When I was a kid, my grandfather was a government lawyer, a GP, a title in India for the lawyer who represents the state for the district. I watched many aspects of his life as a kid, and some have shaped me. One surfaced in strange ways in an AI context.
In his prime, a coterie of clients would sit in the verandah. I would sit somewhere in the side, listening with rapt attention. He reviewed each case aloud, and an assistant took notes. I was never sure how much of what he spoke got recorded verbatim, and how much was the assistant's rendering.
The assistant had become a subject matter expert over time, and could piece two and two together in my grandfather's narrative. By evening, ten or more of those cases became briefs. He would review each one and make sure it carried his thesis and his logic. To what level of detail, I never knew but it used to be often quick.
As I use AI as a collaborator in most of my thought engagement, that verandah came to mind while discussing its pitfalls with a few folks with different perspectives. The technology has evolved. The underlying operating model might not have.
His judgment stayed at the center. The drafting moved to someone else. The review was not about every word. It was about whether the brief carried his thinking and his way of telling it. That is a fair description of how I work with AI today.
But I also remember what happened when the assistant changed. It was rare, and I could see the discomfort in his rhythm. He was more frustrated, and sometimes more intentional in ensuring what he said carried through. Too much of how he worked lived in one person's head.
Our version of that problem is not rare. The assistant changes constantly. Models get updated, tools get replaced, sessions start from zero. The difference is that we can build for it. Skills and context that persist, and workflows around the collaborator, so the model of working survives the change smoothly.
His operating model still holds. The harness is what we get to add, because this assistant is evolving in ways we cannot control. It is the pattern with most technology shifts: draw from what worked, and build beyond it for our time. The future proofing is perhaps what was missing in the past.
For those of us who look at AI as a disruptive force, I hope this parallel gives some context.
And as I think about it, my daughter is watching me engage with an AI assistant. Her future version might draw some inspiration too. A positive one, I hope.