January 22, 2024

Why I Chose Hugo for My Personal Website

Jan 22, 2024

c571516f2e3a1f141d3763ed11ee2b8e_MD5

Having my own website is essential to me.

Being an online lurker for so long, I have often regretted not contributing more to the internet space rather than just passive consumption. However, I disliked the idea of posting on social media and contributing towards data-hungry big tech corporations.

Hence, building a site on a custom domain is my way of carving out a small slice of the internet I can call my own.

I have tried many other platforms in the past (read below), but Hugo fits my current needs for now.

Hugo: My Current Cms Of Choice

To be honest, I LOVE the platform! Here are a few reasons why:

• Hugo is blazingly fast. Hugo’s rendering speed is measured in milliseconds. I’ve seen full-blown websites being generated faster than a pro CS gamer clicking heads. SEO benefits aside, I just like how snappy the website is, which reminds me of the great UI/UX of many Mac apps.

• Makes me feel like a badass. I love the idea of tinkering around Git, HTML/YAML files & using the terminal despite not being a programmer. Yet, Hugo is very accessible even to non-technical people if you follow the instructions carefully and understand what’s going on.

• Obsidian is a core part of my daily life. Hugo uses markdown files, which I can load into my vault. With a git community plugin, I can publish content easily without leaving Obsidian!

• It’s free to set up. By hosting HUGO on Cloudflare Pages and using analytics tracking tools like Umami, I don’t have to pay a single penny beyond purchasing a domain name. (Highly recommend Namecheap.)

• There’s endless opportunities for tinkering. With thousands of free, open-source themes on Github, I can change the look and style of my site quickly without migrating the entire site.

• I like publishing pure text blog posts. Hugo has plenty of themes that are built for this. Many other platforms are designed in such a way that requires some level of commitment for images — even if it’s a quick royalty-free one. I’m a writer, not a designer.

But there are a few minor annoyances with the platform as well.

• A mid-high learning curve. I can see why Hugo can be intimidating for many people. It still took me a while to understand how to set everything up. Sure, I can build a HUGO website in less than 2 minutes, but it takes a lot of troubleshooting to get it the way I want it.

• There’s no default email-newsletter support. This feature comes by default on platforms like Ghost, Beehiiv or Substack. But it is entirely possible to create an RSS to email newsletter system. I heard good things about Brevo.

Hugo is the latest — but by no means the only website creation platform I’ve used. Here are the other options that I’ve tried in chronological order.

Notion & Super.so

Story

Mid-way through the pandemic, Notion had upturned how I created content, which at that point was primarily Google Docs. Beyond quickly organising and creating professional-looking documents, it allowed users to share documents publicly.

Naturally, I created my first personal website with it. This opened the doors to Notion → website translation services such as super.so. Since then, Notion has introduced their own “Sites” feature.

What I like

Notion really knows how to strike a fine balance between customisation & ease-of-use.

The way it handles images, text and page navigation… It opened up many doors that were previously tedious, cumbersome and impossible in traditional word processors.

It’s very easy for users to create a nice-looking website without any prior technical knowledge, which led me down the rabbit hole I’m currently in.

What I disliked

The reason I stopped using Notion has less to do with it being a terrible CMS, and more to do with problems with Notion as a PKM in itself.

It requires an internet connection. It’s powerful, but also bloated. Pages took a long time to load. I no longer enjoyed writing on Notion, and have since moved to other writing tools.

As a CMS, Notion’s SEO and website loading speed is not great. It wasn’t designed to be a website creation tool after all. But the real deal-breaker was the lack of custom domain support. It defeats the whole “carve out a corner of the internet” point of me starting a website.

Substack & Ghost

Story

At this point, I’ve learned about the importance of audience ownership.

Being a novice marketer, my attention was primarily focused on website visits and social media engagements. A sizable chunk of marketing dollars are essentially spent “renting” traffic and eyeballs from Big Tech companies like Meta and Google.

This idea bothered me. I then turned my attention to newsletters — a form of audience engagement that’s more loyal, intimate, and resilient to the ebb and flow of the social media trends.

That’s how I got to know Substack and Ghost.

What I like Substack & Ghost are built for and by writers; The website design, how posts are displayed, and the community sharing aspects are what made Substack a great place for journalists and casual bloggers.

Best of all, you can run a website on either platform for free or at a very low cost. It’s also the first platform I came across that merges both the idea of blogging and newsletters.

Ghost is just Substack with more customisation options, self-hosting capabilities and fewer community functions. I’ve tried it for a bit, found the theme system too cumbersome and expensive, and ultimately left Ghost after the trial period.

What I dislike There’s nothing inherently bad about Substack as a platform for writers — I just don’t think it’s the right platform for me.

Writing on Substack made me feel that my website’s fate is heavily dependent on the platform. Sure, I could export a.csv file containing my email subscribers and migrate easily…but something about the platform made me uneasy.

I was conscious about the Nazi Controversy, and was paying attention to how the website ranked in Google Trends within my country. I found myself comparing Substack and Medium a whole lot, and worrying about the platform more than actually creating content.

I dislike how most Substack websites look the same and are part of a singular ecosystem. Great for readers, but not for someone who wants their site to be unique.

I dislike how readers are bombarded with requests to subscribe from the get-go.

I dislike how I still need to add featured images to posts to make it “complete”.

I dislike how badly the domain performs on SEO.

Again, it’s mostly a ‘me problem’. Substack is still what I’d recommend for most people.

WordPress

Story Ah, ye old reliable. There’s nothing to be said about WordPress, because its history and prominence speak for itself.

WordPress’ customisability, matured ecosystem and permanence is what drew me into the platform. After getting bored with Substack, I took a whole weekend to study plugins and hosting options to make my own website.

What I like.

It’s the go-to platform if you want your website to last for decades. Website development used to be hard, but is now easier thanks to drag and drop systems like Gutenberg and Elementor.

WordPress is extremely cheap to host and run. You can customise it however you want with the plugin marketplace.

But…that’s about it.

What I dislike

It’s no secret that most website developers hate using WordPress because it’s such a legacy system to work with.

The backend UI/UX is horrible. I dislike the idea of logging into my /wp-admin/ account to publish anything. There are ways around this, such as using APIs and tools like Ulysses, but it’s finicky.

WordPress can load at the speed of light or crawl like a bug depending on your level of technical expertise. Fiddling around with Caches, CDNs and image optimisation is annoying.

WordPress reminds me of Notion. Many people hate it, but it’s a system that works. There’s only a few systems in the market like it, so we have no choice but to use it.

Obsidian Publish

Story I LOVE Obsidian. I’ve been disloyal — flirting with Apple Notes, Mem, Bear, Capacities, AnyType.io, Noteplan and countless others — but I always return to Obsidian.

I used Obsidian Publish for a few days, but the subscription price at $8 per month and lack of comprehensive customisation options made me look elsewhere.

What I like

The best thing about Obsidian Publish is that obsidian.md files translate perfectly onto the web. What you see on obsidian is exactly what you get on the web.

Plus, it’s integrated directly into Obsidian which means publishing is as simple as marking a note as ‘For Publishing’.

What I dislike

The price is quite steep for the service it provides, especially compared to actually hosting your own website.

The customisation options are very limited, from aesthetic choices (themes), to functionality with widgets and plugins. Other publishing systems are far more flexible and customizable.

In Conclusion

There’s no “Perfect” CMS; only one that evolves according to your needs.

Will I stick with Hugo long-term? Who knows.

Is it bad that I spent hours switching between platforms? I don’t care. It’s my website and I can do whatever I want with it. Plus, I’ve learnt a just by tinkering with these systems and had loads of fun.

What’s your CMS of choice? I’d love to know!

There’s a comment section below.

career CoThinking productivity technology

January 20, 2024

How Competitive Shooters Made Me a Better Leader

Jan 20, 2024

e7a9524decde7141622931c680dfc972_MD5

It’s easy to chalk up e-sports as just children’s pastime. But like any other sport, it takes a lot of practice, skills, and talent to be highly competitive—even more so within a team setting.

After more than a decade of playing competitive shooters, I come to appreciate the mental gymnastics, teamwork and quick decision-making needed to reach the top of the leaderboards. These values have also helped shaped my career as a B2B marketing manager.

If traditional sports coaches can espouse the values of hard work, patience and skilful manoeuvring, it’s strange that society views gamers as the opposite: Lazy, slobs and toxic. I mean… such groups do exist, perhaps more so percentage-wise than other communities.

But let’s put that aside and focus on the sweaty tryhard gamer values we can extract from this thought experiment. Hopefully, making these comparisons can help with your career aspirations as well.

💡 Granted, this is not an 🍎 to 🍎 comparison. One is a job, and the other is straight-up procrastination. I will also switch between gaming and corporate analogies a lot, so try to keep up!

🚫 Working With “Bad” Teammates

Competitive solo queue is a cesspool 💩. Imagine teaming up with 4 random strangers who:

• Have little team commitment.

• Don’t speak the same language.

• Are either children, toxic, drunk, or high.

• Puts personal ego above winning the game.

The worst part is: You’re stuck with them until the match is over, unless the team abandons the game and quits.

It’s not that different from a workplace now, is it?

And yet, winning the game is a must; For your sanity, MRR points and career ambitions all depend on it. We all wish to be paired with teammates who are competent and rational, but we’re usually stuck with what we’ve got and have to live with it.

If you’re unfortunate enough to have “bad” teammates, the trick is to work around the team, rather than with or against them. Instead of fighting both friend and foe, use each player’s selfish tendencies to further the team’s goals.

• Do you have teammates who only rush sites and die? Don’t crowd the chokepoint and yell “Go! Go! Go!”. Instead, use them as bait and lurk around.

• Do you have passive teammates who only hold angles? Don’t force a fight, sit with them and run out the clock. Instead, take map control and gather intel,

Just because the team doesn’t do what we expect, it doesn’t mean that they’re bad at the game. Learn how to differentiate play styles from competencies!

One player might be comfortable smoking sites and playing at the back lines; Others like to flash and entry-frag. Understanding and working around your team’s intricate habits is more important than outsmarting the enemy team under most circumstances.

The same goes for work settings. For a domain as diverse as marketing, you might have introverts who prefer to commit hours on end producing content; Some are extroverts better suited for public relations. So don’t go around forcing tasks upon people who are not good at the job in the name of “learning”. Let their strengths shine instead.

🔈Team Communication

Watch any VOD or YouTube gameplay, and pay attention to how professional players communicate within solo queue lobbies. Their call-outs generally fall into 3 categories:

• Observations —“2 at B,” “Bomb’s down,” “Footsteps A.”

• Intention —“Flashing market,” “Smoking tree”

• Requesting help —“Can you flash here? Ping,” “Peek with me.”

Notice how c l e a n 👌 these call-outs are. No fluff, no useless intel and no nonsense. Anything more would increase confusion, cloud judgement, and take away precious seconds that will cost the entire match.

More important is the dangers of NOT giving out these call-outs. The rest of the team would essentially operate blind; unable to adapt to the ever-changing circumstances, worrying if there’re enemies behind every nook and corner.

In my department, daily standups are our form of call-outs. Everyone takes turns sharing what they’ve done yesterday, their plans for today, and blockers for their tasks.

The session takes 5 minutes per person max. No filler; No hour-long discussions. In less than 20 minutes, everyone is on the same page and can focus on their deep work sessions for the day. Any work obstacles are highlighted daily so that managers can go around fixing them. Anything extra would warrant a separate meeting, with a proper agenda and meeting minutes.

👑 Role of In-Game Leaders

Statistically speaking, most in-game leaders (IGL) play the tank or support within teams, but rarely the DPS.

Our contribution comes from timing, positioning, and flexibility in assisting the team—not clicking heads. Because, like any workplace, team-based competitive games are designed with hard limits towards solo carries.

There are surprisingly a lot of new studies in this area. Szilágyi (2022) found that the presence of leadership within teams increases the likelihood of winning. Teammates also prefer IGLs who are “supportive” and “participative”. Tucker (2022) found that well-performing teams also have a distributed and collective leadership structure. Even if someone is in charge, everyone gets to make their own calls.

Hence, having ownership is important within the team. Teammates should be given the autonomy to own their respective roles and tasks, along with the relevant rewards and mistakes. More importantly, their autonomy shouldn’t be encroached upon unless they have royally screwed up.

Beyond executing strategy, as managers, we make sure that the team has the resources needed to do their job.

From smoking sites to troubleshooting IT permission issues, we ensure that there’s little standing in their way. If my team is worrying about stupid problems, I’m not doing my job well enough.

There’s no room for solo plays within a team setting. An S-tier graphic designers are like caffeinated teenagers with high K/D ratios. They are good at their jobs, but skills alone can’t carry the team towards the win. Both can’t deal with intense encounters, and both will eventually burn out.

In a way, our primary responsibility is to offer support, occasional guidance and trust the team to do their job. It sounds simple on paper, but many times a manager would step in too early and override the teammate’s judgement.

Your teammate has made a call. The best we can do is work around it and see what happens. Harsh criticisms should come after the fact.

🧸 Role of Fun

I think that competitive video games are an excellent illustration of Cal Newport’s idea of passion and motivation resulting from talent, and not the prerequisite to talent.

I remember playing Sudden Attack for the first time. The server was full of Korean players, so you know you’re about to get wrecked. It was David versus Goliath, and I rarely survived beyond the 30-second mark.

I didn’t “get” FPS games coming from vanilla Runescape, Maplestory and Pokemon. “Is dying over and over again really that fun?”

But things took a turn when I got my first double kill and triple kill. The developers took the effort to make every headshot chunky and bloody—it was morbidly fun. I’ve started ranking second place in a five-man team, and then first place then got a 2:1 K/D ratio three games in a row. Confidence grew, and an idea surfaced. “Maybe I’m good at this game after all”.

Conversely, stagnancy is a motivational killer. Many streamers actually hate playing competitive games after a while, and most of them are not at the top-tier ranks. Yeah, they’re good. But they don’t practice, analyse their games, nor invest in training. They play to entertain.

The same maps, same weapons, same strategies, same unlucky lottery of teammates—it’ll get real old, real fast, real quick. To a certain point, games become routine work, just like a full-time job.

The People I’ve Come Across Who Love Their Day Jobs Have Only One Thing in Common

They’re damn good at what they do.

Work fulfilment mainly comes from deep-seated confidence in one’s own abilities. Our ability to do good work is the source of pride and jealousy which fuels the competitive spirit. It’s the boost in motivation when you face against someone better than you, and you go “yeah, I can totally win against that guy”.

This goes beyond motivation—it’s an obsession. Competitive players are chasing after the dopamine rush of being better and getting better. As managers, we just need to coach teammates, offer resources, and build environments that compel them to tryhard.

But unlike video games, there are no immediate feedback systems for the workplace. There’s no scoreboard a tab button away, nor jingles and announcements after a winning match. There’s no dopamine rush for doing a good job; Only immense dread when you underperform instead.

In a marketing team, imagine tiring yourself out after consecutive exhibitions and doing a stellar job. Instead of feeling accomplished, your bosses decide to “reward” you with more exhibition work because you’ve done such a great job. There is no basking in the afterglow of your success, no end in sight, no sense of progression. There is no carrot, only the stick.

That’s why I heavily emphasize post-mortems within my department. Everyone needs to take part through sticky notes on a Miro board, analysing the campaign outcome, each other, and mostly themselves. Successful campaigns are celebrated with drinks and Starbucks Frappuccinos (for my Muslim colleagues). Shortcomings need to be brought up and analysed. Good individual performance needs to be documented so that I can help them apply for a raise.

In short, a department’s reward systems need to be clearly defined. Employees can’t be expected to “know” if they’re doing a good job. As managers, we need to implement systems to recognise and highlight employee achievements. Because how else are you going to make work engaging, rewarding, fulfilling, and fun?

🎲 Role of Luck

Competitive FPS may be a skills-based game, but we always underestimate the deceptive role of luck.

At the intermediate levels of gameplay, it’s about isolating 1-on-1 gunfights to win 50/50 odds. The bigger your gun relative to theirs, the better your odds are. Sure, you can totally win against a 2 man gank if you’re talented enough, but is it worth the 66/33 dice roll?

Tryharding is all about squeezing every little advantage and tilting the odds to your favour through better guns, positioning and strategy. There’s always the most optimum rotation route, the most optimal decision to make. Deviate from it, and you’ll reduce your chances of winning. To a certain point, competitive shooters become speed-running gambling fiesta.

But at the higher ranks, competing teams are equally skilled mentally, physically and strategically. Even when executing the “right” decision perfectly, there’s a chance that you’ll still screw up and die. Does that mean that you’ve made a “wrong” choice?

The same goes for marketing campaigns. We have no control over market conditions, the economy or buyers’ intent. We can only prepare ourselves to capture consumer demand if it surfaces, using whatever levers we can push and pull.

A well-planned, stellar exhibition may not yield any customers, while a simple signup form can convert a boatload of leads. The world just works weirdly like that.

So what separates the professionals and amateurs? It is their ability to commit and operate under this veil of uncertainty. They can bounce back quickly from an unlucky streak and not overheat when they lucked out. They face each new round with the cold, hard objectivity that it warrants, shedding behind useless emotions that interfere with the ultimate goal: winning the game.

Hence, for marketing campaigns, we can only plan, execute, measure, and move on—to a new campaign with a new fresh pair of eyes. The rest is truly up to lady luck.

Us small enterprise bronze players can’t compete with international diamond players, but that doesn’t mean we can’t win matches. Sure, they may have better market reports, fancier websites and larger booths. But those come at significant costs, and they’re still operating under levels of uncertainty as well.

We only have ourselves to compete with; Not the market nor our competitors.

---

🧠 Closing Thoughts

Truth be told, I rarely game now after I’ve transitioned into the Apple ecosystem since 2022. I’m glad that I did so too, because it forced me to cut down on my gaming time—the god-awful time sinkhole that it is.

In a way, this writeup is a goodbye to the childish gamer side of me. Perhaps looking at gaming through this lens is a way for me to justify the thousands of hours I’ve sunk into it.

I now replace one addiction with another: A.I. productivity apps and note-taking systems. At least, it’s an obsession that helps me get paid better.

Subscribe to my blog/newsletter to get bi-weekly updates! Perhaps I can write another piece on gaming once I finally able to afford a PS5.

Cheers, 🙃

Jotham.

Recommended channels to follow:

• SovereignGuides

• Woohoojin

• Shroud

• Peak

career CoThinking entrepreneurship

January 14, 2024

Will ChatGPT Replace Writers

Jan 14, 2024

982100bf106ffb64c02b8152cb66a69b_MD5

A few weeks back, an old friend asked me this over some pints. “Do you think ChatGPT will replace us one day?” Both of us are from the creative industry, initially assumed to be technologically resilient. But like truck drivers with self-driving vehicles, it is now our heads at risk of the chopping block.

By now, most readers are well aware of the disruptive capabilities of ChatGPT. OpenAI and their counterparts have been making inroads within the generative A.I. space, mainly for text, images and code. With rapid development within this space, is it a cause for concern for the average knowledge worker?

New Guns, Same Battlefield

Despite what pundits might say, generative A.I. at its current state will not replace creators but serve as a supplementary tool within existing workflows. Article writing using ChatGPT, for instance, still needs human involvement to craft deliberate prompts and scrutinise the output, which includes fact-checking. What was once an hours-long writing endeavour can be shortened to just mere minutes.

To put things in perspective, asking ChatGPT to replace the writing process is like having a Thermomix or InstantPot replace my mother’s cooking. It is like believing traditional Japanese knife makers will be put out to pasture just because a factory has opened up nearby, producing thousands of knives in a single day.

I agree ChatGPT will affect large swathes of the content creation industry; but mass-produced, low-quality content has always been primed for disruption. Serious writers have grappled with content mills, where regiments of writers get paid per word by the cent. Similarly, reputable artists have also struggled with copyright issues and low-effort copycats.

This new threat of mass-produced content is not new, but has merely shifted to a digital landscape. Many will pay more for quality content, but they just need a reason to do so. While grammatically correct, articles produced by ChatGPT are generic, lack substance, and most likely factually incorrect. Although the competitive landscape has drastically intensified, it is not a battleground we creators are unfamiliar with.

How the Sausage Is Made

The truth is that A.I. has always been highly disruptive in niche industries. Microsoft’s integrated development environment (IDE) VSCode, has a co-pilot program that auto-completes code, trained using data collected by popular code-hosting platform, GitHub. Auto-transcribing services built into Google Meet and Microsoft Teams have also put manual transcribers out of business, even disrupting incumbent auto-transcribers like Otter.ai.

ChatGPT is not unique in this manner. The only reason it stands out is because of the leaps in capabilities compared to its predecessor, but more importantly, it brought A.I. tools to the mainstream. This is thanks to its high accessibility and low learning curve. Anybody can sign up for an account and start conversing with ChatGPT immediately. The responses given seem intellectual, and the A.I. gives an illusion of sentience, but it is not.

In overly-simplified terms, ChatGPT is a language model that conducts a series of predictions based on given user prompts and conversational history. Think of it as repeatedly tapping the auto-suggested word on your smartphone when typing a text message, except that the sentence generated actually makes sense.

ChatGPT is incapable of “understanding” the semantics behind the prompts it has given, nor the words it has generated. To it, words are just ones and zeros transformed using word embedding techniques, pieced together using statistical likelihoods. It appears intelligent because it excels in its predictive capabilities and assumptions, learnt through petabytes of trained data scraped from the internet. It is not an understanding machine but a predictive one.

Therefore, ChatGPT struggles with face-checking because it does not comprehend what “truth” is (this might change with the integration of additional modules). It is also why conversations with ChatGPT will gradually become weird to outright disturbing as the conversation drags on, where the multitude of inputs causes the deep learning model to go out of whack.

It Boils Down to the State of A.I. Developmen

Source: Vincy Khandpur & Shikhar Sahni

While I’m still assured of my job security, my opinion might change drastically depending on the state of A.I. language model development.

Essentially, technological life-cycles exist on a sigmoid curve. If we are at the middle or tail end of technological innovation, our circumstances would be like the internet in the 1990s. This infrastructure will give rise to companies competing to develop applications leveraging while the technology gradually matures and stabilises. The use cases might differ, but the A.I. equivalent of Napster and AOL will rise and fall, paving the way for even larger corporations in the future.

However, if we are still at the early growth stage of this technology, its potential for disruption will cause heavy whiplash. The companies with the most resources will reign supreme. A.I. will benefit the many, and impoverish the most, while only enriching the few. I have mentioned the idea of integrating fact-checking modules into ChatGPT, but this is opening a can of worms. Who gets to decide what is factually correct and wrong? How will the results inform and direct human decisions? The topic of ethical A.I. has been stuck in the regulatory inbox for the longest time, and hopefully ChatGPT has exacerbated the issue, making it too hard to ignore for authorities globally.

Adapting to Change

So what does this mean for regular Joes and small to mid-sized companies?

For professional knowledge workers, I highly recommend embracing premium digital tools for everyday use. In fact, I would argue that A.I. development within the productivity space is far more interesting than what ChatGPT has to offer.

As an example, Reclaim.ai and Motion auto-schedule your daily tasks unto your calendar based on the task’s priority, estimated duration, and deadline. If a task takes longer than usual, or a meeting gets cancelled at the last minute, the algorithm will readjust your calendar accordingly, letting you know what needs to be done at any given time.

For avid note-takers, Mem.ai uses natural language processing (NLP) to surface similar notes to the one you are working on, introducing a folder-less and tag-less way of organising thousands of notes. It is also the first platform that offers GPT functionality trained using your provided data besides the whole internet. This means that it can offer personalised book recommendations based on your book reviews, or come up with unique marketing campaigns based on existing meeting notes.

Companies should also increase the cycles of tool adoption and abandonment. With the switch away from licensed software to monthly and yearly subscriptions, it is now easier and in fact, cheaper to do so. This involves empowering small teams with the agency to choose their own software that is best suited for the job.

For instance, my current department uses Notion for project management and As the single source of truth. Canva replaced Adobe Suite as our design tool of choice, while Miro and Mindmeister became the default for brainstorming and post-mortem purposes. We also migrated away from locally stored phone contacts to a proper customer relationship management (CRM) tool.

Just introducing these tools into the workplace is not enough. Change management exercises involve introducing liberal yet comprehensive policies that balance work efficiency, data security and future-proofing. Not to mention getting employee buy-ins, training regimes, and migration exercises.

Although the initial process may seem tedious, the benefits of having an agile tool adoption environment pay dividends in the long run. In fact, many of the tools my department adopted do not even have built-in A.I. functionalities.

That is because well-designed software provides more holistic features and greater user experience than the status quo. It makes teammates more productive and more comfortable adopting A.I. tools in the future. More importantly, it makes working five days a week a more pleasant experience. If Asian countries can fuss over elegant stationeries for everyday paperwork, why can’t knowledge workers be fussy over the digital tools we use?

I emphasise this point because many companies I have come across are insistent on utilising legacy tools. While the industry has already shifted to the cloud for most document handling, some are insistent on using software built in the 1990s. I can understand if there are compelling reasons to do so, such as backwards compatibility or regulatory requirements, but more often than not, this is not the case. Why give farmers hoes to till the land when the industry has transitioned into tractors?

Many believe that technology is developing faster than humans can adapt, but I disagree. Humans have always excelled at adoption, being the key reason we are successful as a species. The cycles of tool adoption are getting shorter, with ChatGPT being the first to hit 100 million users in a matter of days. These 100 million users are not geniuses but everyday folks.

Knowledge workers today are no longer measured by just the skills they have or the experience they have garnered; but their ability to embrace and scrutinise new tools while being able to unlearn, learn and relearn new workflows and technologies available at hand. We are trying to adapt to a new age of A.I. digital tools.

career CoThinking productivity technology