To generate revenue in the new era, one must live in the present moment. The future demands creative individuals rather than those who simply toil away and exert themselves. I am expressing a concept ahead of my time, which most individuals cannot yet comprehend. In plain terms, saving on rent alone will not allow you to buy property, whether the rent increases or not.
This is a fact that many people still cannot accept, particularly those born between the 1950s and 1980s. Some readers will undoubtedly be able to relate to this, as they have realized that they cannot achieve their aspirations or financial freedom with a savings of 300 thousand or even 5 million.
One cannot save their way to financial success. The rich now define success in billions rather than millions. The era has changed, and one must consider a different approach to defining wealth.
Your brain is money; you simply have not been using it.
Someone once argued that they are useful and use their brain every day. However, they have not been using their brain. If Einstein were asked to clean a toilet, he would not do a better job than a cleaning lady. They have never really used their brain. What have they used it for? They have always viewed their brain from the perspective of Prussian education and a production line.
Who are they comparing themselves to? Are they comparing themselves to a robot that works longer hours? Or are they comparing themselves to AI to determine who is faster?
As a graphics illustrator, they have always focused on whether they can draw quickly and effectively rather than what they wish to draw.
They rarely think about what they want to draw.
Over a decade ago, when I was the head of the product department, I hired a designer who held a master's degree in art from a top university. I was dissatisfied with all of her designs, so I explained to her what to draw. I instructed her to put numerous images of luxury products, including celebrities, jewelry, villas, luxury cars, and luxury hotels.
I told her not to draw anything. All she had to do was purchase those items that represent all the expensive items on earth, such as beautiful materials, and after she laid them out, the engineer would hang them up on the photos, and that was all.
This is known as "design" from my perspective, and it was highly successful commercially. My intention in instructing her to do this was to hope that others would associate those expensive items with our product itself in a presentable way.
Just like when you see a Tesla, you think of a cool man launching a rocket.
What is the core value of design in this entire workflow? The "association to luxury" is the core value. The latter is known as design execution. Today, AI can do the latter, and it can assist you with all of its execution, automatically or semi-auto. However, AI cannot do the "design" (or provide briefing on what the customer wants).
Have they ever considered the underlying reason why it cannot replace design?
The fundamental reason is cost, not the cost of design, but the cost of the client: the client's time cost. AI can create ten million plans, all at zero cost. The issue is, does their client have the time to peruse their ten million plans and then pick the one they like?
Do they have time?
No.
So, imagine they are trying to pitch an idea to a big shot. Do they think they'll give them a few minutes to explain? Or a few chances to get it right? The big shots are busy and don't have time to waste. Even though AI can work unlimited overtime, they still need to tell it what to do.
If they give them ten million plans and ask the client which one is good, are they helping them?
This is the real cost, and they must understand it deeply.
But most people haven't had this kind of training or opportunity to pitch it right. Today, most people working in corporations solve problems by learning how to execute rather than what or why to solve (design).
Figuring out what to do is the key.
They see people from the 60s, 70s, and 80s, they are saving money by renting and then buying a house. They try to do the same, but they find out it's not working. That's blindly following what others did. Before they start doing anything, have they thought about whether their method will work or not? Have they thought about exactly what they need to do?
Let me give them an example. Compare the console games we make now to the ones I saw on Nintendo over 20 years ago. Don't they think they're quite different?
Over the past 20 years, we've caught up regarding graphics quality, we've advanced technologically, but why does it still feel like we're lagging?
It's not the picture quality that's the issue; it's the content, the game itself. The original game from 20 years ago was obviously a multi-perspective view. Ours may have imitated big productions, but it feels like they only show a single perspective.
A single perspective is like Snow-white. They feel like there are only two types of creatures in the world: good and bad.
A multi-perspective view is like a complete ecosystem; it's complex, intricate, and has many elements.
In the age of AI, after everything has been virtualized and visualized, they will discover that some people can construct a world that's similar to reality because their source material is multidimensional. But what they've created is like a PowerPoint; it's linear.
Why?
The reason is simple. There were many people playing that game, many people who knew how to play it, and a lot of people who understood it. If they stand in the modern timeline, they got rich (in their mind) 100 years before they did.
Their university students from 100 years ago left too many details and dimensions as if they were explorers and players. Therefore, when they made their productions, there were enough elements and source material to draw on.
It's just like how it's easy to find soccer talent in a country where the majority of kids love playing soccer because of a large base.
We need intricate people, need people willing to immerse themselves in something that they like and being really good at it.
Most young people in Asia follow two paths. One still hopes to copy the '70s model of saving money by eating frugally. The other is complaining every day or doing something disgusting to attract attention.
Actually, they haven't considered that the real value lies in the details. A person who lives in a very restless way cannot see the details of life.
People born in the '90s who can still make money are those who know how to explore and drill deep into what they like/want. This kind of exploration/play doesn't mean getting addicted to a video game and hitting a hatchet every day. It's not just talking about everything and doing nothing.
This kind of exploration/play requires them to calm down and observe the world. Immerse themselves in it and find out what they need to do and what they can do.
AI is just a tool, and the AI era is nothing more than giving everyone 50 free employees. But what determines a company's value has never been the employees; it's always been the entrepreneur/the boss.
Do they know what they want to do? If they don't know, calm down and experience life with their heart, not just their eyes.
