a thrash inside of that that's pretty tiring um you know I was emailing with a friend at openai and she was like it's taken us literally six months to go from sort of this token maxing like everybody like aggressive productivity like use AI everywhere to a conversation that's like wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait like is this actually making a difference because it's very expensive you know and she's like six months that's all it took and so if you're sitting inside that it means six months ago they were like use AI all the time every day everywhere and now they're like are you doing it well enough you know and Hillary Gidley said the same thing where she was like you know six months ago everyone was like how do I get people to use AI and now they're like how do I get people to use AI like stop using AI so badly you know and it's like that sixmon thrash often much faster than that is tiring for people the grief is tiring let alone like I think that feeling which you mentioned in your survey of like I'm going to be expected to do more for the same amount of pay like that's exhausting like that I think people feel taken advantage of, you know, and like what is in this for me? Um like why is it fun for me? Um what's the opportunity for me? And I think particularly at bigger companies, it feels almost adversarial sometimes, you know, where like, you know, I get why it's good for our bottom line, but remind me why that's good for me.

这实际上触及了这次调查中最大的发现之一，那就是首先，填写调查的人中有一半感到他们从未有过的快乐。这是一个重要的点，我们需要指出，不是每个人都感到恐惧和觉得一切都完了。

There's that actually touches on one of the biggest findings in this survey, which is that first of all, half of people that filled it out uh are feeling the happiest they've ever felt. This is an important point we need to make is not everybody's feeling fear and and uh sense that it's all doomed.

其实很多人——大概一半的人——觉得这是他们职业生涯中最美好的时光，对正在发生的一切都感到非常兴奋。你可能不这么觉得。如果你不是这样，你可能不相信，但据我观察，我周围很多人都非常兴奋。尽管他们比以往任何时候都更努力地工作，但他们对自己的职业生涯也从未如此快乐。

Actually, a lot of people—like half of people—are feeling like they're having the best time of their life in their career, and they're so excited about all the things going on. You may not feel that. If you're not that, you may not believe that, but from what I can see around me, many people are very excited. Even though they're working harder than they've ever worked, they're also the happiest they've ever been about their career.

是的。

Yeah.

嗯，我记得背景是，很多快乐往往集中在那些在较小团队或拥有更多自主权的人身上，大概是这样。

Well, and I think the context, if I remember, was like a lot of the happiness tended to be concentrated in people that were in smaller teams or had more authority, like sort of.

是的。

Yeah.

绝对如此。更有趣的是，最强的相关性是那些说 AI 放大了他们的人。他们觉得自己找到了如何用 AI 做更多他们兴奋的事情的方法。

Absolutely. And even more interestingly, the strongest correlation is people who said that AI has amplified them. They feel like they figured out how to use AI to do more stuff that they're excited about.

有趣的是，设计师是这项工作中最不快乐的。这实际上就是我从设计师那里听到的——每个人都在更快地行动。设计不能那么快。你必须从人们那里获得反馈。你必须经过对齐。你需要思考——就像坐在那里思考。你不能只是智能体式地迭代。

And interestingly, designers were the least happy from this work. And that's actually what I hear from designers—is everyone's moving faster. Design can't move that fast. You have to get feedback from people. You have to go through get alignment. You need to think—like sit there and think. You can't just agent iterate.

我也觉得——是不是可能——嗯，我不知道你是否从设计师那里听到这个——但也有一种说法是，现在人人都是设计师了。

I also think—isn't there probably—well, I don't know if you're hearing this from the designers—but there's also a like everyone's a designer now.

是的，这也是很大一部分原因。

Yeah, that's also a big part of it.

当我在教育行业工作时，那是一个很难做的行业，因为每个人都曾经是学生，所以每个人都觉得自己懂。我觉得现在设计师也有这种情况，就像，哦是的，我刚在 Gemini 里做了这个，或者我刚在 Claude 里做了这个。给你。这是我的设计。顺便说一句，我认为很多行业都是这样——整个产品也是——就是“我做了这个”和“什么是真正伟大的”之间的差距，对吧？就像我创建了这个原型和一款卓越的产品之间的差距真的很大。设计显然也是如此。设计对普通人来说变得容易多了。至少——好吧，设计变得非常非常容易获得，你知道，当人们一直告诉你如何做你的工作时，这可能会让人筋疲力尽。

When I worked in education, it's like one of those industries it's really hard to work in because everyone was a student once, so everyone thinks they know things. And I feel like now designers have that where it's like, oh yeah, I just made this in Gemini or I just made this in Claude. Here you go. Here's my design. And by the way, I think this is true of a lot of industries, which is like—and whole products—where it's like the gap between I made this and what is actually great, right? The gap between like I created this prototype and a product that is like exceptional is really big. The same is true obviously of design. Design just got like way more accessible to the average person. At least—okay, design got really really accessible, you know, which can be exhausting when people are telling you how to do your job all the time.

是的。前几天我发了一条推文，在这方面引起了很多关注。每个人工作中越来越大的一部分是清理别人试图做你的工作时留下的 AI 垃圾。

Yeah. I had this tweet the other day that got a lot of traction along these lines. A growing part of everyone's job is cleaning up the AI slop from other people trying to do your job.

好的。所以，我对此有很多感受，这涉及到我们之前谈到的超级智能的事情，就像，你知道，我们说 AI 就像你雇佣过的全世界最聪明的员工，它在所有事情上都比你强。我认为这导致人们以这种方式对待它，而实际上我们与 AI 的大多数经验——我想很多人都有过这样的经历：这是错的，就像我刚才让你做的，这不好。我一直认为 AI 需要和人类一样的指导和训练，对吧？它需要上下文，需要入职培训，需要所有这些，它更像一个实习生——一个糟糕的实习生，我经常称之为懒惰的实习生。而发生的事情，就像你关于 AI 垃圾的观点，是人们把它当作一个伟大的——你知道，他们雇佣过的最好的员工。所以他们只是复制粘贴发送，对吧？而我想说，如果你把它当作实习生，你永远不会那样做。你永远不会把实习生交给你的演示文稿直接发给你的老板。那有点疯狂，对吧？你会迭代它，你会编辑它，你会确保它包含了你和暑期实习生进行的 57 次对话中的所有上下文，然后再把那份演示文稿发给你的老板。AI 也是一样。我认为世界上所有垃圾的一部分原因是人们已经放弃了问责。就像，哦，AI 说这足够好了，所以我就复制粘贴发送，你知道吗？而好的工作从来不是这样产生的。你明白我的意思吗？所以我觉得我们需要改变，从这种比我们所有人都更擅长我们工作的超级智能存在，变成——不，它只是一个实习生，伙计，它需要指导和上下文，以及大多数实习生都会做的许多次迭代。我认为另一件事，你知道，关于问责的观点，或者关于如果你不对工作质量负责，那就会转移到别人身上，对吧？接收它的人必须处理它，这对组织来说是一种消耗。就像我真的看到 CEO 们——我们在 Glue Club 里经常谈论这个——CEO 们发送一份明显由 AI 写的战略备忘录，这是你在为你的组织树立榜样，表明外包你的思考和外包你的战略是可以的。这是你在树立榜样，表明你不需要对你发送的工作负责。我觉得这归结为这件事：过去六个月我们真的过度重视生产力，就像，你知道，你听到所有这些关于公司计算 token 和设立 token 排行榜的故事，这让我想起人们计算停车场里的汽车、Slack 气泡和代码行数的日子，对吧？我们都知道那是管理人员的非常糟糕的方式。这不是——我们一直专注于如何在跑步机上尽可能快地跑，但没有关注我是否在前进，你知道，这对我来说是生产力和效率的区别。生产力是你能产生更多，在这一点上我认为我们已经证明了我们都能产生一堆，然后其他人必须费力地筛选，就像你的推文说的。但那是高效的吗？那真的推动了对话吗？最近的答案是否定的。它没有。

Okay. So, I have a lot of feelings about this, and it goes to this superintelligence thing that we were talking about, where it's like, you know, we say like AI is like the smartest employee you've ever hired in the entire world, and it's better than you at everything. And I think it causes people to approach it that way, when actually most of our experience with AI—I think a lot of people have had the experience with AI where it's like, that's wrong, like what I just asked you to do, like this isn't good. I always think like AI needs the same coaching and training that a human does, right? It needs context, it needs onboarding, it needs all of these things, and it's kind of much more like an intern—like a bad intern, often I call it a lazy intern. And what happens, like to your point about AI slop, is that folks are approaching it as if it's like a great—you know, the best employee they've ever hired. So they just like copy paste send, right? And I'm like, you would never do that if you thought about it as an intern. You would never take the presentation that an intern handed you and just like straightforward it to your boss. Like, that is a little bit insane, right? You would iterate on it, you would edit it, you would ask—make sure that it had all the context from like the 57 conversations that you've had with the summer intern before you ship that preso to your boss. AI is the same. And I think part of what's going on with all the slop in the world is people have like shipped accountability. Like it's like, oh, AI said this was good enough, so I'm just going to like copy paste send, you know? And that is never been how good work happens. You know what I mean? And so like I feel like we need a change from like this super intelligent being that's better than all of us at our jobs to like no, it's just an intern, man, and like it needs the coaching and context and all of that and many iterations that most interns do. And I think the other thing, you know, to your point about accountability, or to your point about sort of like if you don't take accountability for the quality of your work, that shifts to someone else, right? The person that receives it has to deal with it, and that is like just a drain on organizations. And like I literally see CEOs—like we talk about this all the time in Glue Club—like CEOs shipping a strategy memo that was clearly written by AI, that is you role modeling for your organization that it's fine to outsource your thinking and it's fine to outsource your strategy. It's you role modeling that you don't need accountability for the work that you send. And I feel like it goes down to this thing of like we've—this last six months we've really been like overvaluing productivity, which is just like, you know, you hear all these stories about like companies like counting tokens and having token leaderboards, and it's like it brings me back to the days when people were like counting cars in a parking lot and Slack bubbles and lines of code, right? Which we all know is a really bad way to manage people. And it's not—we've been focused on sort of like how do you run as fast as you can on the treadmill, but like not am I going anywhere, you know, and which is to me the difference between like productivity and efficiency. Like productivity is can you generate, you know, more, which at this point I think we've proven we can all generate a bunch of that other people then have to wade through to the point of your tweet. But is that efficient? Does that actually move the conversation forward? And the answer lately has been why no. It does not.

是的，在那份报告里我有一张冰山图，就像我们在上面做得更好。哦，看看所有这些，但输出更差。思维判断力在下降。所以，我们正在观察很多事情。好消息是每个人都意识到了这一点。他们就像，你知道，也许这不是我们应该工作的方式。

Yeah, there's a—in that report I have this iceberg image of just like we're doing better on top. Oh, look at all the stuff, but the output is worse. Thinking judgment is coming down. So, there's a lot of things we're watching. The good news is everyone's aware of this. They're like, you know, maybe this isn't the way we should be working.

不。

No.

我想到有一份非常有趣的工程报告说，你知道，对于工程来说，它确实让人们更有生产力了，但不得不重写的代码行数增加了大约 8 倍。所以这就像是一个很清晰的生产力象征。显然，安全事件也增加了，等等等等。所以这就像是生产力和效率之间的区别。我认为你的倦怠数据的一部分原因就是人们被淹没了，你知道，那很累人。如果你一整天都在费力地判断，这件事另一端的人到底有没有认真想过？他们到底在不在乎？那很累人。那感觉不像是在好好利用你的时间。只是让人觉得有点恼火，你知道吗？

I thought there was this really interesting engineering report that said, you know, for engineering, it has genuinely made people more productive, but the amount of lines of code that have had to be rewritten has gone up like 8x. So it's like this very clear symbol of productivity. Obviously, also the security incidents have gone up, etc., etc. So it's like there's just this difference between productivity and efficiency. And I think part of your burnout data is like people are just getting swamped, you know, and that's exhausting. If what you're doing all day is wading through, did the person on the other side of this actually think about it? Did they actually care? That's tiring. That doesn't feel like a good use of your time. It just feels a little bit infuriating, you know?

是的。又回到那种悲伤，就像，天哪，我怀念我以前做的事。看看我现在做的这份奇怪的新工作。

Yeah. Comes back to the grief of like, oh man, I missed what I had used to be doing. Look at this weird new job I'm doing.

是的，完全是这样。

Yeah, totally.

好，那我们回到你的建议。我们有点跑题了，但那个话题很重要。我们先总结一下关于“交出你的乐高”哪些仍然成立，然后再谈哪些不再成立。我简单总结一下。你说话的时候我记了些笔记。所以，仍然成立。嗯，变化是可怕的。这很正常。要理解这一点。这是人性的一部分。我们不喜欢变化。嗯，学习比知道仍然是非常重要的关注点。你不知道没关系，但如果你专注于学习，你大概就会没事。在成功的公司里原地不动，实际上你就是在落后。公司在增长。如果你不成长、不承担新挑战、不交出东西，你就会落后。还有什么核心的仍然成立的吗？

Okay, so let's come back to your advice. We kind of went on a really important tangent, but let's summarize what's still true about giving away your Legos and then we'll talk about what's no longer true. So, I'll summarize briefly. Took some notes as you were talking. So, still true. Um, change is scary. That's normal. Understand that. It's part of human nature. We don't like change. Uh, learning over knowing still a very important thing to focus on. It's okay if you don't know, but if you're focused on learning, you'll be probably okay. This idea of standing still at successful companies is actually you're falling behind. The company's growing. If you're not growing and taking on new challenges and giving away stuff, you're going to fall behind. Is there anything else core to kind of what's still

是的。我想我只会再加一条，那就是变化是可怕且艰难的，你能做的最好的事情就是迎向它，对吧？这不是你的本能告诉你要做的事，但在变化面前，这实际上是你所能做的最好的事情。这就是“乐高”那篇文章传达的信息，基本上就是你需要迎向变化带来的不适，才能成长。我认为今天这仍然成立，即使它可能比以往任何时候都更可怕。

Yeah. I think I would just add one which is change is scary and hard and the best thing you can do is lean into it, right? It is not what your instincts tell you to do, but it is actually the best thing you can do in the face of change. And that was the message of Legos, you know, basically like you need to lean into this comfort of change in order to grow. And I think it is still true today, even if it is maybe even scarier than it's ever been.

本季度的支持赞助商是 DX。现在你们公司的每个人终于都在使用 AI 了，工程领导者面临的问题不再是“我们是否在使用 AI”，而是“它是否带来了回报？”有了 DX，你可以衡量和基准测试 AI 采用在整个产品生命周期中的影响。DX 会向你展示 AI 在哪里帮助了开发者，以及在哪里制造了新的瓶颈。你还可以用它来评估 AI 供应商、监控成本和许可证，并确切看到是什么在限制你的智能体。这就是为什么数百家企业，包括 Snowflake、Sony 和 BNY，都使用 DX 平台来衡量 AI 对开发者生产力的影响。访问 getdx.com/lenny 获取 DX 的演示。网址是 getdx.com/lenny。

This season's supporting sponsor is DX. Now that everybody at your company is finally using AI, the question that engineering leaders face is no longer are we using AI, but is it paying off? With DX, you can measure and benchmark the impact of AI adoption across your full product life cycle. DX shows you where AI is helping developers and where it's creating new bottlenecks. You can also use it to evaluate AI vendors, monitor costs and licenses, and see exactly what's limiting your agents. That's why hundreds of enterprises, including Snowflake, Sony, and BNY, use the DX platform to measure AI's impact on developer productivity. Visit getdx.com/lenny to get a demo of DX. That's getdx.com/lenny.

好。那么现在有什么不同？嗯，建议大致是，好，交出去，让自己变得多余。会没事的。嗯

Okay. So now what is what is different? Uh the advice broadly is okay give away make yourself redundant. It's going to be okay. Uh

我知道这是今天很难谈论的一点。是的。让自己变得无关紧要，各位。一切都会很棒的。嗯，是的。你知道，有趣的是，当 AI 刚开始真正起飞时，我花了一段时间才真正理解到底发生了什么，说实话。我有一阵子是个怀疑论者，我当时想，我们已经自动化东西有一阵子了。这是什么？嗯，但最终我接受了，突然我意识到，哦，你知道，我以前去别人公司演讲前会做的那件事，我会问，你们的人员增长有多快？对我来说，那是我唯一能用来判断有没有人可以交出乐高的标志，你知道，如果我要上台说“交出你的乐高”。很多时候人们会说，“等一下。我们没在招人。我该交给谁？”但现在我想，“哦，好吧。”这个信息甚至更相关了，因为每个人都可以尝试自动化自己工作的一部分，每个人都可以交出乐高。我告诉你，意识到把东西交给机器人和交给人类有多么不同，是一段有趣的旅程。你知道，乐高的核心要点是，你把你一直在做的东西完全交给别人。我在公司做乐高演讲时最喜欢被问到的一个问题是，把乐高交给别人最好的方式是什么？我喜欢这个问题，因为我认为基本上人们期待我说，“所以，你应该极其小心地把这个乐高递给这个人，并向他们解释你为什么把它放在那个位置，你知道，完美地描述你的塔。确保他们有一本不会搞砸的说明书。”而我的答案其实是不。交出乐高最好的方式是朝他们脸上扔过去，然后朝反方向跑，因为我们的倾向又是控制。我们的倾向是，你要完全按照我建的方式建这座塔，你不能搞砸。但实际上，重点是，不，你是在把它交出去。你需要完全分离你的思维。你需要直接交给他们，并相信那座塔的未来属于他们。嗯，显然这既带来很多恐惧，也带来一大堆东西。但也有巨大的自由，对吧？你把这部分脑力空间卸下来，运给他们。嗯，有趣的是，我最大的领悟之一是，把某件事委托给机器人和交给人类不一样，因为你无法摆脱监督，对吧？这更像是把某件事委托给你团队里的某个人。你仍然拥有它。所以我们已经，是的，我们变得更高效了，因为机器人可以为我们做 X、Y、Z，但这和交给人类不一样，因为我们仍然拥有监督权。我们仍然拥有最终产品，这意味着精神负担仍然留在你身上。所以，是的，在某些方面我可以做更多，但在心理上，我仍然背负着所有机器人正在做的所有事情的负担，你知道，我认为这确实让它相当不同，因为这只是意味着你没有那么多空间去继续做新的事情，对吧？你仍然，你仍然承担着所有监督成本，这个成本不是零。你明白我的意思吗？我又在想，这是否是你倦怠数据中部分情况的原因，就像突然之间我在监督所有这些机器人，也许还有所有这些人类，这不仅仅是，它更多，嗯，所以无论如何，我认为这是最大的区别之一，就是它并不完全相同。这就像把乐高转移给某人，你真正摆脱了它，与把乐高委托给某人之间的区别。

I know that's the one that's hard to talk about today. Yeah. Make yourself irrelevant everybody. It's gonna go great. Um yeah. You know, it's funny like when I when AI first really took off and I first took me a while to really understand what was going on in total honesty. I was a skeptic for a while where I was like we've been automating things for a while. What is this? Um but eventually I I got on board and all of a sudden I was like oh you know that thing I used to do before I went to give a speech at someone's company where I was like how how fast is your headcount growing? For me that was like the only symbol I had of like are there people to give Legos to? you know, if I'm gonna get up on stage and be like, "Give away your Legos." A lot of times people are like, "Wait a minute. We're not hiring anyone. Like, who do I give it to?" And but now I was like, "Oh, okay." Like, this message is like even more relevant because like everyone can try to automate parts of their job and everyone can give Legos away. And I will tell you, it has been an interesting journey realizing how different it is to give things away to robots than it is to give them to a human. And you know, principally the point was like of Legos was like you take this thing you've been working on and you fully hand it to someone else. One of my favorite questions that I get asked at companies when I do the Legos talk is what is the best way to give Legos away to someone else? And I love it because I think basically people expect me to be like, "So, you should incredibly carefully hand this Lego to this person and explain to them exactly why you put it in the position you put it in, you know, like perfectly describe your tower. Make sure they have like an instruction manual that they won't up." And my answer is actually no. The best way to give Legos away is to chuck them at their face and run in the other direction because our tendency again is towards control. Like our tendency is to be like you will build this tower exactly how I built it and you will not mess it up. But actually like the point is no you're giving it away. You need to fully separate your mind. You need to just hand it to them and trust that the future of whatever that tower is belongs to them. Um and there is both obviously like a lot of fear and a whole bunch of stuff that comes with that. But there's a huge amount of freedom, right? You take this brain space and you ship it to them. Um, interestingly, like one of my biggest realizations was that delegating something to a robot is not the same as giving it to a human because you cannot get rid of the oversight, right? Like you it's more like delegating something to someone on your team. You still own it. And so we've given yes we've gotten more efficient because the robots can do X Y and Z for us but it's not the same as giving it away to a human because we still own the oversight. We still own the sort of final product and that means the mental tax stays with you. So like yes in some ways I can do more but psychologically I still have all the burden of all the stuff that all the robots are doing you know and I think that does make it quite different because it just means you don't have as much space to then go on to the new things right you're still you've still got all the tax of the cost of oversight is not zero do you know what I mean again I wonder if if this is part of what's going on with some of your burnout data is just like all of a sudden I'm overseeing all these robots and maybe all these humans and like it's not it's it's it's more and um so anyway I think that's one of the biggest differences is just like it isn't exactly the same. It's like the difference between like transferring a Lego to someone where you genuinely get rid of it versus like delegating a Lego to someone.

你描述的方式太有意思了，你需要从这件事的责任中抽离出来，而现在情况正好相反，别人在做这件事，AI 在做，但你仍然要负责。

It's so funny the way you described it, where you need to disconnect from the responsibility of this thing now, and it's the opposite now, where somebody else is doing this, the AI, but you're still responsible.

对。

Yeah.

所以就像你有一座乐高塔，有个小机器人过来，好吧，我现在要来做这个，但你仍然得向你的老板交代这座塔。

And so it's like having this Lego tower with this little robot coming through and okay, I'm going to work on this now, but you still have to represent this tower to your boss.

所以我完全能看清这个比喻。

And so I could 100% see this metaphor clear.

如果你是管理者，这种感觉很熟悉，对吧？你的团队规模翻了一倍，现在你有了这些奇怪的小机器人，它们偶尔会动一动那座塔，你得说：“不不不不不不。那不是我说的话。”你知道，这又像是管理实习生。你懂的。但如果你不是管理者，如果你从来没当过管理者，而且我确实觉得把这一点说出来很重要，就像我说的，管理机器人，这些技能和管理人类非常相似。它们的情绪更少，但你知道，监督、给它们上下文、纠正它们的工作、辅导，所有这些技能都是一样的，管理机器人和管理人类是一样的。而很多人不喜欢这样。很多人是主动选择不当管理者的。你明白我的意思吗？所以如果你没有，如果你不喜欢委派，如果你没有在这些技能上打磨很多很多年，那么突然之间你就处在了管理的位置上，这确实会带来疲惫，但这也意味着，字面意义上，现在世界上每个人都是管理者了，你知道，而且你委派给机器人，就像你委派给团队里的另一个人一样。所以，你知道，我总是说，一个人最多应该管理 10 到 12 名员工，这样最快乐。我管理过比这更大的团队，那看起来可不太好。而且我不认为有任何数据表明人们现在能管理更多。如果你把机器人也算进去，我担心人们的心理，你明白我的意思吗？就你要在脑子里装的东西的量而言。

If you're a manager, it's a familiar feeling, right? Your team got twice as big and now you just have these weird little robots that occasionally like up the tower and you have to be like, "No, no, no, no, no, no. That's not what I said." You know, which is like again managing an intern. Like you get it. But if you're not a manager, like if you've never been a manager, and I do think it's important to name that, like like I said, like managing robots, those skills are very similar to managing human humans. They have less feelings, but you know, it's all the same skills of like oversight and, you know, giving them context and correcting their work and coaching and like all those skills are the same for managing a robot um as they are for managing a human. And a lot of people don't like that. Like so many people actively like chose not to become a manager. Do you know what I mean? And so there is exhaustion that comes with if you haven't, you know, if you don't enjoy delegating, if you haven't worked on all these skills for many many years, like then suddenly you are in that stance of management, but it also just, I mean, it just means literally everyone in the world is a manager now, you know, and um all you're doing when you're delegating to robots is delegating just like you would to another human on your team. So, you know, I always say the happiest the max people should be managing is like 10 to 12 employees. Like I've I've managed bigger teams than that and it was not a good look. And I don't think there's any data that says that people can manage more than that now. And if you count robots, like I'm worried for people's like psychology, you know what I mean? Um in terms of like the amount you have to hold in your head.

对。我会做很多乱七八糟的东西，我有一堆不同的智能体在跑，一方面这太棒了，所有事情都完成了，就像哇看这东西跑起来了，我做了所有这些事，然后另一方面我整天被这些家伙 ping，它们说这个怎么办，好吧，哦我卡在这里了，哦这个行吗，我就想好吧，我得把这一切都看一遍，实际上我也和一个真正的人类工程师合作，我就觉得这让你感激一个很棒的人类工程师，你只要给个粗略的想法，他们就能接着做，做得很好，而这个是，这太烂了。好吧，再试一次，然后坐在那里等五分钟。

Yeah. I build a lot of random stuff and I have all these different agents running and on the one hand it's so awesome and all these things get done and it's just like wow look at this thing go I did all these things and then also I get pinged all day from all these guys they're like what about this okay oh I'm stuck here oh is this good and I'm like okay I got to look through this all actually so I work with an actual human engineer also and I'm just like it makes you appreciate a human awesome engineer that you could just give a rough idea to and they could run with it and do an awesome versus this sucks. Okay, let's try again and then sit there for five minutes and wait.

呃，所以是的，

Uh so yeah,

这就是管理初级员工和管理高级员工的区别。你明白我的意思吗？就像现在的 AI 是相当初级的员工。这不是我最喜欢的管理形式。我总是说，给我高绩效的人，给我，我能把他们变成这些了不起的火箭飞船。管理实习生，管理那些刚进入职场的人，相当累。我确实觉得管理 AI 就是这种感觉。而且就像我说的，这和把一块乐高扔给某人然后往反方向跑非常不同，而你对高级工程师就可以这么做，你知道？

it is the difference between managing junior employees and managing senior employees. Do you know what I mean? Like AI right now pretty junior employees. It's not my favorite form of management. I always say like give me the high performers, give me I can turn them into these incredible rocket ships. Like managing interns, managing like folks that are brand new to the workplace is pretty tiring. And I do think that is like what it feels like managing AI. And it's so different, like I said, than like throwing a Lego at someone and running the other direction, which you can do with your senior engineer, you know?

说得太好了。好，我们会讲到实际的建议。这是你大概应该做的。但在那之前，关于把乐高送出去的那个原始建议，还有什么不同？第一个，太好了。就像你让这一点变得非常明显，为什么把你的乐高送给机器非常不同，因为你实际上并没有送出去，它们只是去做工作，然后你仍然要为它负责，你得监督它。

Such a good point. Okay, we'll get to like actual advice. Here's what you should probably do. But before we get there, what else is different about the original advice around giving away Legos? The first one, so good. Just like uh you made it so obvious why it is very different to give your Legos away to a machine because you're not actually giving away a they're just going to do the work and then you're still responsible for it and you have to oversee it.

对。对。我认为第二件非常不同的事，我们之前已经稍微谈过一点，但我的信息一直是，你把事情送出去，因为你能为新机会腾出空间的唯一方式就是把事情送出去。你明白我的意思吗？而这背后有两个假设。一是把事情送出去是好的，二是另一边有新机会。呃，我认为这个，你知道，我谈到的恐惧叙事是让我在这个世界上抓狂的事情之一，我们在 Glue Club 里经常谈这个，就是这种主导叙事，说所有这些工作都会因为 AI 而消失，你知道，所有这些被贴上 AI 标签的裁员。这不会支持任何人处于这样一种立场，就是，对，让我们把所有事情都委派给这些机器人，让我们把我们的头脑和数据的每一块都给它们，这样我们就能拥有所有正在到来的新机会。我认为这是现在最难进行的对话，而且你知道，说到你说的有很多人真的很兴奋，确实有，我希望每个人都这样，因为这是一个不可思议的时刻，你知道，我在科技行业快 20 年了，呃，我见过很多，但这是那种时刻之一，这是你知道的打了兴奋剂的手机，各种生意都会被创造出来，我相信很多工作会因为这项技术而被创造出来，但我认为我们得开始进行那场对话，才能到达每个人都能投入的地方，对吧，每个人都能说，哦，把我讨厌的所有这些任务自动化太好了，因为它给了我更多时间去做我热爱的事情，你知道，这就像你说的那些被它放大的人，就像，哦，我不必做所有这些无聊透顶的工作。我可以只专注于带给我快乐的事情，对吧？我可以专注于我擅长的事情。这就是我们想要的。但当外面有这种叙事，你知道，媒体公司在传播的，说另一边没有你的东西。你明白我的意思吗？我们有全民基本收入。每个人都需要国家支持，因为 10 年后没人会有工作。就像，如果那是叙事，谁他妈的想给机器人乐高？没人。

Yeah. Yeah. And I think the second thing that's really different and we sort of talked about a little bit already, but like my message was always like you give things away because the only way you can make space for new opportunity is by giving things away. Do you know what I mean? And like that has two assumptions under it. One that it's good to give things away and two that there's new opportunity on the other side. Um, and I think this, you know, what I talked about with the fear narrative is one of the things that's driving me nuts in the world, and we talk about it a lot in Glue Club is just this dominant narrative that like all these jobs are going away because of AI and, you know, all these layoffs that are branded as AI. like that is not going to support anybody being in a stance of like yeah let's like delegate everything to these robots let's give them every piece of you know our brain and our data so that we can have all this new opportunity that's coming along like I think it is the hardest conversation to have right now and in you know to your point about like there's lots of people out there that are really excited there are and I want that for everyone because this is like an incredible moment like you know I've been in technology for almost 20 years and um I've seen a lot but like this is this is one of those moments this is you know the mobile phone on steroids where it's like all sorts of businesses are going to be created I'm a believer that a lot of jobs are going to be created because of this technology but I think we got to start having that conversation in order to get to the place where everyone can be leaning in right everyone can say oh it's great to automate all these tasks that I hate because it gives me more time to do the things that I love, you know, which is like I think to your point about the people that feel amplified by it, it's like, oh, I don't have to do all this boring ass work. I can just focus on the things that bring me joy, right? I can focus on the things that I'm great at. That's what we want. But while there's this narrative out there that, you know, media companies are propagating that says like there's nothing for you on the other side. Do you know what I mean? We've we got universal basic income. Everyone needs to be supported by the state because no one's going to have a job in 10 years. Like, who the wants to give Legos to robots if that's the narrative? No one.

我去了一个叫 food camp 的活动。你听说过 food camp 吗？

I went to this um thing called food camp. Have you heard of food camp?

我听说过。

I've heard of it.

Tim O'Reilly，创办了 O'Reilly Media，很棒、很聪明的人。他提出了 Web 2.0 这个概念。

Tim O'Reilly who started Orley Media, awesome, smart guy. He came up with web 2.0 is a concept.

他组织这些小型私密营，邀请他认为能对这场对话有贡献的人来讨论某个话题。最近这次的主题是：当 AI 承担越来越多我们的工作时，人类会怎样。开场是他和某个人——我想是位律师——聊天，那人说：好吧，我把做这份工作所需的非常具体的知识囤起来，这样 AI 就做不了。我需要保护它，否则我就会被取代。他们不再需要我了。

He organizes these little intimate camps where he invites people that he thinks can contribute to this conversation to talk about a topic. And this last one is around just like what happens with humans when AI does more and more of our job. And it started with him talking to some—I think it was a lawyer—who's just like, okay, I'm hoarding this very specific knowledge I have about doing this job so that AI cannot do it. It's like I need to protect it because otherwise I'm going to be replaced. They don't need me anymore.

我觉得很多人可能都有这种感觉。尤其是很多特定的小众职业。

And I feel like a lot of people are probably feeling that. A lot of specific niche professions especially.

是的，绝对如此。首先，当然，你怎么可能没有这种感觉呢？我不知道。也许我是个富足心态的人，也许六个月或五年后我会后悔说这话，但我从一生中获得的每一条数据，以及我做过的一些对话——比如和 Minutiae 的那次——都说你必须迎难而上。你懂我的意思吗？那种保护、紧抓着你已知的东西不放，并不是在变化中茁壮成长的方式。定义未来的不是这些人。而且，Minutiae 的故事会说，律师永远会存在。他们每六年、每三年或随便多久就会看起来完全不同。所以，你认为下一版的律师是什么样子？你想参与设计它吗？你想参与创造它吗？你想参与弄清楚它吗？还是你想留在这里，试图保护你所知道的？这——我觉得，你知道，对我来说又是——现在外面很可怕。所以我不想低估这一点，但我认为你必须采取这种能动性的立场，或者我们得用另一个词——创业精神。你知道，就像你必须采取这种立场：我想参与设计我职业的未来，而不是保护过去。

Yeah, absolutely. And I go back—first of all, yes, of course. Like, how could you not be feeling that way? I don't know. Maybe I'm an abundance person and maybe I'll regret saying this in six months or five years, but I'm like every piece of data I have from my entire life and some of these conversations I've had—like the one with Minutiae—say you got to lean in. You know what I mean? That protection and holding on and gripping to what you know is not the way you thrive in change. It's not the people that define the future. And again, the Minutiae story would say lawyers are always going to exist. They are going to look completely different in every six years or every three years or whatever. So what do you think the next version of a lawyer looks like? Do you want to be part of designing that? Do you want to be part of creating that? Do you want to be part of figuring that out? Or do you want to stay here and try to protect what you know? And this is—I think, you know, that's to me again—like it's scary out there right now. So I don't want to undervalue that, but I think you have to take that stance of agency, or we got to use a different word—entrepreneurship. You know, like you got to take that stance of I want to be part of designing the future of my profession, not protecting the past.

我真的非常喜欢这个框架，几乎像是——也许这是这次对话建议的很大一部分——来自 Minutiae 的这种思维方式：我的工作会不同，但它会继续存在，问题只是它会是什么，让我思考一下，迎难而上，几乎是为它做准备，而不是试图抵抗，因为抵抗反正也不会奏效。

I really really love this framework as like almost a—maybe that's a big part of the advice from this conversation—is this way of thinking from Minutiae's is like my job will be different but it'll continue to exist and the question is just what will it be and let me think about that lean in like prepare for that almost and not try to resist because like resisting is not going to work anyway.

是的。如果你听 Minutiae 的故事，那真是个创业故事，我知道不是每个人都擅长这个。但它非常像是：让我试试下一个。就像，但它是——你知道，对她来说，它只是——我认为它建立在这种信念上：这个职业在演变和变化，我想参与定义它的未来。你知道，我再次认为，除非数据真的告诉我们相反的情况，我会说这就是我会采取的立场，尤其是在科技领域。如果你相信五年后会有更多、不同的有趣工程工作，你会怎么做？如果你相信放手之后有機會，你会如何行动？

Yeah. And if you listen to Minutiae's story, like it's such an entrepreneurial story and I know that not everyone is great at that. But it is very much the like let me try this next. It's just like but it comes—you know for her it just—I think it was founded in this belief of like this profession is evolving and changing and I want to be part of defining the future of it. You know and I again I think that's until the data genuinely tells us otherwise like I would say that is the stance I would take particularly in tech. What would you do if you believe there were going to be more and different interesting engineering jobs in five years? How would you behave if you believed there was opportunity on the other side of letting go?

好吧，让我们看看这条线索还有没有更多内容，因为这真的很有帮助，那就是：好吧，这会很顺利。我的产品经理们会茁壮成长。会有更多对产品经理的需求，因为这里很多听众是 PM、工程师、创始人。所以，在那个会有更多的世界里，你认为人们应该尝试做什么？是关注你如何被放大？是看看那些做得很好的人并效仿他们？你觉得人们可以做什么来在那个未来取得成功？

Well, let's see if there's more to that thread because that's really helpful, which is okay. This is going to go great. My product managers will thrive. There will be more need for product managers because a lot of listeners here are PMs, engineers, founders. So what do you think people should be trying to do in that world where there will be more? Is it like pay attention to how you're amplified? Is it look at people who are doing great and do what they're doing? Like what do you think people could be doing to succeed in that future?

说来有趣。我们有过一次对话。我们——我和我的团队在公司里运营这些顶尖人才小组，我们做的很多事就是让领导者互相交谈、互相帮助。有一位设计负责人带来了这个问题，她说他们不让我发布代码。她说我做到了。我基本上构建了那个东西，我说就让我把它弄到生产环境吧。她和工程团队谈，就像撞上了一堵砖墙，你知道，他们说不行，你不能发布代码，你是设计师，我是工程师，我拥有进入生产环境的东西。你知道，不让东西随便进入生产环境是有充分理由的，尤其是如果你在金融领域工作，他们就是。我理解。但我认为很多立场是：我们必须打破一些墙，你知道，在曾经的设计师、工程师、PM 之间。这显然是正在发生的很多事，但我们如何真正摆脱我们所知道的，这又很难——很难放下那些乐高积木，你懂我的意思吗——并想象好吧，那会是什么样子。你知道，这就是为什么我认为创业领域如此快乐，因为他们不是在对抗过去的方式，他们在发明可能的方式。你如何在公司内部为这种创造更多空间？对我来说，这是我演讲时谈的第一件事，就像如果你不倾向于创造力对话，而是恐惧对话，那你就是在领导一群吓坏了的人，对吧？就像你如何让人们进入一种状态：我很兴奋，我想尝试东西，我想试探性地让这位设计师把代码发布到生产环境，你知道？所以对我来说，我认为你如何想象一个墙更少的世界？你如何摆脱一些在过去 15、20、25 年里对我们做事方式来说感觉如此重要的墙？我认为这是很多人应该进行的对话。

It's funny. We had a conversation. We run these—my team and I run these top talent cohorts at companies and a lot of what we do is get leaders talking to each other and helping each other. And this woman who is a head of design brought this problem where she was like they won't let me ship code. She's like I did it. I basically built the thing and I was like just let me get it to production. And she was talking to engineering was like a brick wall, you know, where they were like no you can't ship code like you're a designer I'm an engineer like I own what goes to production. And you know there are good reasons for not letting things go willy-nilly to production, you know, particularly if you work in the financial space which they did. Like I get it. But I think so much of the stance is we got to break down some of these walls between you know what was a designer, what was an engineer, what was a PM. This is obviously a lot of what's happening, but how do we really shed what we knew, which again is hard—it's hard to let go of those Legos, you know what I mean—and imagine okay what does it look like. You know this is why I think the startup land is so happy is because they're not fighting against the way things were, they're inventing the way things could be. And how can you make more space for that inside of a company? To me is the number one thing I talk about when I go, which is like if you're not leaning into the creativity conversation versus the fear conversation, like you are leading folks who are just terrified, right? Like how do you get people into a stance of like I'm excited and I want to try things and I want to like tentatively let this designer ship code to production, you know? So to me like I think how can you imagine a world with less walls? How can you get rid of some of those walls that have felt so important, you know, for the way we've done things for the last 15, 20, 25 years? I think that is a conversation that a lot of folks should be having.

就沿着这个思路，澄清一下，这里的想法是——好吧，我一辈子都是设计师——建议是，好吧，也许未来几年我会成为别的什么，而不仅仅是设计师。

Just along those lines, just to be clear, is the idea here—okay, I have been a designer my whole life—is the advice there, okay, like maybe I'll be something else in the next few years that's not just designer.

No, I feel like a lot of your conversations are pointing... I mean, like I think Adam Miseri was on here who I worked with many years ago and was a designer and he's saying like, hey, we're... you know, the idea that like you're a designer and therefore you only do these things, that's obviously changing right now. You can prototype, you can have much more robust and deep conversations to some extent, you know, you can ship code like Elena Varna was talking about being a marketer and shipping code to production. So to me they're just like were these very defined roles and a way that things worked and we got to shed a bunch of that because things are possible now that weren't possible before. And you know, like when you listen to Minutiae's story, so much of what she's talking about is like the only form of journalism used to be like sitting in a newsroom employed by you know some giant news corporation. Like you think about journalism today, like everybody's a journalist like Substack and part of what she talked about is like the crazy thing is your relationship to the business model. Like again, it used to be a paycheck and now it's like every journalist is an entrepreneur. I just can imagine a lot of those transformations in tech, but you have to be willing to break down all the walls and start asking the questions of like fundamentally what is journalism, fundamentally what is design, like fundamentally what is product management, which by the way is a question that we all should have been asking for many many years because it looks really different at different companies you know and I feel like that should be true of every single person which is like what is the value of all these different roles when you strip away a lot of the stuff that we've built up and then what might it look like, you know, in five or 10 years.

Here's the big question, Molly, that I think a lot of people are wondering. Are there any Legos you should not give away that you should resist giving away? Which is a radical departure from your advice over the many years.

Totally. I know as we were preparing for this, um I was realizing that's like the biggest difference like when people again so the questions I get asked a lot like both online and when I give speeches and stuff like one of them is have you ever regretted giving a Lego like do you ever is there something you shouldn't give away and in the in the context of sort of like the rapid scale company where opportunity is flying at you and getting dumped on your head my answer is no give them the away like you you cannot often imagine what is coming next. Like you can't always design the future and it's not always clear. Sometimes you are genuinely giving away the known and stepping into the unknown. Um but it has basically always been a good idea in every example. I've seen both personal experience and you know everyone I've worked with and coached over many many years in AI land. I think we got to caveat this. Like I think there are some Legos that shouldn't be given away. um that the robots like both like don't deserve and like that we should hold on to. And I think that is like one of the things that's starting to show up in this conversation around AI slop is like um there's just some work that shouldn't be outsourced. Like my fervent hope for AI is that it lets us do less of the things we shouldn't have been doing in the first place and more of the things that you know humans are best in the world at, right? Like um anybody that's RI ridden in a Waymo has this experience of like whoa this is crazy. Humans shouldn't be driving. Like driving is fundamentally just like code and systems and we're really bad at we're really bad at being automated. Like we don't stop at the red lights. You know what I mean? Uh so I think like what are the what are the things that we're uniquely suited to do? Those are the things we should hold on to. And some of that is inside this slop conversation which is things that require judgment, right? Things that require like again to the CEOs that are asking AI for a strategy and then copying and pasting it and sending it to their company like no like that is fundamentally something that a human brain that you as a CEO of your company need to own, right? And I think things that require trust like that are you know fundamental to relationships like we should not be outsourcing these things to robots because well for any number of reasons I think you know things where you don't even if you don't know the definition of good how can you give it to your summer intern you know like if if you don't understand uh what quality is like you can't outsource that yet. So those are just examples for me. I bet you have some too. But that to me that is one of the biggest like things I've been thinking about lately is like as of today I think there's some stuff we just shouldn't give away you know and

breaking news. That's like what a departure from from this how many years ago did you write this? 13 years.

Yeah. 13.

Wow. That's um that's something that's a sign of the change we're living through that now there's some

Hold on to some of them.

Yeah. So interesting. There's a few thoughts I had here while you were talking like this is almost a discussion around what should AI do? Where do you want AI to be involved and where you not want it involved? One framework I've loved is this idea of you want AI kind of in the middle of stuff. you want to be at the top like coming up just like here's kind of where we want to go and here's the idea here's the what I'm thinking and then AI does a bunch of stuff and then you review iterate until it's done

sandwich

the AI

sandwich Lenny

the human sandwich

yeah dude

oh man

okay we're getting there we're getting a metaphor

answer the other is something Tara I just thought of as you were talking so Tara shared this really good perspective that humans are going to ne are going be necessary to to help guide us towards the world. We want to have a product we want to build versus the most optimal AI version. I think as a longtime Airbnb person, uh, no, nothing personal, but Booking.com, if you've seen it, very different experience than Airbnb. Booking.com, their whole philosophy, let's optimize the out of every second of interaction. So, it's just all these upsells and pressure and stress. Just like, "Oh my god, only one spot left. You have five seconds left. Just book a 100 times. 100 people book it." It's just like stressful.

It's so stressful, but so effective. You go there, you're like, "Oh I got to book this right now."

You're like, I didn't even know I was booking it, but I booked it.

I'm going to Japan. There's only one spot left.

But it's so good.

它非常有效地让你去预订，呃，Booking.com 那种方式，但它奏效了，而且作为一家企业做得很好。所以，你知道，好主意。干得好，伙计们。呃，Airbnb 一直是我们不想变成那样。我们希望它感觉很好，有很棒的体验，感觉良好。嗯，所以我认为这是答案的很大一部分，当你说话时让我意识到，人类在那里是为了引导我们走向我们想要的世界。

It's like so effective at getting you to book, uh, booking.com appropriate, but it worked and it's doing great as a business. So, you know, good idea. Good stuff, guys. Uh, Airbnb has always been we don't want to become that. We want it to feel really nice, to have a great experience, feel good. Um, so I think that's a big part of the answer as you were talking made me realize is humans are there to guide towards what the world we want.

是的。

Yeah.

在某种程度上，你谈论的是品味，你知道，就像有些东西还行和有些东西非凡之间有很大的区别。我认为这甚至超越了品味，我认为这就像一种愿景。就像你对这件事应该是什么样子的愿景是什么？因为你可以说，你知道，Booking.com 的人，他们对特定类型有品味，你知道，就像一种不同的品味。

And to some extent where you're talking about is taste, you know, that like there is a big difference between something that's okay and something that's phenomenal. I think it's even beyond taste just a I think it's like a vision. It's like what is your vision of where this should be? Because you could say, you know, people at booking.com, they have taste for a specific type, you know, it's like a different kind of taste.

但就像，是的，你想要什么？你想成为什么？

But it's like, yeah, what is what do you want? What do you want to be?

你想让世界变成什么样？我喜欢这个。我对此很感兴趣。

What do you want the world to look like? I like that. I'm into that.

是的。

Yeah.

我还认为，我们必须接受，至少目前来说，这就像一群实习生，你知道吗？这是一群初级员工。如果你把你的愿景或世界的未来外包给一群暑期实习生，那就像，呃，我们就有问题了，你知道。所以，我认为，人类大脑在很多事情上都很强大。我们在很多事情上都很强大。你个人在一系列事情上非常出色。不要外包那个。你可以启用它，你可以放大它来使用你的数据，但不要把它外包给这些奇怪的机器人，你知道，它们实际上就是暑期实习生。

I also just think like we got to accept that at least for the moment like this is a bunch of interns, you know? This is a bunch of junior employees. And like if you're if you're outsourcing your vision or the future of the world to a bunch of summer interns, like woof. like we got problems, you know. So, like I think I that really like the human brain is powerful at a lot of things. We are powerful at a lot of things. You individually are phenomenal at a set of things. Like do not outsource that. Like you can enable it, you can amplify it to use your data, but don't outsource it to these weird robots that you know are effectively summer interns.

关键在于，随着它变得更好，你能坚持住你想要的东西吗？你知道，我们的工作中有我们热爱的部分。就像工程师过去喜欢，你知道，很多工程师过去喜欢坐在那里写代码，我想。我想知道你是否能坚持住，就像，不，我爱这个。我不会让 AI 接管这个。

The trick is as it gets better, can you hold on to things you want? You know, there's like parts of our job we love. Like engineers used to like, you know, in like a lot of engineers used to love to sit there and kind of write our code, I think. And I wonder if you can hold out and just like, no, I love this. I'm not going to let AI take this on.

是的。我对此有两个反应，因为自从我和那位工程师谈过之后，我一直在思考这个问题。第一个是，会不会有一种反弹？就像你在艺术中看到的，你在很多事情中看到的，实际上你在技术的很多不同部分看到的，趋势是全是 AI，一切 AI，会不会有手工的？有人跟我谈论过，AI 将创造所有这些艺术，但这不是增加了真正人类制作的艺术的价值吗？你知道，它是由人类制作的，你知道，它是手工制作的，我有同样的问题，我不是工程师，所以我不是想说这个，但会不会有什么东西重新出现，人类编写的代码或其他类似的东西的价值突然再次变得有价值或流行。嗯，所以我对此很好奇。嗯，因为我在生活中见过足够多次这种反弹，嗯，有时很难知道什么是趋势，什么是永久的，特别是在这种状态下。嗯，但我想我思考的另一件事是，是的，你热爱那个，是的，你在这方面非常出色，那太棒了，我们应该为此哀悼。我们应该哀悼也许那正在消失，你知道有这个人 Chip Connelly。我在说什么？你对他很了解

Yeah. I have two reactions to that because I've been thinking about it a bunch uh since I had that conversation with that engineer. Like the first is like will there be a a sort of like whiplash back? Like you see this in art, you see this in a lot of things actually you see in a lot of different parts of tech where like the trend is like all AI everything AI will there be like the handmade like somebody was talking to me about like AI is going to make all this art and but does doesn't that increase the value of like true humanmade art you know that you know it was made by a human that you know it was crafted by hand like I have that same question I'm not an engineer so I I'm not trying to to say this but like will something show back up where the value of human written code or something like that suddenly gets valuable again or trendy. Um so I'm curious about that. Um because I've seen those whiplashes enough times in life that um it's hard sometimes to know like what's a trend and what's permanent particularly in this state. Um, but I guess the other thing that I think about a little bit is like yes, you loved that and yes, you were extraordinary at it and that is amazing and we should grieve it. We should grieve that maybe that's going away and you know there's this guy Chip Connelly. What am I saying? You know him well

我，是的，他很快会来工作生活节目，我喜欢和他的对话。他在谈论中年，但他说有时你需要为事情举行葬礼。你明白我的意思吗？我说，“是的，伙计。有时你需要一个葬礼是有原因的。”嗯，所以，让我们花一分钟哀悼过去，但然后让我们问可能是什么，你可以再次那样爱什么？在这个新世界里，如果机器人在做 X、Y 和 Z，你可以再次那样出色？我认为两者都可以是真的。你可以对你失去的感到非常悲伤，同时即将到来的事情中也有机会。嗯，但我们必须能够，我们必须为两者腾出空间，你知道，我认为有时我们不允许悲伤，因为呃，我们只是说，对未来的事情感到兴奋吧，人们。

who I yeah he's coming on work life soon and I loved the conversation with him. He was talking about like midlife but he was saying like sometimes you need to throw a funeral for things. Do you know what I mean? And I was like, "Yeah, man. Sometimes you need a The funeral is there for a reason." Um, so like, let's take a minute and mourn what was, but then let's ask what could be like what could you love that way again? What could you be extraordinary at that way again in this new world if the robots are doing X, Y, and Z? And I think both things can be true. Like you can be really sad about what you've lost and there can be opportunity in what's coming. Um, but we got to be able we got to make space for both, you know, and I think sometimes we're not allowing the grief because uh we're just like just get excited about the future people.

这是一种非常强大的思考方式。只是接受它会改变，就像哀悼它一样。那很好。那是一个美好的世界，我曾经拥有。

Such a powerful way of thinking about it. Just accepting it is going to change and just like grieving it. That was nice. That was a nice world I had.

我怀念它。

I miss it.

也许我没有像我应该的那样珍惜它。

Maybe I didn't appreciate it as much as I should have.

完全正确。但然后不要抗拒即将到来的变化。我喜欢这个想法，就像回到乐高概念的最初想法，就是对你的工作变化感到舒适，知道它几乎肯定会没事，成长来自于尝试、放手和那种东西。当我思考这个时，我有另一个想法，我一直在注意到的事情。所以，你知道这整个像黑客攻击，像 OpenAI 模型试图黑入 Hugging Face，以及一千个智能体的群体在没有人知道的情况下协调，就像我们将解决这个非常不可能的问题，由

Totally. but then not fighting the change that is coming. And I love this idea of just like coming back to the original idea of the Legos concept is being comfortable with ch your job changing and knowing it'll almost surely be okay and growth comes from trying letting go and and that kind of stuff. Another thought I had as I'm thinking about this, something I've been noticing. So, you know this whole like hacking this like open AI model trying to hack into hugging face and the swarm of thousand agents just coordinating without anyone knowing just like we will solve this very impossible problem by

实习生。

interns.

非常非常非常呃有动力的实习生。

Very very very uh motivated interns.

是的，没错。

Yeah, exactly.

我喜欢这个 AI 如此有动力去解决问题。是的，我要呃，好消息是我感觉总是有这个问题，我们在上一个播客中讨论过，这个想法是我们会处于慢速起飞还是快速起飞。我们会达到一个 AI，它只是加速到极其超级智能，然后我们有大麻烦，因为我们无法控制它，或者我们会处于慢速起飞，我们看着它发展，当它做那些事情时我们抓住它，就像我们在这个黑客事件中所做的那样。对我来说，我们肯定处于慢速起飞时刻。感觉就像每一个这些像，“哦，糟糕。”我们只是说，“好吧，看，我们明白了。我们看到了。我们在进化。我们在学习。”显然，总是有这种恐惧。好吧。但直到它达到这个呃自我强化循环，训练自己，然后它变得超级智能，当然，也许会发生。现在感觉它不在轨道上这样做。所以感觉很好，感觉像，好吧，它不会，你的工作不会明天就消失。我们有时间适应和学习，看看这一切如何发展，它不像人们想象的那样疯狂。

I love how motivated this AI is to like solve the problem. Yeah, I'm gonna uh the good news I'm feeling there's always this question of we talked about this in the last podcast this idea of are we going to be in a slow takeoff or a fast takeoff. Are we going to get to an AI that just accelerates to this extremely super intelligent and then we are in big trouble because we have can't control it or are we going to be in the slow takeoff where we kind of watch it develop and we catch it as it's doing that stuff like we did with this hacking incident. Feels to me like we're definitely in the slow takeoff moment. It feels like every of these like, "Oh shit." We're just like, "Okay, look, we got it. We see it. We're evolving. We're learning." Obviously, there's always this fear. Okay. But until it hits this uh self reinforcement loop that trains itself and then it becomes super intelligent, for sure, maybe it'll happen. Feeling right now it's not on track to do that. And so that feels nice to feel like, okay, it's not going to your job's not going to go away tomorrow. we have time to adapt and learn and see how all this goes and it's not as crazy as people thought it might be.

嗯，我认为这真的很重要，你知道，因为也许三四个月前或六个月前比现在更多。但但有一种被落下的感觉，你知道，外面有一个非常强烈的叙事，就像你太晚了。你已经太晚了。

Well, and I think that is really important to name, you know, because there was maybe more like three or four months ago or six months ago than there is now. But but there is this feeling of being left behind, you know, and there was a really strong narrative out there that was like you're you're too late. You're already too late.

你懂我的意思吗？如果你没有把生活中的每一个环节都自动化，没有管理 26 个智能体，我甚至不知道，你就落后了。我跟所有大实验室的每一位领导者、每一位管理者、每一家公司的每一次对话都是这样：我们还处在早期。这就像你想参与的任何球类比赛，这才是第一局、第一节、第一码。我们还处在早期，未来由我们塑造。你知道，未来是你的。我的朋友 Max Mullen 说过，从初学者到专家的距离其实很短。我觉得这又回到了恐惧叙事，我就是觉得，我们需要鼓励人们参与塑造未来，而不是只让他们恐惧未来。我觉得这在某种程度上是我们所有人的责任。但这是一个缓慢的起飞，并不是说未来就是明天、下个月。要真正理解这个新工具、这项新技术、所有这些有趣的实习生到底能做什么，以及他们最擅长什么，需要数年时间。我觉得这是一个非常有力的信息，因为它让人们觉得，哦，好吧，我是这件事的一部分，而不是死死抓住不放，被一架以每小时 100 英里起飞的飞机拖着走。

You know what I mean? If you're not automating every single part of your life and managing 26 agents, I don't even know, you're behind. Every single conversation I have with every leader, every manager at all of the big labs, every company is like, we are early. This is like whatever sports ball game you want to be in, this is inning one, period one, yard one. We're early and the future is ours to shape. You know, it's yours. My friend Max Mullen said the distance from beginner to expert is really short. And I think that goes again to the fear narrative, where I'm just like, we need to be encouraging people to be part of shaping the future, not just making them terrified of it. And I feel like that is on all of us, you know, to some extent. But it is a slow takeoff and it isn't like the future is next day, next month. It's going to take years to really understand what this new tool, this new technology, all these fun interns can actually do and also what they're best at. I think that is a really powerful message because it helps people feel like, oh, okay, I am part of this, not sort of holding on for dear life while being dragged by a plane that's taking off at 100 miles an hour.

我完全同意。我上一次播客对话，我不知道什么时候会播出，就是关于这种对永久底层阶级的恐惧：如果你不赶上，如果你不掌握这个，你就会被落下。我觉得这肯定有一部分道理，因为很多公司做得非常好，加入那些公司的人会非常成功，而有些公司则不然。还有另一个讨论，关于世界上社会经济差距显著扩大，以及在一个拥有许多富人——比以往任何时候都多——的世界里，这会导致什么。那是另一个话题。我们不需要深入讨论。

I completely agree. My last podcast conversation, I don't know when it will come out, is about this fear of the permanent underclass, that if you don't catch up, if you're not on top of this, you're going to be left behind. I think there is definitely a part of that, in the sense that many companies are doing extremely well and people that have joined those companies are going to be very successful, and some companies aren't. And there's this whole other discussion around this socioeconomic divide growing significantly in the world and just what that causes in a world where there are many wealthy people, many more than there have ever existed. That's its own thing. We don't need to get all into that.

嗯，我希望你深入讨论。

Well, I hope you do.

好的。

Okay.

总有一天会有很多集专门讲这个，Lenny。我觉得这——

Many episodes on that someday, Lenny. I think it's—

但这是另一个领域，我会说，我不确定我们是否知道什么是真实的，你明白吗？我认为这显然是最重要的对话之一，但对我来说，什么是真实的，未来实际上会是什么样子？世界上流传的那些故事，它们还不是真实的。我们不知道。

But it is another area where I'm like, I'm not sure we know what's real yet, you know? I think it's obviously one of the most important conversations, but what is real and what is the future actually going to look like, to me? The stories out in the world, they're not real yet. We don't know.

确实如此。

It's true.

我认为指出这一点很重要。

And I think that's important to name.

哦，天哪，那是个非常非常大的话题。

Oh man, that's a big, big topic.

你提到的有趣的部分，我想接着聊的是这个想法：你并没有落后。真正帮助我认识到这一点的是 OpenAI 设计主管 Ian Silber，他最近上了播客，提出了一个很好的观点。他说，这是历史上成为设计师的最佳时机。如果你刚以应届毕业生的身份进入设计领域，你就从设计师现在拥有的所有这些工具开始。你可以如此迅速地加速，学会做设计，比任何人学设计都快。我最近也有这种感觉，比如 Rockbot 刚出来。人们随着时间的推移，用 codecs 和 Claude Code 积累了所有这些技能。我是所有这些工具的高手，现在工具变得越来越聪明。你不需要人们长期以来构建的许多脚手架。就像如果有人今天从零开始尝试 Grok Bot 甚至 codeex，你不需要花数年时间紧跟所有新闻和所有更新。你可以直接投入，构建出和那些已经用了很久的人一样多的东西。

The interesting part you mentioned there's that I wanted to follow thread on is this idea of you're not behind. What really helped me see this is Ian Silber, head of design at OpenAI, was on the podcast recently and he made this really good point. He's like, this is the best time in history to be a designer. If you just came in fresh as a new grad into design and just become really—you just start with all these tools that designers have now. You can accelerate so quickly and learn to do design faster than anyone's ever learned to do design. And I feel that with like Rockbot recently came out. There's all these skills people have built over time with like codecs and Claude Code. I'm such a pro with all these tools and now it's just the tools are getting so much smarter. You don't need a lot of the scaffolding that people have built over time. Like if someone were to start fresh today and try Grok Bot or even in codeex, you don't need to have spent years being on top of all of the news and all of the updates to it. You could just dive right in and build as much as people that have been on it for a long time can build.

我觉得真正需要培养的主要技能，我一直在思考，我发过推文，但我觉得没有得到足够的关注，因为我认为它非常重要。我觉得现在最大的技能是，当你准备做某件事时，问自己：AI 能帮我做这件事吗？因为一旦你擅长这个——我一直在——我想到冥想中的刺激和反应，如果你学会觉察外界发生的事情，你会在刺激和反应之间创造更多空间。我觉得你需要插入‘AI 能帮我吗’，这听起来很脏，像‘搞什么，为什么要用 AI？’但我觉得这是一项非常新的技能，因为这样你就可以，随着这些工具变得更好，你可以开始以各种不同的方式利用它们，我认为这就是现在区分很多人的地方，就像，哦——

I feel like the actual main skill to build, something I've been thinking about, I tweeted this, but I feel like it didn't get enough traction because I think it's very important. I feel like the biggest skill to build right now is when you're about to do something to ask yourself, can AI help me with this thing? Because once you get good at that—and I've been getting—I think about the stimulus and response kind of thing with meditation, like you create more space between stimulus and response if you learn to be aware of what's going on outside. I feel like you need to insert 'can AI help me with this,' which sounds like dirty and like, what the hell, why would you want AI? But I feel like that's a really new skill because then you can start, as these tools get better, you can start to leverage them in all these different ways that I think is what separates a lot of people right now, like, oh—

完全同意。

Totally.

而我，你知道，这就引出了关于墙的观点。我认为我们这些在行业里待了很久的人，事情有一种做法，对吧，产品有一种构建方式，有所有这些方式，对吧？那些都是墙。它们是旧墙。我们需要做的部分事情，以及我认为你所说的部分内容是，如果你不知道那些墙存在，你实际上有一点优势，对吧？就像如果你以这样的方式看待世界：工程师和 X、Y、Z 没有不同的角色，或者事情就是这样做的。能够说‘如果’是有优势的，比如‘如果我就这么做了呢’，或者‘什么’，你知道，就是去尝试，并且像你说的，总是思考，嘿，我时间的最佳用途是什么，然后一个智能体或机器人能为我做什么。我认为这就是关于学习者的部分要点，对吧？如果你能够摆脱你认为你知道的东西，拥抱可能性和第一性原理思维——我知道你也有一篇很好的文章——我认为这将定义未来。那些人将塑造这个东西的样子。

And I, you know, it goes to that point about the walls. I think those of us that have been around a long time and there's a way that things were done, right, there's a way that product was built, there's all these ways, right? Those are walls. They're walls that are old. And part of what we need to do and I think part of what you're saying is like you're actually a little bit at an advantage if you don't know those walls exist, right? Like if you approach the world as if, you know, engineers didn't have a different role from X or Y or Z or like this is the way things are done. There is an advantage to being able to say what if, like what if I just did it, or what, you know, and to just try and to your point to always think like, hey, what's the best use of my time and then what could an agent or a robot do for me. And I think that's partially the point about the learners, right? If you're able to shed the sort of things you think you know and lean into the possibility and the first principles thinking, which I know you have a great article about too, that I think is going to define the future. Those are going to be the people that are going to shape what this thing looks like.

是的。这里还有一条关于雄心的线索，在播客中经常出现，有点联系。

Yeah. There's also a thread here around ambition that's been coming up a lot in the podcast, kind of connect.

是的。

Yeah.

这个想法是，现在做任何你想做的事都如此容易，只要描述它，它就被构建出来了。

This idea that now that it's so easy to do whatever you want, just describe it and it's built.

我们需要做的，除了问自己 AI 能帮我做这件事吗，还有——如何对这个想法更有雄心？因为工具现在能做这么多，它们就像在等你告诉我一些比那更有雄心的事情。就像，你就这点本事？而我们不——人性不喜欢——我们不习惯最终产品团队和业务只思考一件事最雄心勃勃的版本。我们想的是 MVP 和最快推出方式。现在感觉推动力是，我们如何思考得更大？我们能要求这个 AI 做的最难的事情是什么？因为它可能真的只需一次请求就能实现。

The thing that we need to, in addition to asking ourselves, can AI help me with this thing, what's kind of the—how do I be more ambitious with this idea? Because the tools can now just do so much and they're just like waiting for you to tell me something more ambitious than that. Like, that's all you got for me? And we're not—human nature doesn't like—we're not used to end product teams and business just like thinking about the most ambitious version of a thing. We're thinking about MVP and what's the quickest way to get this out. And now it feels like the push is, how do we think big? What's like the hardest thing we can ask this AI to do? Because it may actually just achieve out of one ask.

是的。

Yeah.

我还想提醒一点：没错，你可以直接敲几个字就把它变出来，但你需要问自己的另一个问题是：它好吗？你明白我的意思吗？这就是垃圾内容和问责制的问题。如果雄心壮志是围绕“我如何打造一个能持久存在的非凡事物”，那我会感兴趣。如果只是“我如何做出更多东西并把它推向世界”，那我的一个问题是——这真的很前沿，Lenny——创业公司的 AI 垃圾版是什么？我们是不是即将看到一大堆公司把东西推向世界，只持续六到十二个月，然后就消失或变得无关紧要？

And I'd also nudge on the idea that, yeah, you can just type something into existence, but one of the other questions you need to ask yourself is: is it good? Do you know what I mean? This is the slop and the accountability thing. And if ambition is wrapped up in how do I build something phenomenal that's going to endure, that I'm interested in. If it's just how do I make more and put it out in the world? One of my questions — this is really frontier, Lenny — is: what is the AI slop version of startups? Are we about to see a ton of companies just shipping stuff out into the world that's going to last for like six or 12 months and then just disappear or get irrelevant?

绝对是。

Definitely.

所以，好吧，很好。那听起来不好玩。你如何成为持久事物的先驱，那个五年后仍然存在的东西，你知道，那会很重要，那会很棒——而不仅仅是存在？再说一次，这涉及到仅仅是生产力——我造了一个东西——和什么是好的、什么是真正值得的、什么值得别人花时间之间的区别。

So, okay, great. That doesn't sound fun. How can you be the pioneer of the enduring thing, the thing that's going to still be around in five years, you know, that's going to matter, that's going to be great — not just exist? And again, it goes to the difference between just productivity — I built a thing — and what is good, what is actually worth it, what's worth other people's time.

是的，我认为这是现在一个巨大的差异化机会：不是快速推出东西，而是这个东西的非常好的版本是什么。人们看到后会想，哇，这不一样。

Yeah, I think that's a big differentiating opportunity right now: instead of just shipping the thing fast, it's what's a very good version of this thing. And people see that and they're like, oh wow, this is different.

是的，没错。我认为这涉及到人类触感方面什么会重要，你知道，我认为很多都将归结为这个问题：什么是好的，什么是值得的，什么能持久。

Yeah, exactly. I think that this goes to the point of what will matter when it comes to human touch, you know, and I think a lot of that is going to come down to the question of what is good and what is worth it and what endures.

在我们尝试总结这次自由漫谈的一些关键教训之前，还有什么我们没有涉及到的吗？

Is there anything that we haven't touched on that we should before we try to summarize maybe some key lessons from this freewheeling conversation?

嗯，我只想说一件事——我昨天因为一次对话在想——我想让每个管理者或领导者知道什么？因为我认为独立贡献者的世界说实话更清晰一些。你知道，你更有生产力，你拥有所有这些权力和自主权来构建。而现在对我来说非常艰难的世界是管理者和领导者的世界，因为变化太快了。有点难知道该告诉人们什么。有点难知道你的团队应该是什么样子，什么重要，什么不重要，你知道，所有这些。所以我想对那里的管理者和领导者说几件事，如果你给我一点时间。第一是：明白你是一个榜样，你知道，你所做的和你的行为方式本质上是在向你的团队展示什么是好的。这意味着你如何使用 AI 会向下传递，但你也如何在这个时刻中自处，如何展现自己。对我来说，我希望世界上有更多空间来承认这种变化的感觉。我希望因为这次对话有更多管理者谈论悲伤，谈论变化带来的情绪，谈论这对人们来说有多难。我认为承认这种变化速度对人们大脑和心理的影响——说实话，即使只是承认它，也会让人们更容易。就像我说的，我向上帝发誓，那篇乐高文章的大部分作用就是告诉人们，嘿，你感受到的那个东西，其他人以前也感受过，这并不意味着一切都要完蛋了。你知道，它意味着，哦，你正在经历很多非常非常快的变化。这很可怕，很难。所以领导者越能谈论这个，我认为每个人就会感觉越理智，越不孤单，你知道，知道 XYZ 公司的某个人和你感受一样会有帮助。我想我最后要说的是：我认为每个人在某种程度上都拥有这一点，但管理者和领导者更是如此。我们需要坚持问责制的定义和什么是好的。我认为这是榜样作用的一部分——什么是可以交给 AI 的，什么是我们作为人类、人和工作者仍然需要拥有的。我们将不得不为此树立榜样，我们将不得不为此制定标准。所以这涉及到你自己的行为，但也涉及到你如何领导以及如何谈论它。就像 Clay 几周前发布的那份漂亮的 AI 写作政策，我想是几周前，它太棒了，因为它实际上只是在谈论对你推向世界的东西负责，对什么是好的负责，无论你是怎么做的。今天对我来说，那种把 AI 当作初级实习生对待的感觉，并意识到它从根本上只是一个完成工作的工具。但重要的是，工作仍然主要由人类和人类大脑完成，我们必须照顾人类，我们必须帮助他们弄清楚如何在我们所处的这个狂野西部中导航。

Well, the one thing I just wanted to say is — I was thinking yesterday because of a conversation I was having — what do I want every manager or leader out there to know, you know? Because I think the world of the IC is honestly a little more clear. You know, you are more productive and you have all this power and agency around building. And the world that feels very hard to me right now is the world of the managers and the leaders, because so much is changing so fast. It's a little bit hard to know what to tell people. It's a little bit hard to know what your team should look like, what matters, what doesn't matter, you know, all that. And so I guess I wanted to say a couple of things to the managers and leaders out there if you'll give me the sec. The first is: understand that you're a role model, you know, and that what you do and how you behave is essentially showing your team what good looks like. And that means that how you use AI trickles down, but also how you sit in this moment, how you show up. And for me, what I want a little more space for in the world is to be able to acknowledge what this change feels like. I hope there's more managers out there because of this conversation talking about grief and talking about the emotions that come with change and talking about how hard this is for people. I think that acknowledging what this rate of change does to people's brains and psychologies — it just honestly even acknowledging it makes it easier for people. Like I said, I swear to God that's most of what the Legos article did is just tell people, hey, that thing that you're feeling, other people have felt it before you and it hasn't meant that everything is going to hell in a hand basket. You know, it's meant, oh, you're going through a lot of change really, really fast. And it's scary and hard. So the more that leaders can be talking about that, I think the more sane everyone's going to feel and less alone, you know, knowing that someone at XYZ company is feeling the same way as you makes a difference. And I guess the last thing I just say is: I think everyone owns this to some extent, but managers and leaders more so. We need to hold on to the definition of accountability and what good means. I think that's part of the role modeling — what is right to give away to AI and what do we still as humans and people and workers need to own. We're going to have to role model that and we're going to have to create standards for that. So that goes to your own behavior but it also goes to how you lead and how you talk about it. Like Clay put out this beautiful AI writing policy a couple weeks ago, I think it was, and it's so badass because it's literally just talking about being accountable for what you ship out in the world and being accountable for what good is regardless of how you made it. And for today to me, that feeling of treating AI as a junior intern and realizing that it's fundamentally just a tool to get work done. But what matters is the work is still done mostly by the humans and the human brains and we got to take care of the humans and we got to help them figure out how to navigate this wild wild west that we are in.

我很高兴你补充了这一点。这与调查中另一个非常有趣的见解有关，那就是你现在实际上可以改变的一件事来提高人们工作中的幸福感，就是他们的管理者。这是工作中幸福感最强的杠杆。你实际上可以对此做些什么。所有其他 AI 的东西你无法做太多。这是一个。而且，天哪，根据调查，大多数人的管理者也不太好。所以——

I'm really glad you added that. It connects to another really interesting insight from the survey, which is that the one thing that you can actually change to increase people's happiness right now at work is their manager. That's the strongest lever for happiness at work. You can actually do something about it. All this other AI stuff you can't do a ton about. That's one. And so it's — and man, most people's managers are not good according to the survey also. So it's —

这都不令人惊讶。

None of this is surprising.

所以照顾管理者只是提醒你，你在那里也有很多杠杆。

So taking care of the managers is kind of a just a reminder that you have a lot of leverage there as well.

是的。顺便说一句，大公司内部有趋势要摆脱管理，比如摆脱整个管理层级，我认为这是一个巨大的错误。我认为从长远来看，这最终会让人吃苦头，因为我现在看不到任何迹象表明管理变得不那么重要。如果说有什么不同，按照你的观点，我认为它更重要。而且，你知道，我再次理解效率和成本节约之类的，但我认为代价是什么，你知道，你无法预测的代价。所以我——管理几乎更重要，这真的引起共鸣，因为它让人们感到被看见。就像一个伟大的管理者所做的就是让人们感到被看见和支持，并帮助他们弄清楚他们所处的任何混乱。你知道。

Yeah. Which by the way is like there are trends inside of bigger companies to get rid of management, like to get rid of whole management layers and I think it is a huge mistake. Like I think it is going to end up biting people in the ass long term because I see no signs right now that management matters less. If anything, to your point, I think it matters more. And, you know, again I get the efficiency and the cost savings and all that but I think like at what cost, you know, what cost that you can't predict. So I — it really resonates that management is almost more important because it makes people feel seen. Like that's what a great manager does is make people feel seen and supported and help them figure out whatever mess they're in. You know.

看看是否会有反弹会非常有趣，就像，你知道，人们有过伟大的管理者，他们很少会说，我希望我没有管理者。你知道，这就像有糟糕管理者的人，很多人会说，“我不需要这个人，但他们太没用了。”

It's gonna be so interesting to see if there's a backlash towards that, like, you know, people have had great managers, they're rarely going to be like, I wish I had no manager. You know, it's like people with bad managers, which a lot of people are like, "I don't need this person, but they're so useless."

是的。他们挡我的路。他们是一堵墙。

Yeah. They're in my way. They are a wall.

不，完全正确。

No, totally.

我的意思是，我总是说，你一生中只会遇到几个好经理，当你找到一个时，就要死死抓住，因为你只会遇到大约两个。

I mean, I always say you only get like a couple good managers in your life, and when you find one, hold on to it for dear life because you're only going to get like two.

哦，天哪。真吓人。我以前从未听过这个建议。你还有什么想分享或提到的吗？

Oh, man. Scary. I've never heard that advice before. Anything else that you wanted to share or touch on?

不，我觉得我们——我的意思是，这会很有趣。我们会在六个月后反思这个，看看会发生什么。

No, I feel like we—I mean, it'll be fascinating. We'll reflect on this in six months and see what happens.

我也是这么想的。

That's what I was thinking.

我们现在正处于其中。就像 Elizabeth Stone 有一个很好的框架方式。我们正处于风暴阶段。

We're in the middle of it right now. It's like Elizabeth Stone had a really good way of framing it. We're in the storming phase.

是的，老兄。

Yeah, dude.

然后是规范阶段。

And then there's the norming phase.

我知道。

I know.

就像我不知道那实际上意味着什么，但听起来是对的。风暴、规范，然后——

Like I have no idea what that actually means, but it sounds right. Storming, norming, and—

是的。

Yeah.

嗯，有风暴、规范，然后还有执行。但关于这个框架，没人告诉你的另一件事是，你可以倒退。就像你经常经历循环。这就像一个——这是一个关于团队发展的模型，嗯，你经历风暴，然后规范，然后执行，但你可以从执行滑回风暴，我觉得我们会看到很多这种情况。

Well, there's storming, norming, and then there's performing. But the other thing that nobody tells you about that framework is that you can go backwards. Like you often go through cycles. This is like a—it's a model on team development and, um, you go through storming and then you go through norming and then you go performing, but you can slip from performing into storming and I feel like we're going to see a lot of that.

哦，天哪。是的。能亲历这段历史真是太酷了，

Oh boy. Yeah. It's very cool to be living through this history,

对吧？很容易把这一切视为理所当然，就像我们正在经历的那样，

right? It's like easy to take for granted just how this is like—it's like we're living through,

你知道吗？

you know?

你说得有趣，因为那其实是我在做这些 LEGO 演讲时总是谈到的另一件事，就像身处一家快速成长的公司感觉就像身处龙卷风中。你明白我的意思吗？就像它如此吸引人，我不知道，东西总是朝你飞来，一切都在不断变化，在这种状态下很容易只见树木不见森林。就像你真的会陷入困境，或执着于这个人或这件事，或感觉被低估。我在那些演讲中对人们说的很多话就是你必须拉远视角。你必须思考我想在另一边讲述什么故事。就像我想，你知道，这与其说是关于你的头衔或所有这些事情，不如说是关于我在这里，我帮助构建了这个。我把它比作一个巨大的乐高雕塑。所以就像你——让我们假设它是一只老虎。你会——你会带着这个不可思议的故事离开这里，对吧？你建造了脚，然后你参与了建造脸，然后你重建了屁股三次，然后你意识到它不只是一只老虎，它就像一个完整的动物园。就像身处这些快速变化的公司中的感觉。我想知道，你知道，当你说这些时，我在想的是天哪，想象一下我们将在五年或十年后讲述的故事。就像我当时在那里——这是我认为对的。这是我认为错的。我是第一个说这个的人。哦，天哪，我错得离谱。就像你正在亲历历史。嗯，你将向你知道的十年后出现的任何新一代毕业生讲述这些故事。嗯，你想让你的故事——你在这故事中的部分是什么？你知道你将如何讲述那个故事？我认为有一些关于拉远视角并意识到它很难，有很多变化正在发生，但在另一边我们都会讲述一个疯狂有趣的故事。我们只是还不知道它是什么。

It's funny you say that cuz that's actually something I else I always talk about when I do these LEGO speeches is like being inside of a rapidly growing company feels like being inside of a tornado. Do you know what I mean? It's like it is so absorbing and I don't know, shit's just flying at you at all times and everything's changing all the time and it is so easy in that state to lose the forest for the trees. Like you can get really bogged down or stuck in like obsessing about this person or this thing or feeling undervalued. And a lot of what I say to folks in those speeches is like you got to zoom out. You got to think about what is the story that I want to tell on the other side of this. Like I want to, you know, it's less about your title or all these things than it is about I was here and I helped build this. I talk about it as like a giant Lego sculpture. So it's like you're like let's pretend it's a tiger. You're gonna—you're gonna leave here with this incredible story, right? You built the feet and then you like were part of building the face and then you rebuilt the butt three times and then you realized it like wasn't just a tiger, it was like a whole zoo. Like that is what it feels like to be inside of um these rapidly changing companies. And I wonder, you know, as you were saying that, what I was thinking about is gosh, imagine the stories we're going to be telling in five or 10 years. Like I was there when—here's what I thought that was right. Here's what I thought that was wrong. I was the first person to say this. Oh man, I was so wrong about that. Like you are living through history. Um that you will be telling stories about uh to whatever you know generation of new grads shows up in 10 years. Um what do you want your story—your part of that story to be? You know how are you going to tell that story? I think there is something about zooming out and realizing like it is hard and there is a lot of change going on, but there is a crazy fun story that we're all going to be telling on the other side of this. We just don't know what it is yet.

希望不只是和我们的 AGI 聊天。

Hopefully not just talking to our AGI.

多告诉我一些。多告诉我一些，Molly。

Tell me more. Tell me more, Molly.

完全正确。那太迷人了。

Totally. That's so fascinating.

是的，没错。你真聪明。

Yeah, exactly. You're so smart.

哦，天哪。

Oh, man.

好的，如果我们就像为人们做一些要点总结怎么样？就像这里有一些关键的事情要记住，来自这个“交出你的乐高”框架。嗯，看看你的想法，然后也许我会从我的笔记中添加一些。

Okay, what if we do just like some bullet points like takeaways for folks? Just like here's a few kind of key things to keep in mind coming from this giving away your Legos framework. Uh see where your mind goes and then maybe I'll add a few for my notes.

好的。对我来说，最重要的是变化是可怕和艰难的，但这并不意味着它是坏的。这意味着你必须拥抱随之而来的情绪。但你也必须投入其中，你——你应该放手。就像是的，它很可怕，是的，感觉可能另一边什么都没有，但替代方案是什么？坚持这个可能正在慢慢消亡的东西，那也不安全。所以对我来说，投入变化是人们应该带走的最重要的事情。嗯，我认为作为其中一部分，我只想说悲伤是其中的一部分，有时悲伤需要一个葬礼，或者做你必须做的事，你知道，去悲伤。让你的团队悲伤。让你周围的人为此腾出空间，因为就像那里——变化伴随着变化而来的是舍弃你喜爱的东西，嗯，那很糟糕。嗯，我认为另一件感觉真的出现的事情，Lenny，是这里有 机会。我们必须开始忽略或静音或什么的这些恐惧叙事。嗯，因为现在数据并没有说没有工作给你。数据说的是实际上这将创造很多机会。特别是如果你愿意投入重塑，对吧？什么不是——两年前你的工作形式是什么，但五年后它可能是什么，嗯，还有什么，我想打破墙壁是我在想的另一件事，但什么——什么——你的清单上有什么？

Okay. To me like most important is change is scary and hard but that doesn't mean it's bad. That means you have to embrace the emotions that come with it. But you also have to lean into it and you—you should let go. Like yes, it's scary and yes, it feels like there might not be anything waiting on the other side, but what's the alternative? To hold on to this thing that might be slowly dying, like that's not safe either. So leaning into change feels like to me the most important thing for folks to take away. Um, I think as part of that, I would just say like grief is part of this and sometimes grief needs a funeral or do what you got to do, you know, to like be sad. Let your teams be sad. Let the people around you make space for that because like there—change with change comes shedding things um that you loved and that sucks. Um, I think like one of the other things that feels like it really came out, Lenny, is like there is opportunity here. And we got to like start ignoring or muting or whatever some of this fear narrative. Um, because right now the data isn't saying like there are no jobs for you. The data is saying like actually there's going to be a lot of opportunity created by this. Particularly if you're willing to lean into reinvention, right? What not—what was the form of your job two years ago but what might it be in five years um what else I guess like breaking down walls is the other thing I was thinking but what—what—what came to your list

嗯，有一个微小的视角，想象你的工作不会消失，想象你的工作会继续但会不同

Well, there's the minut kind of perspective of imagine your job isn't going to go away imagine your job will continue but be different

是的，没错，我喜欢，我只是，当她这么说时，对我来说真的是一个思维转变，因为我当时想哇，就像是的，五年后工程会是什么样子？

Yeah exactly I love I just it it was a real mind change for me when she said that because I was like whoa like yeah What what is engineering going to look like in five years?

对。它不会消失。它会有些不同。

Right. It's not going to go away. It's going to be some different.

也许会有更多。就像新闻业，无论好坏，都有更多记者。

Maybe there'll be more of it. Like journalism, there's more journalists out there for better or for worse.

是的。到目前为止，有更多更多的产品经理，更多产品，更多工程师。是的。

Yeah. And so far there's more more uh PMs, more product more um engineers. Yeah.

就像到目前为止进展顺利。另一种要点是，要刻意决定你做什么，你给 AI 什么。有几种思考方式。一种是 AI 会在什么方面做得很糟糕？不要那样做。你热爱什么，不想让它夺走？你如何避免脑腐和过度依赖 AI？就像那里有几件事，就像 AI 不会——不要把一切都给 AI。

Like so far that's going well. Another kind of takeaway is just be deliberate about what you do what you give to AI. And there's a few ways to think about it. One is just like what is AI going to do a terrible job at? Don't do that. What is it you love that you don't want it to take for you? How do you avoid like brain rot and just overlying an AI? It's like there's a few things there just like AI is not gonna—don't give everything to AI.

是的。我认为对我们很多人来说，也要承认 AI 不是这种超级智能存在。它更像是一个实习生。嗯，这意味着真的把它当作实习生来想。就像你会给实习生什么，你永远不会给他们什么？

Yeah. And I think also for a lot of us acknowledging that AI is not this like super intelligent being. It's like it is much more like an intern. Um and that means like literally think about it as an intern. Like what would you give to an intern and what would you never give them?

我认为那是核心。

I think that's the core of it.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得我们说过这一点，但有些东西我们可能永远不该拱手让人。这确实不一样。就像，把你的乐高送出去，但要分辨哪些该留下、哪些该由人来做、人存在的意义是什么。我觉得这就是未来——不管多少年——对话的一部分：人类独特擅长的是什么？

And I feel like we said this, but there just may be some things we should never give away. And that is genuinely different. Like, give away your Legos, but be discerning about what you should keep and what should be human and what humans are here for. I think that's part of the conversation for the next, you know, however many years: what are humans uniquely good at?

而我对此的想法，在我脑海里非常具体，就是：做那个引导你所做的事走向一个地方、走向你想要的世界愿景的人。不只是最简单的事，不只是 AI 指向的事，而是你真正想要什么。这大概就是我们接下来一段时间的任务。

And what I think about there, just very concretely in my mind, is: be the person that guides what you're doing to a place, to your vision of the world you want. Not just the simplest thing, not the thing that AI is kind of pointing to, just like what do you actually want. And that's kind of our job for a while.

是的，而且在个人层面，这个新工具，这个你雇来的不智能的实习生，怎么能让你做更多你热爱的事？让你给世界带来更多快乐。让你更投入你热爱做的事。它怎么能放大你，而不是让你觉得你只是在不断失去东西给它。

Yeah, and like at the individual level, how can this new tool, this unintelligent intern that you've hired, let you do more of what you love? You know, let you bring more joy into the world. Let you lean into the things that you love doing. How can it amplify you, instead of feeling like all you're doing is losing things to it.

Molly，我们现在所处的真是一个特殊的时刻。

What a moment in time we're in, Molly, right now.

试图把这一切都搞清楚。

Trying to figure all this out.

我们一两年后回看这段会嘲笑自己的。

We're going to rewatch this in a year or two and make fun of ourselves.

是啊，我们会说：“我们搞定了。我们全说对了。”

Yeah, we're going to be like, "We nailed it. We got everything right."

完美。先知。哦，天哪。

Perfect. Visionaries. Oh, man.

那么，Molly，还有别的吗？有什么想宣传的吗？有什么想推荐给大家的吗？有什么你正在做、可能对大家有趣或有用的想告诉大家的吗？

Well, with that, Molly, is there anything else? Anything you want to plug? Anything you want to point people to? Anything you want to tell people about that you're up to that might be interesting, useful to them?

好，我说两件事。第一，我从社区和 Glue Club 得到了很多智慧，也得到很多对这类对话的支持。我觉得如果你是一位领导者，听着这期节目感到孤独、有点得不到支持，那就去找一个社区——不管是 Glue Club 还是别的——在那里你可以谈论这些。因为我确实认为，互相依靠去了解什么是真实的、什么不是，什么有价值、什么没有——我们在 Glue Club 做的很多事就是问：“还有别人看到这个吗？”这真的很有价值。你在 Lenny 的地盘也能这么做，但就是走出去，谈论什么是真实的、什么不是。不要只是待在一个悲伤孤独的洞里。

Well, I'll say two things. First, I get a lot of wisdom, but also a lot of support for this kind of conversation from the community and Glue Club. And I think if you're a leader listening to this and feeling lonely and a little bit unsupported, find a community—whether it's Glue Club or another one—where you can talk about this. Because I do think leaning on each other to learn what's real and what's not and what's valuable and what's not—so much of what we're doing in Glue Club is being like, "Is anybody else seeing this?" And that is really valuable. You can do it in Lenny land as well, but just get out there and talk about what's real and what's not. Don't just stay in a sad lonely hole.

但我想说的第二件事，Lenny，是谢谢你为这件事留出空间。我觉得这很重要。现在有太多空间留给“我该做什么”“我该学什么技能”“我该上什么课”“我下一个该试什么工具、今天谁最火”。但我们没有足够地谈论这件事人性的一面，以及每个人经历这一切时的感受。所以我很感激你主动联系我，我们谈到要留出空间来聊这个，因为我想，希望人们离开时会觉得更清醒一点，觉得“哦，原来其他人现在也有点疯”。外面有很多人在悲伤，这没关系。这很正常。所以，谢谢你，Lenny。

But the second thing I wanted to say, Lenny, is thank you for making space for this. I think it's important. There's so much space right now for the "what should I do" and "what skills should I get" and "what course should I take" and "what tool should I try next, who's hot today." But we aren't talking enough about the human side of this and what it feels like to be going through this for everyone. And so I'm grateful that you reached out and we talked about making space to talk about this, because I think hopefully people will leave feeling a little more sane and like, "Oh, everybody else is feeling a little crazy right now, too." And there's lots of people out there grieving, and that's okay. That's normal. So, thank you, Lenny.

谢谢你，Molly。我觉得这类节目——我对这类节目有个说法。我叫它们特洛伊木马节目，人们冲着这些战术性的具体内容来：“我需要知道怎么这样用 AI？我怎么成为更好的产品经理？”然后就有这些——

Thank you, Molly. I think of these—I have a term for these sorts of episodes. I call them Trojan horse episodes, where people come for all this tactical concrete stuff: "I need to know how do I use AI in this way? How do I become a better PM?" And then there's these like—

你得到了心理治疗。

You get therapy.

重要的节目就这么溜进来了。是的，没错。你会说：“哦，好吧。我不知道我需要这个，但那真的很有帮助。”

Important episodes that slip right in. Yeah, exactly. You're like, "Oh, okay. I didn't know I needed that, but that was very helpful."

是的。

Yeah.

那么，欢迎特洛伊木马偷偷溜进来。

So, well, welcome to the Trojan horse smuggling in.

我喜欢。

I love it.

最近跟《奥德赛》很应景，是吧？

Very timely with the Odyssey these days, huh?

是啊，老兄。

Yeah, dude.

好了，Molly。非常感谢你来。

All right, Molly. Well, thank you so much for being here.

是的。谢谢你邀请我，Lenny。

Yeah. Thanks for having me, Lenny.

大家再见。

Bye, everyone.

大家再见。

Bye, everybody.

非常感谢你的收听。如果你觉得这有价值，可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或你最喜欢的播客应用上订阅本节目。另外，请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，因为这真的能帮助其他听众找到这个播客。你可以在 lennispodcast.com 找到所有往期节目或了解更多关于本节目的信息。我们下期见。

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.