Every time your business uses AI, you’re basically renting compute from someone else. For the hard, weird, high-value stuff? That makes sense. But for the same repetitive workflows running thousands or millions of times? Maybe not forever. That’s the idea behind my newest video. The future of AI probably isn’t all-cloud or all-local. It’s hybrid: Own the boring intelligence. Rent the exceptional intelligence. Watch here: https://youtu.be/lKQmIxmde3M?si=abHmgaC_Q_0ixCTU Curious if you agree — where do you think the cutoff is between what a business should own vs rent?

AI is saving us time… so why are we somehow busier? I went down a rabbit hole on this after seeing the new AI productivity data. AI can write the email, summarize the meeting, generate the report, build the presentation — all dramatically faster. But I think we’re making a huge mistake: We’re using AI to speed up workflows that probably shouldn’t exist in the first place. So instead of getting our time back, we just produce more. More reports. More emails. More versions. More things to review. I broke down why this happens, and the 3 questions I think every business should ask before automating another workflow: → What should AI do? → What should humans still do? → What should disappear completely? That third question is the one most people skip. Would love to hear what you guys think — has AI actually given you time back, or has it just increased how much you get done? 🎥 AI Saves You 8 Hours a Week. So Why Are We Busier? Watch the video on YouTube

I went pretty deep down a rabbit hole on Anthropic’s economics this week. They’ve been one of the loudest companies warning about how powerful AI is becoming and pushing for more safeguards. But there’s another incentive that I don’t think gets talked about enough: Heavy AI users are expensive. Really expensive. So I started looking at the overlap between Anthropic’s safety messaging, usage limits, and the actual economics of serving people who hammer Claude all day. I ended up making a full breakdown because there was way more to it than I expected: https://youtu.be/s1T9eaGt4lw Curious what everyone here thinks... how much of the push toward tighter limits is safety, and how much is just the economics of running these models?