I recommend that every one of my fans and brothers spend 2 hours watching the full interview with David Feng and Duan Yongping!

This afternoon, I spent two hours watching the interview between Fang Sanwen and Duan Yongping. The insights gained were invaluable. I will omit the summary of the investment and stock trading parts, as investment trading is something brothers need to comprehend on their own.

I also agree with Duan Yongping’s statement: don’t touch what you don’t understand. This is still very valuable to me. Don’t naturally believe that you are among the 20% who can make money from stock trading. More likely, you are the 80% who will lose money when trading. We must have reverence for the market.

Doing what you love is truly a great inspiration and temptation. What exactly is the thing you truly enjoy doing? It’s a genuine question that requires you to spend time and energy to think about carefully.

You can tell when someone truly understands something by their actions. When you understand something, how do you act? Defining a person’s understanding of a matter isn’t about what they have done but what they choose not to do. Based on some of my own small experiences—using AI to write code—the most direct observation is: if you truly understand a problem, then describing it to AI in natural language with precision and logical consistency usually results in very useful code, which requires little to no modification. Conversely, if a problem is ambiguous, it’s obvious when writing requirements to AI because there's a fuzzy area. In such cases, AI will analyze possibilities during deep thinking and even confirm logic and details with the user.

Knowing how to use AI, or even understanding AI, generally means communicating clearly and explicitly. Those who don’t understand tend to make vague, unclear requests. From this perspective, there are some similarities.

At this point, Duan Yongping considers AI to be a once-in-a-century industrial revolution that requires everyone to think seriously and respond thoughtfully. I personally strongly agree with this. He also explained that some say it’s a bubble—there may be bubbles, but the emergence of AI as a phenomenon cannot be ignored. The significant increase in productivity will inevitably create new demands, but it will also impact some people. He neither overhyped AI’s万能性 nor suggested it will replace many jobs to create anxiety. He approached it more objectively, emphasizing the importance of understanding, learning, and applying AI.

He also mentioned that many people become unwilling to learn and change after age 40, with rigid thinking and reluctance to acquire new knowledge. This is a very valuable wake-up call. People can be self-consistent; they may love learning and reading but do it mainly to prove themselves right. In such cases, learning might be worse than not learning at all.

Growing old and learning lifelong is truly a profound truth.

Regarding education, it is also very insightful. It’s necessary to give children a sense of security and avoid doing things that diminish that security—like hitting, scolding, or shouting at children. Moreover, children’s brains are not fully developed, and physical punishment can negatively affect their mental and physical health. Although we are already in the 21st century and it’s 2025, the basic civilized expectation that parents do not hit or scold their children might not be as high as I imagined. Even in Shenzhen, I’ve heard and seen some parents physically discipline their children.

Parents who cannot truly love their children should, at the very least, from a purely utilitarian perspective, avoid mistreating them. How you treat them in their childhood will likely influence how they treat you when you are old. After all, human relationships are reciprocal.

During the interview, the most noticeable thing was the logical flow of questions and answers. Good questions are often even more valuable than good answers. Duan Yongping, with his engineering background, reveals his logical and rational thinking throughout the conversation. This is very worth learning from. Logic should be a compulsory course for everyone. As someone who was once poisoned by emotion-driven toxic positivity and who has overcome anxiety through behavioral and cognitive logic training, I have never paid more attention to learning logic and developing logical thinking than I do now.

I won’t buy stocks just because of his recommendations and analysis, because what he understands doesn’t necessarily mean I understand. If I truly understood, I might buy without his recommendation. I imagine a few years ago, if someone like him told me to buy, I would be immediately influenced and buy in. But today, I won’t, because others’ opinions are based on their own cognition and stance. My decisions still need to be analyzed and judged by myself.

Their dialogue and interview are very worthwhile to spend 2 hours on—listen, watch, and understand how others think, why they say what they say, what their basis is, whether it’s logical, and if there are counterexamples. Whether his viewpoints deepen my existing understanding or challenge my previous ideas, it’s all valuable.