AI Doesn’t Make You Dumber, How to Nail Your Raise, and Most Common Ways People Use Al in Everyday Life
Don't resist the urge.
Good morning
In today's edition, among other things:
AI Doesn’t Make You Dumber
How to Nail Your Raise
Most Common Ways People Use Al in Everyday Life
Does the Spray & Pray Fund Strategy Work?
AI Builder Tech Stack
Checklist: What Enterprise Buyers Want From AI Vendors
The Coming Wave of Acquihires
Onwards!
AI Doesn’t Make You Dumber
Recently, a paper made the headlines all over the media, with them and a lot of “influencers” claiming that using AI is making you dumber. I’ve seen this cycle over and over again. Computers will ruin your life, games will make you kill people, and internet will make you not learn new things. Heard that before?
Here’s Peter Attia:
The study has been publicized across popular press and social media, spreading alarm with headlines suggesting that the use of AI leads to cognitive deficits and a reduced ability to learn and think. But as we’ve seen so many times in the past, important nuance tends to get lost in the midst of media frenzies, and alarm spreads faster than truth. So what did the study really show? And how should it impact how we utilize AI tools going forward?
(…)
The MIT study sought to investigate the effect of using AI versus a search engine or the human brain alone for a series of essay-writing tasks on neural activity and cognitive engagement. A total of 54 participants (18–39 years of age) were tasked with writing three SAT essays, for which they were randomly divided into three groups: 1) a ChatGPT group, in which participants were restricted to using OpenAI’s ChatGPT-4o as a resource; 2) a search engine group, in which participants were prohibited from using any large language model (LLM) AI bots but were permitted use of any other internet resource; and 3) a brain-only group, in which participants had to rely exclusively on their own brains.
(…)
In other words, these results showed that the use of LLMs for essay writing leads to progressive reduction in neural connectivity and poor engagement. Even after a subsequent switch to using their own brains, those who had previously relied on ChatGPT failed to “catch up” to the levels of cognitive engagement achieved by those who had relied on their brains more regularly. The authors interpreted these findings as evidence that reliance on AI tools leads to “the accumulation of cognitive debt,” characterized by reduced critical thinking and creativity.
(…)
This study — which notably has not yet undergone the peer-review process — was designed to evaluate the effect of AI on cognitive engagement, but it was not designed to evaluate effects on the capacity for cognitive engagement. In other words, it may have shown that the use of LLMs reduced the amount of thinking that was required for completion of the essay tasks, but it did not show that the use of LLMs impaired participants’ ability to think.
The availability of AI as a resource meant that the ChatGPT group didn’t need to rely so heavily on their own power of thinking in order to complete the essay, and neural activity in this group diminished even further with repeated sessions not because they were getting dumber, but the exact opposite: analysis of their ChatGPT use showed that they were getting progressively smarter in how to use AI most effectively and efficiently, thus further reducing the amount of “brain power” that was required for each successive essay.
(…)
The brain, like muscle, is something of a “use it or lose it” organ. The more we engage certain circuits, the stronger they become, whereas inactive circuits tend to weaken over time. While this particular study provides no evidence that repeated reliance on AI can result in reduced capacity for critical thinking or creativity, such an effect is certainly plausible — or even probable — if we never “practice” these cognitive skills ourselves and truly offload all such tasks onto AI tools. The risks are likely highest among children and adolescents, as the brain is especially malleable during these periods of development.
Thus, we should approach these tools as a supplement to our own mental abilities rather than as a replacement for them.
(…)
Despite the alarm, this study certainly does not show that the use of AI is rotting your brain or impairing critical thinking skills. (Ironically, the writers responsible for the panicked headlines appear to have failed to apply critical thinking in their own evaluation of this research.)
The “stunning” learning for this paper is that if you are not using your brain regularly, it doesn’t work well regularly. Shocking, I’m telling you.
How to Nail Your Raise
“A masterclass by Vinod Khosla on how to effectively pitch to VCs, covering what investors look for and how to craft a compelling narrative.”
Highly recommended:
Most Common Ways People Use Al in Everyday Life
The Menlo Ventures report is wort reading in full but this part was super interesting.
First, how overall consumers spend their time (regardless of AI usage):
Then, what are the most common ways people use AI in everyday life?
This was also interesting:
Parents are among the most engaged AI users, turning to AI for everyday help.
Among parents with children under the age of 18:
The vast majority of parents (79%) have used AI compared to 54% of non-parents;
29% report using AI every day, nearly twice the rate (1.9x) of non-parents (15%);
Top use cases: 34% for managing childcare, 28% for researching topics of interest, 26% taking and organizing notes;
Millennial parents rank highest: They make up 53% of parents with kids under 18 and are more likely to be working, earning higher incomes.
How to Start your AI-first Transformation Journey
Recommendation for companies from BCG:
Does the Spray & Pray Fund Strategy Work?
Let’s “Roll the universe” 20,000 times. Monte Carlo style.
Run 20,000 times, a $40 million fund invested across 100 mini-bets outperforms a “high-conviction” fund of 20 chunky checks on almost every metric that matters (which is the most common VC strategy).
A model starts every fund with the same $40 million of investable capital, then assumes realistic dilution and exit odds.
Diversified portfolio: 100 checks of $0.4 million each.
Concentrated portfolio: 20 checks of $2 million each.
Results: mean TVPI 2.6× vs. 2.1×; median 2.5× vs. 1.9×; 99.7 % vs. 81.9 % likelihood of at least returning capital; and a 77 % vs. 47 % chance of doubling money.
Only at the 95th percentile—roughly the top 5 % of outcomes—does concentration pull ahead (4.8× vs. 4.0×). In plain English: concentration is a high-beta wager that pays off for the one-in-twenty firm that already expects to win.
If the math is so clear, why do funds and GPs cling to 20-company portfolios:
Narrative: it is easier to raise a fund by claiming a mystical picking ability than by admitting you need 100 tries.
Career risk: a focused portfolio provides more board seats, signaling “value-add” to the next set of LPs.
Workload: 100 relationships mean more midnight Slack messages; 20 feels manageable, even if it lowers survival odds.
Diversification in venture capital is portrayed as “lazy,” when it often involves more sourcing, quicker decision cycles, and ruthless follow-on discipline and that sounds like proper (ad)venture capital.
AI Builder Tech Stack
From Iconiq:
Interesting Analysis and Trends
AI, Agents & Enterprise Transformation
The AI Agent Chasm LINK
AI-Powered R&D, Vibecoding, and Full-Stack Design LINK
What the Top AI Startups Are Doing LINK
Meta’s AI Strategy LINK
The Rise of the AI-Native Employee LINK
Insights for Enterprise AI Builders LINK
Tidemark AI Playbook LINK
Checklist: What Enterprise Buyers Want From AI Vendors LINK
The Age of AI: GTM Learnings From ICONIQ’s 2025 Report LINK
Avatars: The Next Interface is a Face LINK
GTM, Sales & Growth
State of Go-To-Market 2025 LINK
Your VP of Sales Can’t Save You (AI GTM) LINK
$0–$5M: The Path to Repeatable Revenue LINK
How to Navigate AI Distribution LINK
Seven Product Strategies to Prevent Churn LINK
Startup Models, Talent & Strategy
The Four Chief of Staff Archetypes LINK
Breyer Capital’s Principles for the AI Era LINK
The Playbook for Selling IP After a Startup Fails LINK
Most AI Startups Are Built to Die LINK
The Coming Wave of Acquihires LINK
Toast: A Recipe for Building a System LINK
Market Commentary & Macro Trends
Why Seed Investors Are Selling Their Winners Earlier LINK
Should China’s 996 Work Culture Be the New Normal? LINK
AI Apps vs SaaS Apps LINK
Corpospeak: Why You Still Sound Like a Consultant LINK
Six Takeaways From Tech’s Most Resilient Workers LINK
Meditations
Stephen Covey:
Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.
Thank you for your time,
Bartek