写作和不写作

文摘   2024-10-28 20:01   北京  
昨天把段永平传看完,对他的了解都是在垃圾短视频上边,而且都还是起码20年前的视频进行混剪。书中介绍的更为详细,聊两个印象非常的例子:
1.他给投资者的忠告:无论什么时候卖都不要和买的成本联系起来。该卖的理由可能有很多,唯一不该用的理由就是“我已经赚钱了”。不然的话,就很容易把好不容易找到的好公司在便宜的价钱就卖了。买的时候也一样,买的理由可以有很多,但这只股票曾经到过什么价位最好不要作为你买的理由。
2.他说善于投资的人要集中投资回报率较高的企业,几乎不需要做任何考虑的事情,重要的是寻找好的篮子,而不是担心篮子里的鸡蛋太多,把钱投资到其他不那么赚钱的公司,在逻辑上就是错乱的。把钱投在高价值的企业身上,本身就是一件非常稳妥的事情,人的一辈子只要把握少数的几次甚至一次机会就可以了。
其实这两点都会有一些反逻辑的,归其原因,段在聊的内容是投资,当我们去设置一个指标的止盈标准的时候,那么这笔交易就变成了投机。鸡蛋放在不同篮子里边好处是平摊风险,不过这也不是投资,这更像是理财。
对于我来说投资已经简化的不能再简化了,听完这个思路之后,用逆向思维来想哪些资产未来会因为暴涨或者价格达到预期自己会卖掉?很明显在我为数不多的投资组合里边还是有那么一些的,所以我准备不等“合适”的价格再出手,即刻就清仓。
另外一个启发是,为什么要选择大的篮子,因为大公司的包容性非常强,我很早之前非常看好潮玩,所以我囤了一堆molly毕竟这是泡泡玛特的王牌,结果这个ip没跑出来,现在这批库存还在吃灰。
最近半年labubu忽然火了起来,泡泡玛特股价上也有所体现,从最低位的10块左右涨到了现在的70块,对于潮玩这个赛道来说,大篮子是看好就要去买股票,小篮子是molly、labubu这种ip,无论加上什么属性和定位这都是小篮子。
……


今天看了 YC 创始人 Paul Graham 最新的一篇文章《写作与不写作》。他预言,由于 AI 写作的影响,再过几十年,能写作的人将变得非常稀少。这种趋势有点类似于工业化前的时代,那时大多数人因为体力劳动而身体强壮,而现在如果想要强壮,就得主动去健身。
同理,未来的社会依然会有聪明的人存在,但这些人只会是那些选择主动思考和锻炼思维的人,看完之后又多了一个写日更的理由。
这个内容还是热乎的,分享给大家原文内容(附翻译):

英文原版《WRITES AND WRITE-NOTS》

I'm usually reluctant to make predictions about technology, but I feel fairly confident about this one: in a couple decades there won't be many people who can write.

One of the strangest things you learn if you're a writer is how many people have trouble writing. Doctors know how many people have a mole they're worried about; people who are good at setting up computers know how many people aren't; writers know how many people need help writing.

The reason so many people have trouble writing is that it's fundamentally difficult. To write well you have to think clearly, and thinking clearly is hard.

And yet writing pervades many jobs, and the more prestigious the job, the more writing it tends to require.

These two powerful opposing forces, the pervasive expectation of writing and the irreducible difficulty of doing it, create enormous pressure. This is why eminent professors often turn out to have resorted to plagiarism. The most striking thing to me about these cases is the pettiness of the thefts. The stuff they steal is usually the most mundane boilerplate — the sort of thing that anyone who was even halfway decent at writing could turn out with no effort at all. Which means they're not even halfway decent at writing.

Till recently there was no convenient escape valve for the pressure created by these opposing forces. You could pay someone to write for you, like JFK, or plagiarize, like MLK, but if you couldn't buy or steal words, you had to write them yourself. And as a result nearly everyone who was expected to write had to learn how.

Not anymore. AI has blown this world open. Almost all pressure to write has dissipated. You can have AI do it for you, both in school and at work.

The result will be a world divided into writes and write-nots. There will still be some people who can write. Some of us like it. But the middle ground between those who are good at writing and those who can't write at all will disappear. Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write.

Is that so bad? Isn't it common for skills to disappear when technology makes them obsolete? There aren't many blacksmiths left, and it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Yes, it's bad. The reason is something I mentioned earlier: writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing. You can't make this point better than Leslie Lamport did:

If you're thinking without writing, you only think you're thinking.

So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too.

This situation is not unprecedented. In preindustrial times most people's jobs made them strong. Now if you want to be strong, you work out. So there are still strong people, but only those who choose to be.

It will be the same with writing. There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.


中文翻译版
我通常不太愿意对科技做出预测,但对这一点我相当有信心:在未来几十年里,会写作的人将会很少。
如果你是一个作家,你会学到一个非常奇怪的事实,那就是有很多人对写作感到困难。医生知道有多少人担心自己的痣;擅长设置电脑的人知道有多少人不会操作电脑;而作家知道有多少人需要写作上的帮助。
这么多人觉得写作困难的原因在于写作本质上很难。要写得好,你必须清晰地思考,而清晰地思考本身就不容易。
然而,写作却渗透到许多工作中,并且职位越高,通常需要写作的要求就越多。
这两种强大的相反力量——对写作的普遍期望和写作本身难以简化的难度——产生了巨大的压力。这就是为什么一些著名教授经常被发现抄袭的原因。对于我来说,这些案例中最引人注目的地方在于他们的窃取行为是多么微不足道。他们剽窃的内容通常是最普通的陈词滥调——这种东西即使是写作能力一般的人也能轻松写出来。这意味着他们甚至连“写作能力一般”都达不到。
直到最近,这些对立力量产生的压力还没有方便的释放途径。你可以花钱请人代写,比如肯尼迪(JFK),或者剽窃,比如马丁·路德·金(MLK),但如果你无法购买或偷窃文字,你就得自己写。因此,几乎所有被期待要写作的人都不得不学会如何写作。
但现在情况不同了,人工智能彻底改变了这一切,几乎所有对写作的压力都消失了。在学校和工作中,你都可以让人工智能为你写作。
其结果是,世界将分裂成“会写作的人”和“不会写作的人”。仍然会有一些人会写作,因为有些人就是喜欢写作。但那些会写作的人与完全不会写作的人之间的中间地带将不复存在。不再有优秀的写作者、普通写作者和完全不会写作的人,而只有优秀写作者和完全不会写作的人。
这很糟糕吗?当某项技能因科技进步而过时时,它消失不是很常见吗?比如,现在几乎没有铁匠了,但这似乎也不是问题。
是的,这很糟糕。原因在于我之前提到的:写作就是思考。事实上,有一种思考方式只有通过写作才能实现。莱斯利·兰波特(Leslie Lamport)对此的描述再恰当不过了:
如果你在没有写作的情况下思考,你只不过是在假装自己在思考。
因此,一个被分为“会写作的人”和“不会写作的人”的世界比看上去更加危险。这将是一个被分为“会思考的人”和“不会思考的人”的世界。我知道自己想成为哪一类人,我敢打赌你也一样。



我的其他文章:
避免受害者心态
珠海CPG复盘
如何点菜

紫菜同学
解决10w年轻人的副业刚需