This is one of those things I do not really like writing after absorbing everything I read. It happened to me with a podcast Peter McCormack had with Michael Saylor, which I initially had playing in the background during a gym routine, but which ended up becoming a serious mental workout.

The claim is this: artificial intelligence is devaluing us, and our money is being devalued too. If human capital is being devalued by AI, and soon by robots, while our money continues to be devalued at an average rate of 7% per year, what is left for us? The idea that working hard is enough simply does not work anymore.

Because the economy does not respect nostalgia, nor does it reward models that worked for previous generations. Our parents, for better or worse, prepared us for the market and the economy they knew, not for the future. And that is fine. But today, that must be challenged. If a task can be repeated, systematized, or turned into a process, then it will be automated. This happened to the automotive and construction industries with physical strength, then to manufacturing, and so on.

Today, the new target is intellectual work.

Today, it does not matter how hard-working you are or how dedicated you are; a computer will be better than you. It does not get tired, it does not negotiate, it does not need vacations, it does not have existential crises, and it multiplies the productivity of a company. We used to believe that only physical labor would be affected, and therefore the tractor represented progress. We used to say that the lawyer, the writer, the consultant, the public servant — all of them were protected by intellectual capital, because analysis or technical judgment could not be replaced.

We believed that.

Today, AI does all of thatToday, AI does all of that

Let us not close our eyes. Drafting a contract, creating images, preparing slides for a presentation, doing preliminary research, responding to clients, generating reports — all of this still requires supervision and, of course, all of these tasks are still forms of human work. But the point is economic: if something used to cost me 100 USD to produce, today that same thing can be produced for 5 USD.

And no, it is not that work disappears. But that premium price you could charge for doing it loses power. In a market economy, whatever is not scarce is not highly rewarded. Human capital, by the way, is the set of skills, knowledge, certifications, and experiences that a person accumulates and that makes them valuable in the market.

We must redefine this, not because we want to be contrarian, but because repeatable knowledge is already abundant. Being able to do one single thing is no longer a guarantee of work if AI can do it faster, cheaper, and with equal or superior quality. And no, it is not that studying has lost value. The danger is studying something replaceable. We must study in order to learn how to design processes, not merely obey them.

There are those who train themselves to execute instructions, and those who train themselves to make decisions. There are those who hang their university degree on the wall as a symbolic credential, and those who develop the judgment required to operate in dangerous environments. Human capital has been updated.

Are you preparing yourself?Are you preparing yourself?

Get this tattooed — and I will leave it in Chinese too, in case you want to tattoo that as well:

加班加點或更努力工作並不會為你帶來回報。勝利屬於那些了解這套體系的人。

You will not be rewarded for working longer hours or working harder. Victory belongs to the one who understands the system.

The multiplication of value has become the new framework. It is no longer simply about being one unit of labor.

Saylor also warns that it is not convenient for anyone to compete against technology, and this is obvious. Just look at hundreds of failures that took place when technology arrived and people tried to resist it: scribes against the photocopier, the PDF against the fax, Uber and taxi drivers. The battle was already lost before it even began.

The question must shift from “How can I do better what I have always done?” to “What can I do now that was impossible before?” What I am saying is not easy, and I am aware of what I am saying. But we must consider that generative artificial intelligence is becoming capable of turning one individual into a massive media entity. The work of the future — for example, in writing — will not be writing for the sake of writing. My human application lies in knowing whom I am writing for, with what intention, under what monetization model, among other things.

As a writer, people will pay attention to me because of the questions I ask, the patterns I detect, the risks I interpret, and most importantly, the decisions I am making. Creating content? Even a monkey with AI can do that. But building judgment? That is the central point.

Another thing that attracted me from that conversation was the recognition of distribution as one of the most important things: the audience, the community, the account with real followers, the network of contacts. That is true capital. It is economic infrastructure. Fame, influence, and audience are not superficial phenomena. They are the construction of trust, which is far more valuable than the content itself.

What AI can't doWhat AI can't do

There is an overabundance of images, videos, courses, opinions, and testimonials. What is scarce today is knowing whom to believe. The person with skin in the game, the person who produces and takes responsibility for their products. Trust is not a generative process. It is something inherently human.

And to this we must add the factor we always talk about in this community: ownership.

If salary is the sale of time, and human time competes against machines, then we are literally devaluing our own time. And today, depending exclusively on a single salary is a path toward bankruptcy. Salary is for living, buying food, paying bills, and building a base. Today, with automation, it is insufficient to protect us against automation, monetary inflation, and technological concentration.

Saylor has an idea that blew my mind. AI can replicate work, that is true. However, it cannot replicate scarce and desirable assets. It cannot duplicate land, real estate, intellectual property such as the music rights of The Beatles, brands, audiences, and of course, Bitcoin.

So where should wealth concentrate? In what is difficult to copy, confiscate, dilute, or replace. Sounds familiar, right? Bitcoin, as programmed, verifiable scarcity resistant to political manipulation, has something more than investment-grade qualities. It is a response to a devalued monetary structure.

Now, simply telling you “buy Bitcoin and that’s it, AI will not be able to touch it” would be oversimplifying your life. And it would be disrespectful to you, oh powerful subscriber. That is the kind of laziness typical of someone trying to sell an expensive version of a cheap product. Ownership of assets does not replace the need to develop capabilities. Otherwise, you fall into the classic mistake of the majority: buying satoshis without understanding them.

The new workforceThe new workforce

Having bitcoins without understanding self-custody, volatility, time horizon, security, and a bunch of other factors often ends in tragedy, because it is like buying property without knowing what to do with it. That is why your human capital must continue to grow.

Human capital plus strong money equals protection of your wealth. If there is one thing you should take away, it is that you must rebuild human capital across four dimensions:

1. Judgment: AI produces answers and content. You decide which one is good, bad, or mediocre. Judgment is formed through experience; AI cannot produce experience.
2. Creativity: The creativity I am talking about is the ability to confront a real problem with new solutions. It is not about reinventing the wheel. It is about using AI to sell better, research better, write better, build your community, and a gigantic etcetera.
3. Distribution: This is the professional’s channel, where a small audience is more valuable than an elegant job title. It is not about thousands. It is about dozens of people willing to support your product, idea, or service.
4. Ownership: Human capital will always create assets. Working to consume is the trap. Working to buy more assets — Bitcoin — is the correct transition.

The death of work as a simple commodity is already happening. Lazy ideas die fast because our main challenge is not to compete against robots, but to stop thinking of ourselves as replaceable pieces.

Mechanical, repetitive, and replicable human capital is being purged. In the new era of artificial intelligence, hard work is not a guarantee of wealth. The true guarantee of wealth lies in what to delegate, what to own, and who you want to become for the rest of your days.

Bitcoin is here to help you.

Can you help yourself?

Think about it.