The most effective users of AI tools don't treat them as black boxes. They succeed by using AI to go deeper, understand the process, question outputs, and iterate. In contrast, those who get stuck use AI to distance themselves from the work, avoiding the need to learn or challenge the results.

While many believe AI will primarily help average performers become great, LinkedIn's experience shows the opposite. Their top talent were the first and most effective adopters of new AI tools, using them to become even more productive. This suggests AI may amplify existing talent disparities.

Block's CTO observes a U-shaped curve in AI adoption among engineers. The most junior engineers embrace it naturally, like digital natives. The most senior engineers are also highly eager, as they recognize the potential to automate tedious tasks they've performed countless times, freeing them up for high-level architectural work.

Contrary to the belief that AI levels the playing field, senior engineers extract more value from it. They leverage their experience to guide the AI, critically review its output as they would a junior hire's code, and correct its mistakes. This allows them to accelerate their workflow without blindly shipping low-quality code.

The value you extract from AI follows a formula: Skill x Clarity = Leverage. Your domain expertise (Skill) multiplied by your ability to communicate precise instructions (Clarity) determines the amplification effect (Leverage) you'll receive from any AI tool.

Contrary to popular belief, AI reduces inequality of output. Research shows that AI provides the biggest performance lift to lower-skilled workers, bringing their output closer to that of experts. This elevates the value of human judgment over rote implementation, narrowing the performance and wage gap between top and bottom performers.

Building an AI application is becoming trivial and fast ("under 10 minutes"). The true differentiator and the most difficult part is embedding deep domain knowledge into the prompts. The AI needs to be taught *what* to look for, which requires human expertise in that specific field.

AI coding assistants won't make fundamental skills obsolete. Instead, they act as a force multiplier that separates engineers. Great engineers use AI to become exceptional by augmenting their deep understanding, while mediocre engineers who rely on it blindly will fall further behind.

Recent dips in AI tool subscriptions are not due to a technology bubble. The real bottleneck is a lack of 'AI fluency'—users don't know how to provide the right prompts and context to get valuable results. The problem isn't the AI; it's the user's ability to communicate effectively.