I think you should be allowed to write that exact line in your journal. If you rob the bank that can be used as evidence against you, but in no way is it acceptable for private reflections alone to be used to arrest you. Or else every author who's written a novel with 'bad' characters would be arrestable.
The AI cannot smell a rose, nor mourn the loss of a parent, nor envision a more just world. These aren't fringe abilities of the human brain/mind either, they've been pretty definitional.
The role is "producer" and it's a valid and influential role, even if it's not directly creative. Producers decide what to focus on, raise the money, and put together the principals. As an actor or director you may not like working with them, but you can't deny their importance.
Vaporware is the default state, you have to release something concrete for it to become something real. Right now it appears you don't have anything concrete, and I don't see a precise vision, so everything is just fuzzy "look at all the potential of this idea"! If you picked just one small thing and executed on it well, that would mean a lot more than having big dreams. (You can have big dreams, you just have to take small steps to achieve them!)
You are missing the point. On the line between explore and exploit, RC is basically 100% explore. The point is to learn, and more importantly, to flex the muscle of learning without being taught. And to participate in a community of kind and curious people who are also motivated to do the same.
Most uberwealthy aren't doing it for the extra money. And if they are, I think it's fine if they call it quits early. There are plenty more people who could be rich if Bezos/AMZN didn't suck all the air out of the room.
John Wayne is said to have chain-smoked 5-7 packs a day? If you can smoke a cigarette every ~30 mins, that's 2/hour (actually about 1.5 packs/day), but if a cigarette takes 10 minutes to smoke and you chain-smoke, that's 6/hour (4.5 packs/day). So it's doable but John Wayne was significantly out of breath the last 10+ years of his life, perhaps from having an entire lung removed.
"Awhile" IME is 3-6 months. And they won't stay for 10% more when Meta offers them 50% more. It's brutal but I'm not sure the economics of 'training' add up for any individual company.
I wrote a contract proposal a few months ago and I absolutely did a few rounds with an LLM to get the result I wanted. Anyone applying for a job should be doing this with their cover letters. You know that HR has a pipeline set up with a prompt like "here's the job description, here's the candidate's info, rate the candidate on a scale from 1-10" so you can do the same and learn how to boost your own signal. I have zero qualms about doing this.
As for "verbiage", I guess that's too bad, I'm going to continue using it anyway. Interesting factoid about the word though. I will say that "utilize" is one of my pet peeves (99% of the time the word you actually want is "use") and I've excised it from my spoken vocabulary, but I like(d) how verbiage rhymes with foliage so I'm more reticent to give that one up.
You have to assume that in many situations a human is asking an LLM about the content you've provided, even if they or another human reads some or all of it themselves too. So it's valuable to proactively ask your own LLM in the same way, so you can see what the other person will get out of it. And tune the verbiage until the LLM tells them what you want it to :)
So let's think one more step out. You're supposed to train your juniors so that you have seniors when everyone else is scrambling. But when everyone is scrambling, the biggest and most-funded/most-profitable companies will be offering a lot more money than you can afford to pay your now-senior devs. Now I suppose you think those former juniors would be so grateful that you trained them, that they would be loyal to your company and continue working for what you're paying them, right? ...right?
A 100-year-old's children are 70-80 years old themselves, if they are still alive. They very well might be not be capable of taking care of a 100-year-old person. And not everyone has children. Rather than throw up our hands and say "too bad", perhaps we collectively have some responsibility to take care of those who aren't able to take care of themselves?