Speed is the disease of the AI era: every answer arrives instantly. But writing, investing — these don’t need speed. They need to be thought through.
My method is an adversary mechanism. For any decision, let the pro side speak, then the con side, and argue it back and forth. That’s how I invest: a decision only counts when you and your opposing side have both been persuaded.
One seaside property went through dozens of rounds: rental yield, the friction costs of short-term rentals, the spillover logic. Every rebuttal ground my thinking one notch finer; every persuasion patched a blind spot.
The mechanism’s natural enemy is flattery. AI loves agreeing with you — you float an idea, it answers “great intuition.” What makes it dangerous is the absence of pain in the moment: the flattered side does not bristle, it relaxes. Flattered agreement is a nodding mirror; it can nod all day and never show you the hole in your argument.
So the usage must be concrete: feed your own opposition yourself. Find the strongest counterargument, arm it, let it genuinely win once inside your head — then rule. What survives the ruling is a decision. Whatever never fought the opposition is merely a preference.
The cost of a decision is boredom. Compounding comes from slowness.
