The instinct to ship something slightly below your own standard, telling yourself it can be revised and improved later, isn't new. What's changed is the specific dynamic AI has introduced around this instinct: because AI has made revision feel cheap and fast, it's become significantly easier to justify shipping something imperfect now on the assumption that fixing it later will be quick and painless when the time comes. The problem is that later rarely comes with the same reliability the assumption implies, and the accumulated debt of small, deferred fixes represents a growing, largely invisible cost that AI's speed makes easier to accumulate, not easier to actually pay down. ------------- Context ------------- Before AI meaningfully accelerated the revision process, the decision to ship something imperfect carried a natural weight, because everyone involved understood, at least implicitly, that fixing it later would require real, deliberate effort: reopening the work, remembering the original context, doing the actual revision work manually. This natural weight discouraged excessive deferral, because the cost of "later" was genuinely felt as significant enough to warrant getting things closer to right the first time whenever reasonably possible. AI has changed the felt cost of "fix it later" considerably. Because revision with AI assistance can often happen quickly once you actually sit down to do it, the anticipated cost of deferring a fix feels low, which makes the decision to ship something imperfect now, with the intention of fixing it later, feel like a low-risk trade-off. The problem with this logic is that it assumes the "later" moment will actually arrive with the same reliability the low anticipated cost implies. In practice, deferred fixes compete for attention against new, more pressing priorities that continuously emerge, and a significant portion of items deferred with the intention of fixing them later simply never get revisited at all, regardless of how quick the actual fix would have been if it had happened.

In this video, I'll show you how to use ChatGPT's improved plugins to set up an AI system that works more quickly and efficiently. Discover 10 practical ways to use ChatGPT Work to save time, organize your workload, and move projects forward faster: Grab Your Free PDF Want to save time, get more leverage, and stop figuring this AI stuff out from scratch? I put the clearest map and support inside the AI Advantage Club Enjoy! :)

For a growing number of small business owners, a meaningful and increasing share of the business's actual competitive edge now lives inside AI-assisted processes, workflows, context documents, and system configurations that one person, usually the owner, built and deeply understands. This creates a specific and often unaddressed risk that used to be a more distant, easier-to-defer concern: what happens to this business if that person exits, sells, retires, or simply steps back for an extended period. AI adoption, done well, tends to force this succession question to become urgent much earlier than it used to be, because the business's operational knowledge is increasingly embedded in systems that require deliberate, structured transfer rather than existing as more generalized, transferable business processes. ------------- Context ------------- Before AI became deeply integrated into how many small businesses operate, the core operational knowledge of a business, while still often concentrated in an owner's head, was somewhat more generically transferable. A new owner or manager stepping in could often learn the fundamentals of the business's processes through reasonably standard means: observing operations, reviewing documented procedures, working alongside existing staff. The knowledge, while real and valuable, wasn't typically locked inside highly specific, individually configured AI systems that only the original builder fully understood. AI-assisted businesses, particularly ones where the owner has built sophisticated, customized workflows, context documents, and system configurations over time, carry a different kind of knowledge concentration risk. The specific way AI has been configured to handle client communication, the particular context documents that inform pricing or proposal generation, the exact prompting patterns that produce reliable output for a specific recurring task, these represent real business value, but they're often poorly documented and exist primarily as tacit, personally-held understanding of how the systems were built and why they work the way they do.

Personalized check-ins, birthday messages, milestone acknowledgments, these small relational touches have always been part of how professional relationships get maintained over time, particularly at scale, where a business with hundreds of clients or contacts can't realistically maintain deep, individual attention to every single one. AI has made it remarkably easy to generate and send these touches automatically, personalized with genuine-seeming specificity, at a scale that would have been impossible to maintain manually. This is genuinely useful. It also raises a specific question worth taking seriously: when the small talk is handled entirely by AI, what happens to the actual relationship underneath it, and does the appearance of connection eventually diverge from the substance of it in ways that cost more to repair than the automation ever saved? ------------- Context ------------- Relational touches, checking in, acknowledging a milestone, sending a thoughtful note, have traditionally served two purposes simultaneously: they maintained the appearance of an ongoing relationship, and they were also, at least sometimes, genuine expressions of actual attention and care from the person sending them. AI-generated versions of these touches can maintain the first function at scale remarkably well. They're considerably less able to provide the second, because the genuine attention that used to underlie at least some portion of these touches isn't actually present when the message is fully AI-generated based on stored data points rather than genuine, current awareness of the recipient's situation. This distinction matters because relationships, particularly professional ones that matter for referrals, retention, and trust, tend to be sustained by more than just the appearance of ongoing contact. They're sustained, at least in part, by moments of genuine attention that recipients can distinguish, consciously or not, from purely automated touches, even when those automated touches are personalized skillfully enough to feel individually crafted at first glance.

OpenAI just put out a new update called Computer History that lets the ChatGPT desktop app see...well...just about everything you do on your computer. In this video, I'll explore this new and VERY controversial feature, showing you how it works so you can satisfy your curiosity and get your questions answered without having to first install it on your computer. Want to save time, get more leverage, and stop figuring this AI stuff out from scratch? I put the clearest map and support inside the AI Advantage Club Enjoy!