Capitalogix

Trying to Understand Happiness ...

I am often amazed at how little human nature has changed throughout recorded history.

Despite the exponential progress we’ve made in health, wealth, society, tools, and understanding ... we still struggle to find meaning, purpose, and happiness in our lives and our existence.

Last month, I shared an article on Global Happiness Levels in 2025. Here are a few bullets that summarize the findings: 

• We underestimate others’ kindness, but it’s more common than we think.
• Community boosts happiness—eating and living with others matter.
• Despair is falling globally, except in isolated, low-trust places like the U.S.
• Hope remains—trust and happiness can rebound with connection and a sense of purpose.

Upon reflection, that post didn’t attempt to define happiness. This post will focus on how to do that.

While it seems like a simple concept, happiness is complex. We know many things that contribute to and detract from it; we know humans strive for it, but it is still surprisingly challenging to put a uniform definition on it. 

A few years ago, a hobbyist philosopher analyzed 93 philosophy books, spanning from 570 BC to 1588, in an attempt to find a universal definition of Happiness. Here are those findings.

 

via Reddit.

It starts with a simple list of definitions from various philosophers. It does a meta-analysis to create some meaningful categories of definition. Then it presents the admittingly subjective conclusion that:

 

Happiness is to accept and find harmony with reason. 

 

My son, Zach, pointed out that while “happiness” is a conscious choice, paradoxically, the “pursuit of happiness” often results in unhappiness. Why? Because happiness is a result of acceptance. However, when happiness is the goal, you often focus on what you’re lacking instead of what you already have. You start to live in the ‘Gap’ instead of the ‘Gain’. 

So, it got me thinking – and that got me to play around with search and AI, a little, to broaden my data sources and perspectives. If you would like to view the raw data, here are the notes I compiled (along with the AI-generated version of what this article could have been, had it been left to AI, rather than me and Zach).

Across centuries, philosophers have wrestled with a deceptively simple question: What does it mean to live a good life?

 

As entrepreneurs, investors, and leaders, we often chase performance, innovation, or edge — but underneath it all, there’s a quieter inquiry: Am I living well?

 

Happiness aside, across 93 influential philosophical texts spanning two millennia, one word consistently reappears: Eudaimonia. This is not happiness in the modern sense of pleasure, but a richer concept of human flourishing — a life filled with purpose, virtue, and meaning.

 

• Ancient thinkers saw happiness not as a mood, but as a life aligned with purpose and virtue.
• Some prioritized inner character; others emphasized harmony with the divine or nature.
• Debate endures over the role of external goods — wealth, luck, friends.
• During the Renaissance, the conversation shifted toward subjective experience.
• Across eras, the thread remains: Happiness is cultivated, not consumed.

 

Contradictions and Tensions

Thoughts on happiness contain paradoxes, contradictions, and tensions. Examining the boundaries between what you are certain of and what you are uncertain of is where insights occur. Here are a few to get you started.

 

• Virtue vs. External Goods: Aristotle acknowledges external goods (wealth, friends) as necessary for complete happiness, while Stoics claim virtue alone suffices. This tension challenges the simplicity of virtue-based happiness, suggesting a nuanced balance between inner character and outer circumstances.
• Subjective vs. Objective Happiness: Ancient philosophers often defined happiness as an objective state (living virtuously or intellectually flourishing), whereas modern definitions more often emphasize the subjective satisfaction varying by individual. This tension probes whether happiness is a universal or personal experience.
• Happiness as Pleasure vs. Happiness as Duty/Struggle: Epicureanism equates happiness with pleasure (absence of pain), but Cynics and Stoics emphasize enduring hardship and discipline as the path to happiness, which presents a paradox between comfort and resilience.

 

Three Metaphors To Help You Think About Happiness

Metaphors help make abstract ideas more concrete, memorable, and easier to grasp. Here are three to consider.

 

The Ship Captain (Stoicism)

• Metaphor: You can’t control the ocean (external events), but you can steer your ship (your mind). 
• Clarification: Highlights control over internal states despite external chaos.

The Team Soul (Plato’s Tripartite Soul)

• Metaphor: The soul is a team where reason is the coach, spirit is the player, and appetite is the goalie. Happiness is achieved when the coach directs the players well. 
• Clarification: Demonstrates the importance of internal harmony and self-governance.

The Garden (Aristotle’s Life Cultivation)

• Metaphor: Happiness is like tending a garden over time — it requires continuous effort, nurturing virtues (soil quality), and sometimes external help (sunlight, rain). 
• Clarification: This shows happiness as a process, not a momentary state.

Reach out – I’m curious to hear what you think!

Relics Of A Bygone Era ...

The U.S. Treasury is ceasing production of pennies - as they cost more to make than they’re worth.

According to a 2024 report from the U.S. Mint, we lose $85M a year minting pennies, as they cost 3.69 cents to make. 

That makes the phrase “penny wise and pound foolish” officially passé - at least in America. 

 

 

Many phrases like this still exist. It’s an interesting example of the power of language. Words take on meaning beyond their original usage ... and often remain relevant long after their origin has become irrelevant. 

For example:

• Burning the midnight oil means working hard, but it comes from a time before electricity, when you had to use candles and lamps to light a room after dark. 
• Time to face the music refers to dealing with the consequences of one’s actions, but originates from a time when disgraced military officers had to face a drumline upon discharge.
• More recently, hang-ups were what you did when you replaced a phone receiver in its cradle. Now, you can only really find a desk phone in an office. Even then, you don’t need to place it in its cradle to hang it up. 
• Put a sock in it comes from the act of putting a sock into the trumpet of a gramophone.
• And Stereotypes come from a type of printing plate commonly used in old-school newspaper publishing. While it still refers to impressions ... the origin is lost on the average user of this word. Filming is rarely done on film; footage is from when film was measured in feet and frames, and you don’t need to stay tuned because your television doesn’t need to be tuned to receive the channels you like. 

Until recently, technologies (and the phrases they spawned) lasted for decades, if not longer. As technology evolves at an ever-accelerating pace, new tools, platforms, and ways of communicating emerge almost daily. With these innovations come fresh slang, buzzwords, and cultural references that often catch on quickly—think “DM me,” “ghosting,” or “cloud computing.” Yet just as rapidly as they rise, many of these terms fade into obscurity, replaced by the next wave of trends. What was once cutting-edge can become outdated in a matter of years, if not months. This cycle of innovation and obsolescence is a hallmark of the modern digital era.

However, much like these old idioms, the fleeting nature of these technologies and jobs doesn’t mean they lack value or impact. Some expressions endure because they capture something universally human—emotion, conflict, humor—even if the context changes. Similarly, technologies may evolve, but their core functions or purposes often remain. The fax machine gives way to email, and email to instant messaging—but the need for communication is constant.

This principle also applies to work and tools. While job titles and methods may change, the underlying skills — such as critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity — remain timeless. A carpenter today might use laser-guided saws instead of hand tools, just as a marketer might use data analytics instead of intuition alone, but the essence of their work persists. Innovation reshapes how we do things, not always what we do.

Just as enduring phrases carry forward old meanings in new settings, so too will jobs, tools, and skills adapt and survive.

Onwards!

Is AI Making You And Your Team Smarter?

At the core of Capitalogix’s existence is a commitment to systemization and automation. 

At first, the goal was to eliminate fear, greed, and discretionary mistakes from trading.

Over time, we’ve worked hard at making countless things easier. Much like math, we found that the best practice is to simplify complex processes before trying to automate them.

I’m surprised by how many times I have had the same realization ... Less is more.

Likewise, I’ve learned the hard way that a great strategy is useless if people don’t get it. That is part of the reason that frameworks are so important.

Ultimately, the process, the system, and the automation should follow this basic recipe if you want it to succeed:  Simple, Repeatable, Consistent, and Scalable.

Finding ways to automate sounds great. Increasing efficiency, effectiveness, and certainty sounds great, too  ... but, routines and habits become ruts and limits when they become un-measured, un-managed, or forgotten. 

A practical reality of increasing automation and constant progress is that it becomes increasingly important to have expiration dates on decisions, systems, components, and automations. We need to shine a light on things to make sure they still make sense or to determine whether we have a better option.

Freeing humans to create the most value sounds great, too ... but, as the pace of technological progress increases, the importance of freeing people to do more diminishes if they don’t actively rise to the occasion.

 

My Use of Technology

I got my first computer in 1984. It was the original Macintosh. That means I’ve been searching for and collecting technology tools to make business and life easier and better since the mid-80s.

It has been a long and winding road. These days,  it seems like I’m constantly looking for new ways to use AI in my life.

As you might guess, I “play” with a lot of tools. Of course, I think of it as research, discovery, and skill-building ... rather than playing. Why? Because it is something I’m good at, it produces value – and it gives me energy ... so, I make sure to reserve a place for it in my routine.

While most of what I explore doesn’t make it into my “real work” routine, I now have a toolbox of dozens of tools that I use for everything from research, notetaking, brainstorming, writing, and even relaxing. 

It’s a little embarrassing, but my most popular YouTube video is an explainer video on Dragon NaturallySpeaking from 13 years ago. It was (and still is) dictation software, but from a time before your phone gave you that capability. 

As I focus on systemization, I also have to focus on optimization. 

Using generative AI tools for daily research has fundamentally changed how I approach information gathering. What began as a meditative practice—slowly reading, digesting, and reflecting on material—has evolved into a faster, more expansive process. With AI, I can now scan and synthesize a much broader set of sources in far less time. The quality of the summaries and takeaways is high, enabling me to deliver more value to others. I can write better articles, share timely insights with fellow business owners, and keep my team well-informed. The impact on others has grown — but something subtle has shifted in my own learning.

The tradeoff is that if I’m not as careful as I used to be while doing the research, and I don’t engage with the material in the same way I did before. When I did the research manually, I was “chewing and swallowing” each idea, pausing to make connections, reflecting on implications, and wrestling with the nuance. That process was slower, but it etched ideas more deeply into memory.

As a result, my favorite articles of the week or month would show up in how I spoke on stage, what I wrote about, and how I worked through roadblocks with employees. Now, I notice that although I’m exposed to more information, it doesn’t have the same weight or impact. I’m consuming more at scale ... but retaining less, or perhaps less deeply (at least in my head). In contrast, I store much more, both in terms of quantity and depth, in my second brain (meaning, the digital repositories available for search when needed).

This brings up a fundamental distinction between knowledge storage and knowledge retrieval. Storage is about accumulating information, while retrieval is about quickly accessing and using the correct information at the right time. It requires digestion. 

It’s kind of like Amazon. Amazon has made buying books and getting them on my shelves easier than ever. I’ve got 1000s of books with answers to many of life’s questions. But, I’d estimate that I’ve really only read around half of the books I currently have on my shelf. The point is that having a book on your shelf with the answer to a problem is not the same as having the answers. 

I now have many thousands of articles in my Evernote. There are probably over a hundred of them about better “prompt engineering” or using “prompting techniques better”... but I can’t pretend that each article has made me better at those things. I have gotten better at thin-slicing and knowing what I want to store to improve the quality of the raw material I search for.

So now, I’m exploring how to maintain a balance. I still want to leverage AI’s value, while reintroducing a layer of slowness and reflection into the process. Maybe that means manually summarizing some articles. Maybe it means pausing to journal about what I’ve read, or discussing it with someone. The goal is not to abandon the efficiency — but to ensure that efficiency doesn’t come at the cost of depth.

The priority is making sure I’m optimizing on the right thing. It’s not progress if you’re taking steps in the wrong direction.

Let me know what you think about that ... or what you are doing that you think is worth sharing.

Onwards!

Global Happiness Levels in 2025

Are you Happy?

What does that mean? How do you define it? And how do you measure it?

Happiness is a surprisingly complex concept comprised of conditions that highlight positive emotions over negative ones. And upon a bit of reflection, happiness is bolstered by the support of comfort, freedom, wealth, and other things people aspire to experience. 

Regardless of how hard it is to describe (let alone quantify) ... humans strive for happiness.

Likewise, it is hard to imagine a well-balanced and objective "Happiness Report" because so much of the data required to compile it seems subjective and requires self-reporting. 

Nonetheless, the World Happiness Report takes an annual look at quantifiable factors (like health, wealth, GDP, and life expectancy) and more intangible factors (like social support, generosity, emotions, and perceptions of local government and businesses). Below is an infographic highlighting the World Happiness Report data for 2025.

World Happiness Report via Gallup

Click here to see a dashboard with the raw worldwide data.

I last shared this concept in 2022. At the time, we were still seeing the ramifications of COVID-19 on happiness levels. As you might expect, the pandemic caused a significant increase in negative emotions reported. Specifically, there were substantial increases in reports of worry and sadness across the ninety-five countries surveyed. The decline in mental health was higher in groups prone to disenfranchisement or other particular challenges – e.g., women, young people, and poorer people. 

Ultimately, happiness scores are relatively resilient and stable, and humanity persevered in the face of economic insecurity, anxiety, and more.

While scores in North America have dropped slightly, there are positive trends. 

The 2025 Report

In the 2025 report, one of the key focuses was an increase in pessimism about the benevolence of others. There seems to be a rise in distrust that doesn't match the actual statistics on acts of goodwill. For example, when researchers dropped wallets in the street, the proportion of returned wallets was far higher than people expected. 

Unfortunately, our well-being depends on our perception of others' benevolence, as well as their actual benevolence. 

Since we underestimate the kindness of others, our well-being can be improved by seeing acts of true benevolence. In fact, the people who benefit most from perceived benevolence are those who are the least happy. 

"Benevolence" increased during COVID-19 in every region of the world. People needed more help, and others responded. Even better, that bump in benevolence has been sustained, with benevolent acts still being about 10% higher than their pre-pandemic levels. 

Another thing that makes a big difference in happiness levels worldwide is a sense of community. People who eat with others are happier, and this effect holds across many other variables. People who live with others are also happier (even when it's family). 

The opposite of happiness is despair, and deaths of despair (suicide and substance abuse) are falling in the majority of countries. Deaths of despair are significantly lower in countries where more people are donating, volunteering, or helping strangers. 

Yet, Americans are increasingly eating alone and living alone, and are one of the few countries experiencing an increase in deaths of despair (especially among the younger population). In 2023, 19% of young adults across the world reported having no one they could count on for social support. This is a 39% increase compared to 2006. 

Takeaways

In the U.S., and a few other regions, the decline in happiness and social trust points to the rise in political polarisation and distrust of "the system". As life satisfaction lowers, there is a rise in anti-system votes.

Among unhappy people attracted by the extremes of the political spectrum, low-trust people are more often found on the far right, whereas high-trust people are more inclined to vote for the far left.

Despite that, when we feel like we're part of a community, spend time with others, and perform prosocial behavior, we significantly increase perceived personal benefit and reported happiness levels.

Do you think we can return to previous levels of trust in the States? I remember when it felt like both parties understood that the other side was looking to improve the country, just with different methods. 

On a broader note, while we have negative trends in the U.S., the decrease is lower than you might expect. The relative balance demonstrated in the face of such adversity may point towards the existence of a hedonic treadmill - or a set-point of happiness.

Regardless of the circumstances, people can focus on what they choose, define what it means to them, and choose their actions.

Remember, throughout history, things have gotten better. There are dips here and there, but like the S&P 500 ... we always rally eventually. 

Onwards!

Choosing To Be More Human in the Age of AI

Last week, I asked, “What do you do when AI gets better than you?” One of the key takeaways from that post was that AI is freeing you up to be more human.

My son (who helped write it) said he wished we used more examples and stories that dealt with “the future of being human” rather than “the future of work”. So, we decided that would be the “seed” idea for this post.

It’s funny, but when I started to gather my thoughts about it ... I felt a rush of emotions. 

Emotions and Logic

Emotions have frustratingly little to do with logic. Humans are driven by impulse and often by those that don’t represent our best nature. History shows that we’re driven by fear, greed, scarcity, and self-preservation. And, truthfully, that’s all “human”. But humans are also beautiful, meaning-making machines ... and throughout our often messy history, we’ve done amazing things and somehow survived.

Appreciating Life

Watching my father die was a catalyst for me to appreciate life and living more than I did. I gave a TEDx talk about that and wrote articles about the time value of a life worth living. At the end of his life, it was clear that he appreciated things more (a family dinner, a kiss goodbye, the beauty of a sunset) and that he would have done almost anything for more time. Two hidden gifts came from that “scarcity”. The first gift was recognizing that we got to choose how much more “life” we got out of the last part of my dad’s life. The second gift was realizing that you don’t have to wait for the end of life to “live like you only have a year left”.  

Final Goodbye

I have another memory from his deathbed as well. He had been out of it for a while, and I was worried that I wouldn’t get a chance to say a final goodbye and to tell him how much I loved him. Luckily, he woke up, and we had a few final lucid moments together. He looked me straight in the eyes, told me how much he loved me, and then with a touch of humor said, “Okay, so tell me how this relates to Veritas ...” which was the original name of the company I was running at that time. His final message to me was a reminder that life is not really about work.

Looking Beyond Work

Transparently, I still look at the world through a lens and filter that too often focuses on work. Yet I also recognize and strive to pay attention to the deeper meanings beyond that.

Getting back to the point of the article, it is easy to see how AI relates to work ... yet, it might be more important to consider how AI is going to affect the rest of your life. 

 

 

In the last article, we discussed how Lee Sedol, one of the world’s top Go players, retired after losing to AlphaGo. When asked about it, Lee said, “Losing to AI, in a sense, meant my entire world was collapsing.” He also explained, “I could no longer enjoy the game. So, I retired.” 

While it’s certainly his right to retire, I think it might have been the wrong choice ... or, at least, not what I would have done in that situation.

If playing Go was his passion, it might have been better for him to change how he “keeps score” to focus on his progress, rather than the distance between him and what AI could do.

As long as you believe you can get better (and have hope for continued improvements), there are many ways to leverage the capabilities and opportunities that come from that.

Many people engage in sports or games even though they know they won’t become the greatest of all time. The same is true for almost any hobby or pursuit (whether it’s in art, literature, philosophy, craftsmanship, or other fields). There will always be someone or something that can do it better, faster, or more efficiently. However, that shouldn’t be the sole determinant of whether you get joy or energy from pursuing a path of getting better at what you want to excel at.

One of my core beliefs is that the changes coming to the world will free us up to be more human. That means we have to choose what to pursue.

What’s more human than pursuing something difficult? 

The Beauty of Passion

In a world increasingly shaped by AI’s precision and efficiency, choosing to do something purely out of passion becomes a powerful act of self-expression. When a machine can paint more photorealistically or compose music with perfect mathematical harmony, human creativity finds new purpose not in competing, but in conveying emotion, imperfection, and lived experience.

 

As we focus on growing businesses and changing the world, I think it’s easy to lose sight of the passion that first got us into business. 

I do the research and write this newsletter, not because I expect it to make me a ton of money, or because AI can’t do it ... but because I enjoy it, and it’s almost like meditation for me. 

My son plays rugby despite enduring countless injuries, significant financial cost, and realizing that it takes increasing amounts of his time to stay competitive. From a logical standpoint, it makes almost no sense for him to spend scarce resources or risk such extreme bodily harm in his 30s. But he’s passionate about rugby, enjoys playing it, and recognizes how it improves other parts of his life. It is an excellent example of the time value of a life worth living. He made a conscious choice that this is what it takes to be, do, and have what he values most.

The Power of Fun 

Artificial Intelligence is probably better than you at poker ... does that mean you shouldn’t have some friends over and try to win their money?

Does it mean you shouldn’t try to learn a new instrument or write a book?

We often undervalue fun because it doesn’t always produce measurable outcomes, but fun is not frivolous. It’s how we bond, relax, and explore parts of ourselves we can’t access through obligation or structure.

We intrinsically understand this. You don’t worry about being the best when you’re playing pick-up basketball or throwing a football with your son. You’re focused on creating memories and having fun. 

Joy doesn’t need justification. 

 

Striving To Be The Best

Ultimately, you have to be willing to lose to be the best. In every pursuit, there will always be someone ahead of you. Whether it’s a faster runner, a sharper mind, or a newer technology, I want to be the man in the arena. 

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore Roosevelt, Citizenship in a Republic

The point has never been to be the best at everything ... but to strive for your best.

I’ve always believed the game isn’t over until I win, not because I can’t lose, but because the belief empowers me to get back up again. 

Being second best — or tenth, or just a beginner — doesn’t diminish your effort; it validates it. The climb matters, even if you never reach the summit. Humans are wired for persistence and purpose, not perfection. 

Humanity got where we are today because people weren’t happy with the status quo. They pursued greatness and innovation. Sometimes, what seems like failure ends up being the most significant success. 

AI is an incredible opportunity. It’s an opportunity to increase your productivity, to transform your business, and to redefine industries. It’s also an invitation to redefine your future and how you spend time. You can use it as an excuse to get smaller or bigger ... the power is in your perspective.

Hope that helps.

What Do You Do When AI is Better Than You?

When Beethoven was at the peak of his career, several of his contemporaries struggled to deal with the realization that they may never create anything that lived up to his creations. Brahms, for example, refused to make a symphony for 21 years. Schubert is quoted as saying, “Who can ever do anything after Beethoven?”

We’re seeing the same effect as a result of Artificial Intelligence. 

 

via visualcapitalist

The gap between human and machine reasoning is narrowing fast. I remember when AlphaGo, an AI program created by Google’s DeepMind, finally got better than humanity at Go. It was a big deal, and it prompted us to think seriously about competition in a post-AI world. If you can’t be the best, is it still worth competing? To one former Go champion, it wasn’t. He retired after “declaring AI invincible.” 

Over the past few years, AI systems have advanced rapidly, surpassing humans in many more tasks. Much like Beethoven, AI is discouraging competition. 

Was Lee Sedol, the former Go champ, wrong to quit? It’s hard to say ... but as AI gets better at more activities, it’s an issue we’ll encounter more often.

There’s always someone (or something) better. Taking a purely utilitarian approach isn’t always necessary or productive. It often helps to take a longer view of the issue.

Sometimes, it's okay to just do something because you enjoy doing it.

Sometimes you have to “embrace the suck” and be willing to put in the work to learn, grow, and progress.

Sometimes, you need to invest effort in understanding a process better to determine whether others (or automation) are achieving the right results.

The most successful people I know don’t try to avoid things with powerful potential. Instead, they leverage those things to achieve more and become better.

I advocate intelligently adopting AI, in part, because I expect the scale of AI’s “wins” will skyrocket. That means I know AI will soon be better than I am at things I do now.

It doesn’t mean I should give up. It means I have to raise the bar to stay competitive.

I have another belief that helps here. What if you believed, “The game isn’t over until I win ...”? With that belief in place, I won’t let a 2^nd place ceiling stop me if something gives me energy. AI may change how I play the game ... or even what game I choose to play ... but I will still choose to play.

 

 

What Happens to Human Work When Machines Get Smarter?

AI is changing the playing field at work, too. 

As a result, some say that AI-driven job displacement is not a future threat but a present reality.

This past week, several prominent  CEOs publicly mandated AI use, marking a shift to “AI-first” work culture, which prioritizes and integrates AI into the core of an organization’s strategy, operations, and overall culture.

Here is what I think (and you've probably heard me say this before): 

At this point, AI won't likely replace you ... but someone who uses AI better might.

Let’s face it, doing more with less is a core goal and strategy in business.

But that doesn’t mean humans are doomed. There are lots of historical parallels between AI integration and past technological revolutions. If you think about AI as a transformative force, you can hear the echoes of historical shifts that redefined work practices and intellectual labor (like the printing press, the calculator, or the internet).

We’re seeing significant changes in how we work. Instead of just having a mix of people working from home or the office (a hybrid workplace), we’re moving to a situation where people are working alongside smart computer programs, called AI agents (a hybrid workforce).

 

The rise of the hybrid workforce signifies a transformative shift in workplace dynamics. Gartner predicts that one-third of generative AI use cases will involve AI agents by 2028.

In the age of AI, success doesn’t come from battling technology — it comes from embracing our uniquely human powers and building systems that let those powers shine.

AI is coming - but it doesn’t have to be joy-sucking. Ideally, it should free you up to do MORE of the things that bring you joy, energy, and satisfaction. 

Onwards!

Are Your AI Fears Valid? What Experts Say

It's no surprise that there is often a disparity between what experts believe and what the average adult feels. It's even more pronounced in industries like AI that have been lambasted by science fiction and popular media.

Even just a few years ago, many of my advisors and friends told me to avoid using the term "AI" in our materials because they thought people would respond negatively to it. Back then, people expected AI to be artificial and clunky ... yet, somehow, it also reminded them of dystopian stories about AI Overlords and Terminators. An incompetent superpower is scary ... so is a competent superpower you can't trust!

As AI integrates more heavily into our everyday lives, people's hopes and concerns are intensifying... but should they be? 

Pew Research Center surveyed over 5,000 adults and 1,000 experts about their concerns related to AI. The infographic shows the difference in concern those groups had regarding specific issues.

 

Statista via VisualCapitalist

Half of experts (47%) report being more excited than concerned about AI’s future. Among U.S. adults, just 11% say the same.
Instead, 51% of adults say they’re more concerned than excited — more than triple the rate of experts (15%).

 

The most common—and well-founded—fears center on misinformation and the misappropriation of information. Experts and the average adult are in alignment here. 

I am consistently surprised by the lack of media literacy and skepticism demonstrated by otherwise intelligent people. Images and articles that scream "fake" or "AI" to me are shared virally and used to not only take advantage of the most susceptible but also to create dangerous echo chambers. 

Remember how bad phishing e-mails used to be, and how many of our elderly or disabled ended up giving money to a fake Prince from various random countries? Even my mother, an Ivy League-educated lawyer, couldn't help but click on some of these e-mails. Meanwhile, the quality of these attacks has risen exponentially.

And we're seeing the same thing now with AI. Not only are people falling for images, videos, and audio, but you also have the potential for custom apps and AI avatars that are fully focused on exploitation. 

AI Adoption Implications

Experts and the average adult have a significant disparity in beliefs about the long-term ramifications of AI adoption, such as potential isolation or job displacement. 

I'm curious, how concerned are you that AI will lead to fewer connections between people or job loss? 

I often say that technology adoption has very little to do with technology and much more to do with human nature.

That obviously includes AI adoption as well. 

Career growth often means abandoning an old role to take on something new and better. It's about delegating, outsourcing, or automating tasks so you can free up time to work on things that matter more.

It may sound like a joke, but I don't believe most people will lose jobs to AI. Instead, they'll lose jobs to people who use AI better. The future of work will be about amplifying human intelligence ... making better decisions, and taking smarter actions. If your job is about doing those things – and you don't use AI to do them – you will fall behind, and there will be consequences.

It's the same way that technology overtook farming. Technology didn't put people out of work, but it did force people to work differently.

Innovation has always created opportunity and prosperity in the long term. Jobs may look different, and some roles may be phased out, but new jobs will take their place. Think of it as tasks being automated, not jobs. 

Likewise, COVID is not why people have resisted returning to the office. COVID might have allowed them to work remotely in the first place, but their decision to resist going back to the office is a natural part of human nature.

When people found that technology enabled them to meet expectations without a commute, opportunities and possibilities expanded.

Some used the extra time to learn and grow, raising their expectations. Others used that time to rest or focus on other things. They're both choices, just with different consequences.

Choosing to Contract or Expand in the Age of AI 

AI presents us with a similar inflection point. I could have easily used AI to write this article much faster, and it certainly would have been easier in the short term. But what are the consequences of that choice?

While outreach and engagement are important, the primary benefit of writing a piece like this, for me, is to take the time and to go through the exercise of thinking about these issues ... what they mean, what they make possible, and how that impacts my sense of the future. That wouldn't happen if I didn't do it.  

I often say, "First bring order to chaos ... then wisdom comes from making finer distinctions." Doing work often entails embracing the chaos and making finer distinctions over time as you gain experience. With repetition, the quality of those results improves. As we increasingly rely on technology to do the work, to learn, and to grow, the technology learns and grows. If you fail to also learn and grow, it's not the technology's fault. It is a missed opportunity.

The same is true for connection. AI can help you connect better with yourself and others... or it can be another excuse to avoid connection.

You can now use an AI transcription service to record every word of an interaction, take notes, create a summary, and even highlight key insights. That sounds amazing! But far too many people become accustomed to the quality of that output and fail to think critically, make connections, or even read and process the information.

It could be argued that our society already has a connection problem (or an isolation epidemic), regardless of AI. Whether you blame it on social media, remote work, or COVID-19, for a long time, how we connect (and what we consider "connection") has been changing. However, many still have fulfilling lives despite the technology ... again, it's a choice. Do you use these vehicles to amplify your life, or are they a substitute and an excuse to justify failing to pursue connection in the real world?.

As said, actions have consequences ... and so do inactions.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on these issues. Are you focused on the promise or the perils of AI?

Why Don't We See Aliens?

So, if the math says it's likely that there are aliens ... why don't we see them?

In 2020, I mentioned Israeli officials who claimed they had been contacted by Aliens from a Galactic Federation - and that not only is our government aware of this, but they are working together.

There are many stories (or theories) about how we have encountered aliens before and just kept them secret. Here are some links to things you might find interesting if you want to learn more about this.

• NewsNation Segment: UFO Whistleblower Jake Barber Shares Allegations and Will Testify to Congress About Nonhuman Craft Retrievals.
• NewsNation Segment: UFO whistleblower David Grusch: 'We are not alone.'
• Dr. Diana Walsh Pasulka, Professor of Religious Studies, bridges the gap between religious studies, technological advancements, and the realm of UFO phenomena.
• Trailer for a film called "The Phenomenon."

So, while some may still believe aliens don't exist - I think it's a more helpful thought experiment to wonder why we haven't seen them. 

For example, the Fermi Paradox considers the apparent contradiction between the lack of evidence for extraterrestrial civilizations and the various high-probability estimates for their existence. 

To simplify the issue, billions of stars in the Milky Way galaxy (which is only one of many galaxies) are similar to our Sun. Consequently, there must be some probability that some of them will have Earth-like planets. It isn't hard to conceive that some of those planets should be older than ours, and thus some fraction should be more technologically advanced than us. Even if you assume they're only looking at evolutions of our current technologies, interstellar travel isn't absurd. 

Thus, based on the law of really large numbers (both in terms of the number of planets and length of time we are talking about) ... it makes the silence all the more deafening and curious. 

If you are interested in the topic "Where are all the aliens?"  Stephen Webb, a particle physicist, tackles that in his book and this TED Talk.   

via TED

In the TED talk, Stephen Webb covers a couple of key factors necessary for communicative space-faring life. 

1. Habitability and stability of their planet
2. Building blocks of life 
3. Technological advancement
4. Socialness/Communication technologies

But he also acknowledges the numerous confounding variables, including things like imperialism, war, bioterrorism, fear, the moon's effect on climate, etc. 

Essentially, his thesis is that there are numerous roadblocks to intelligent life, and it's entirely possible we are the only planet that has gotten past those roadblocks. Even if there were others, it's entirely possible that they're extinct by now. 

What do you think?

Here are some other links I liked on this topic. There is some interesting stuff you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand or enjoy. 

• 75 Reasons We Don't See Aliens 
• Wait But Why: The Fermi Paradox
• A New Theory on Why We Haven't Found Aliens Yet
• A List of Solutions to The Fermi Paradox
• Dissolving the Fermi Paradox, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University

To Infinity and Beyond!

Here Are Some Links For Your Weekly Reading - April 20th, 2025

Here are some of the posts that caught my eye recently. Hope you find something interesting.

Lighter Links:

• OpenAI's Most Impressive Move Has Nothing to Do With AI. (ZDNet)
• AI Stuns Researchers by Rewriting Its Own Code to Overcome Limitations. (TalkAndroid)
• Meta’s New AI Tech Can Read Your Mind at Work…What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (AllWork)
• How to Enter a ‘Flow State’ on Command: Peak Performance Mind Hack Explained in 7 Minutes. (OpenCulture)
• British Anthropologist Claims Jesus' Tomb and Ark of the Covenant are Beneath the Great Pyramid. (JPost)

 

 

Trading Links:

• Trump’s Knives Are Out for Jerome Powell, Setting Up a Supreme Court Showdown Over the Fed’s Independence. (Fortune)
• First Shockwaves of Trump’s Tariffs are About to Hit the World Economy. (Bloomberg)
• America is Losing the Robot Wars. (Insider)
• The Only Way Some Manufacturing Jobs Will Return Stateside is If AI-Empowered Robots Do Them—And That’s a Good Thing. (Fortune)
• ‘China’s Elon Musk’ Uses Just Two Numbers to Demonstrate Why His Country’s Auto Industry is Now Outcompeting the U.S. And Europe. (Fortune)

Are We Alone In The Universe?

Last week, Astronomers announced the discovery of the most promising "hints" of life on an exoplanet, K2-18, 124 light years away. 

While it would only be signs of phytoplankton and other microscopic marine life, it would still be a massive finding. 

I tend to read a lot across a wide variety of sources. Recently, I've noticed a significant uptick in stories about aliens, UFOs, non-human intelligence, and non-human technology. In addition, several of my seemingly sane friends claim to have direct knowledge of projects and groups (funded by well-known billionaires) close to making very public announcements about missions, research, and discoveries in these areas, they hope will result in discontiguous innovations and asymmetric capabilities.

While I believe it's naive to assume that there's no other form of life in a universe as vast as what we understand ... I'm also highly skeptical of anyone who claims that they have specific knowledge or proof. With that said, I have seen enough stuff from people I trust to expect that our beliefs about these issues will shift massively in the very near future. As an example, check out Skywatch.ai, some of its videos, or this NewsNation broadcast.

Since we live in a time where technologies are rapidly advancing, I thought it might be interesting to test out an AI-powered chatbot designed to debunk conspiracy theories through evidence-based conversations. It is a spin-out project with roots at MIT and other top universities. Research shows that many people doubted or abandoned false beliefs after a short conversation with the DebunkBot. 

I first heard of this tool through these two articles: Meet DebunkBot, The AI Chatbot that Will Debunk Any Conspiracies You Believe and AI Chatbot Shows Promise in Talking People Out of Conspiracy Theories.

Here is a link to the conversation I had with it about the belief  "Life likely exists elsewhere in the Universe due to its vastness and the repeated conditions that can give rise to life."  To my surprise, this tool concluded that the belief is not a conspiracy theory and reminded me that:

Science for the sake of knowing is one thing. Belief for the sake of hope, curiosity, or imagination is another. The search for "life" might actually help us discover something more valuable than what we thought we were searching for in the first place.

You can test your beliefs against DebunkBot's AI. Let me know how it goes and whether you changed your mind.

Meanwhile, Information Is Beautiful has an interactive data visualization to help you decide if we're alone in the Universe. 

As usual, it's well done, fun, and informative. 

For the slightly geeky amongst us, the model lets you adjust the estimate by playing with the Drake and Seager equations.

The Drake equation estimates the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy and the universe. It factors in variables such as habitable planets, the likelihood of life, intelligent life, and the duration of time a civilization sends signals into space. 

The Seager equation is a modern take on the equation, focusing on bio-signatures of life that we can currently detect - for example, the number of observable stars/planets, the % have life, and the % chance of detectable bio-signature gas. 

Click here to play with the Are We Alone in the Universe infographic. 

 

via Information Is Beautiful

For both equations, the infographic lets you look at various default options, but also enables you to change the variables based on your beliefs. 

For example, the skeptic's default answer for Drake's equation shows 0.0000062 communicating civilizations in our galaxy, which is still 924,000 in the universe. The equivalent for Seager's equation shows 0.0009000 planets with detectable life in our "galactic neighborhood" and 135,000,000 planets in our universe. 

Even with the "lowest possible" selection chosen, Drake's equation still shows 42 communicating civilizations (Douglas Adams, anyone?) in the universe.

 

via Information Is Beautiful

One of the most interesting numbers (and potentially influential numbers for me) is the length of time a civilization sends signals into space. Conservative estimates are 420 years, but optimistic estimates are 10,000 or more. 

One other thing to consider is that some scientists believe that life is most likely to grow on planets with very high gravity, which would also make escaping their atmosphere for space travel nigh impossible.

If any aliens are reading this ... don't worry, I won't tell. But we will find out who you voted for in the last election.

Last week, Astronomers announced the discovery of the most promising "hints" of life on an exoplanet, K2-18, 124 light years away. 

While it would only be signs of phytoplankton and other microscopic marine life, it would still be a massive finding. 

I tend to read a lot across a wide variety of sources. Recently, I've noticed a significant uptick in stories about aliens, UFOs, non-human intelligence, and non-human technology. In addition, several of my seemingly sane friends claim to have direct knowledge of projects and groups (funded by well-known billionaires) close to making very public announcements about missions, research, and discoveries in these areas, they hope will result in discontiguous innovations and asymmetric capabilities.

While I believe it's naive to assume that there's no other form of life in a universe as vast as what we understand ... I'm also highly skeptical of anyone who claims that they have specific knowledge or proof. With that said, I have seen enough stuff from people I trust to expect that our beliefs about these issues will shift massively in the very near future. As an example, check out Skywatch.ai, some of its videos, or this NewsNation broadcast.

Since we live in a time where technologies are rapidly advancing, I thought it might be interesting to test out an AI-powered chatbot designed to debunk conspiracy theories through evidence-based conversations. It is a spin-out project with roots at MIT and other top universities. Research shows that many people doubted or abandoned false beliefs after a short conversation with the DebunkBot. 

I first heard of this tool through these two articles: Meet DebunkBot, The AI Chatbot that Will Debunk Any Conspiracies You Believe and AI Chatbot Shows Promise in Talking People Out of Conspiracy Theories.

Here is a link to the conversation I had with it about the belief  "Life likely exists elsewhere in the Universe due to its vastness and the repeated conditions that can give rise to life."  To my surprise, this tool concluded that the belief is not a conspiracy theory and reminded me that:

Science for the sake of knowing is one thing. Belief for the sake of hope, curiosity, or imagination is another. The search for "life" might actually help us discover something more valuable than what we thought we were searching for in the first place.

You can test your beliefs against DebunkBot's AI. Let me know how it goes and whether you changed your mind.

Meanwhile, Information Is Beautiful has an interactive data visualization to help you decide if we're alone in the Universe. 

As usual, it's well done, fun, and informative. 

For the slightly geeky amongst us, the model lets you adjust the estimate by playing with the Drake and Seager equations.

The Drake equation estimates the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy and the universe. It factors in variables such as habitable planets, the likelihood of life, intelligent life, and the duration of time a civilization sends signals into space. 

The Seager equation is a modern take on the equation, focusing on bio-signatures of life that we can currently detect - for example, the number of observable stars/planets, the % have life, and the % chance of detectable bio-signature gas. 

Click here to play with the Are We Alone in the Universe infographic. 

 

via Information Is Beautiful

For both equations, the infographic lets you look at various default options, but also enables you to change the variables based on your beliefs. 

For example, the skeptic's default answer for Drake's equation shows 0.0000062 communicating civilizations in our galaxy, which is still 924,000 in the universe. The equivalent for Seager's equation shows 0.0009000 planets with detectable life in our "galactic neighborhood" and 135,000,000 planets in our universe. 

Even with the "lowest possible" selection chosen, Drake's equation still shows 42 communicating civilizations (Douglas Adams, anyone?) in the universe.

 

via Information Is Beautiful

One of the most interesting numbers (and potentially influential numbers for me) is the length of time a civilization sends signals into space. Conservative estimates are 420 years, but optimistic estimates are 10,000 or more. 

One other thing to consider is that some scientists believe that life is most likely to grow on planets with very high gravity, which would also make escaping their atmosphere for space travel nigh impossible.

If any aliens are reading this ... don't worry, I won't tell. But we will find out who you voted for in the last election.