|
|
|
|
|
by bwfan123
11 days ago
|
|
> friction = focus, focus = product AI tools have put friction where it should be - by eliminating incidental friction. By incidental friction I mean, things that were really not ambiguous, but were made so due to lack of access to resources. As an example, if i needed to navigate, I used a paper map. There was friction in pulling out a map, planning a route etc. This took time. With digital mapping apps this sort of incidental friction is not there. Real friction is inherent ambiguity. For example, what product does the market need ? By eliminating incidental friction, AI allows us to focus on the smallest hard-problem where there is real-friction. |
|
The wrinkle that needs to be added is that there are no truly universal rules as to what counts for incidental vs ambiguous friction - the definitions are relative to individual/project goals. I am working with some scientific instruments to map out chemical data, and 3d modeling is needed. I don’t particularly care about 3d modeling - it is incidental to me. The chemistry is the focal point. So the STL files are vibe coded so I can keep my focus on chemistry. But if I were working for the latest marvel movie, the reverse would be true. The actual chemistry would need to fit the script and the visual effect intended. To a scientist the visualization just needs to be good enough. To the film director, the world building physics and chemistry instead become the supporting actor. The challenge introduced by AI is that in ruthlessly eliminating incidental friction, you are being deliberate about what you choose not to learn. This is fine at a task level - but how many of us “found” our current expertise through incidental friction in the first place? I never wanted to do chemistry, I went to school for something else. But incidental friction led to discovery. That is my biggest worry, particularly for students and early career folks.