Yesterday's Substack laid out the two clocks running in every vibe-coding interview — the build clock (visible) and the judgment clock (invisible). The thesis goes beyond interviews. Anywhere you're executing in real time — building, demoing, presenting — both clocks are running. Walk me through a moment in the last 30 days where you were busy executing and didn't make your judgment visible enough. What did you do, and what would you have narrated differently?

In the last 30 days — when did you trust your own judgment over what an AI tool was suggesting? Walk me through what you were working on, what the AI proposed, and what you did instead. (Bonus points if you can name what the AI couldn't see that you could.)

What's one decision this week where you trusted your judgment over the playbook? Where the "right answer" by any framework wasn't the one you went with? Walk me through what you weighed. (I'm publishing Sunday on the version of this that costs PMs interviews. If your story is good, I might pull from it — anonymously.) Subscribe to joshatlas.co/substack so the post lands in your inbox when it drops.

As AI takes more of the execution work off engineering's plate, the questions that shape what gets built matter more than ever. PMs are trained to ask "what problem are we solving for whom" before "what should we build." Engineers often aren't. Share a specific question you've started asking — in sprint planning, roadmap reviews, or stakeholder conversations — that changed the direction of a decision. What did it unlock?

Product sense isn't about having better ideas — it's about seeing the real problem before anyone else starts building. This week's LinkedIn and Substack content was all about that shift. Share a specific moment where you stopped before solving, named the tension, and changed the direction of a conversation or decision as a result. What did you notice that others had missed?