The conventional mindset versus A(G)I
Those who can't adapt will fare poorly
If you follow this Substack regularly, you’re likely familiar with Leopold Aschenbrenner’s prediciton that AGI will arive around 2027-28. I’ve previously expressed skepticism regarding this timeline—primarily due to unresolved questions about data availability. I remain unconvined that Aschenbrenner has adequately explained how these data constraints will be resolved within the next few years.
But this post isn’t about my concerns with his timeline. Instead, it’s about the broader implications of Aschenbrenner’s arguments, specifically how they relate to those who are conventionally- and institutionally-minded. And few figures embody that mindset more than Ivanka Trump. She sounded the alarm about Leopold Aschenbrenner’s collection of essays, Situational Awareness:
This is not a critique of Ivanka’s intelligence—far from it.1 Many conventionally-minded people are highly intelligent. However, being deeply embedded in institutional frameworks can limit one’s ability to grasp the transformative impacts of emerging technologies like AI. And this, I believe, is worth exploring.
The Divide: Adaptability vs Tradition
A recurring pattern throughout technological revolutions is the divide between those who are forward-thinking and adaptable and those who cling to established systems. This divide is particularly relevant to AI, as its developent is poised to disrupt the very foundations of many traditional frameworks. In the case of AI, the consequences of being on the wrong side of that divide will be more pronounced than in previous technological shifts.
Institutionally-minded people and organizations rely on stability, predictable processes, and slow, deliberate decision-making. This worked in an era when incremental progress was the norm, but AI operates on a different timeline—one that rewards agility and adaptability. This creates a dilemma for those steeped in conventional systems: will they adapt, or will they fall behind?
I still remember a Christmas party in the early 2000s, where I was interrogated by elderly lawyers resistant to the idea of using Google for information. At the time, it was easy to dismiss Google as a fad, just as many now dismiss AI’s disruptive potential. But just as those lawyers found themselves increasingly outpaced by new technologies, so too will those who underestimate AI’s impact. The gap between those who adapt and those who don’t will widen.
Why Conventional Thinkers Struggle
There are several reasons why people embedded in traditional institutions will face significant challenges in a world reshaped by AI:
Lack of awareness or interest in new technologies. Many institutional leaders remain unaware of AI’s current capabilities or are skeptical of its potential. Their risk-averse nature leads them to delay adopting innovations until they’re fully proven, not realizing that by the time AI’s potential is “proven,” it will be too late to catch up.
Resistance to change. Bureaucratic, hierarchical institutions are built to move slowly. Decision-making is a process, not a sprint. This makes it difficult for organizations, and the people who work in them, to pivot quickly when AI begins to reshap their industries. Traditional structures are ill-equipped to accommodate the pace of technological change we are now seeing.
Over-reliance on human-centered processes. Much of AI’s value lies in its ability to automate complex tasks, from decision-making to predictive analysis, even to creative work. Those who cling to traditional, human-centered processes will find themselves sidelined as AI increasingly takes on roles that were once thought to require human expertise.
Underestimating AI’s potential for job displacement. Many conventionally-minded thinkers believe that while AI might augment their work, it won’t fundamentally replace them. This is a dangerous miscalculation. AI is not just an assistant, it is becoming a replacement for entire categories of cognitive labor. As it outperforms humans in various tasks, those who don’t keep pace will find their roles redundant and their expertise devalued.
What This Means for the Future
The people and organizations that will thrive in an AI-driven world are those that embrace change, continuously learn, and adapt. This is not just a matter of technical proficiency, though technical skills are important. The real key is a mindset that prioritizes experimentation, agility, and a willingness to question established norms.
Those who resist these shifts—those who continue to rely on the slow-moving processes and hierarchical decision-making of conventional institutions—will increasingly find themselves outpaced and irrelevant.
This brings us back to Ivanka Trump, a symbol of the institutionally-minded person. While she is highly intelligent and capable, she is a part of a system that is fundamentally ill-equipped to navigate the rapid changes AI is bringing. If these kinds of people don’t adapt, they risk being left behind, just as those who dismissed the early internet found themselves scrambling to catch up.
Ultimately, the divide between the forward-thinking and the conventionally-minded will only grow. As AI continues to reshape our world, the adaptability of individuals and organizations will determine who thrives and who is left playing catch-up.
This post obviously is not about Ivanka Trump’s intelligence, but I understand that she is controversial-by-association. If you are resistant to the claim that she is intelligent, I recommend that you watch her conversation with Lex Fridman.