You’re fair to call out the wording. I agree some of it reads more buzzword-y than intended.
My point wasn’t that thinking fast is inherently good or that coding is “drag.” Quite the opposite: the friction of implementation used to be a form of thinking time for me. Typing forced pacing and reflection.
What I’m noticing now is that when iteration becomes extremely cheap, the bottleneck shifts from “can I build this?” to “should I build this?” That’s not about hyperactivity. It’s about decision quality.
The “dopamine” part wasn’t meant as a brag but as a caution. Fast feedback loops can encourage shallow iteration instead of deeper design if you’re not careful.
So if anything, I’m arguing for more deliberate thinking, not less.
My point wasn’t that thinking fast is inherently good or that coding is “drag.” Quite the opposite: the friction of implementation used to be a form of thinking time for me. Typing forced pacing and reflection.
What I’m noticing now is that when iteration becomes extremely cheap, the bottleneck shifts from “can I build this?” to “should I build this?” That’s not about hyperactivity. It’s about decision quality.
The “dopamine” part wasn’t meant as a brag but as a caution. Fast feedback loops can encourage shallow iteration instead of deeper design if you’re not careful.
So if anything, I’m arguing for more deliberate thinking, not less.