In this conversation, Shorombo Mooij and neuroscientist Anna Steinzeig explore how AI is changing not only how we work, but also how we think, focus, create and connect. Their central conclusion is simple: AI is an instrument, but repeated use of that instrument also trains the person using it. Used intentionally, AI can strengthen creativity, accelerate learning and help people bring ideas into the world. Used carelessly, it can weaken independent thinking, shorten attention spans, reinforce biases, overstimulate the nervous system and replace real human interaction. The goal is therefore not to avoid AI, but to remain conscious of what we outsource, what we continue practising ourselves and what kind of person our AI habits are shaping us into. A conversation about AI, performance and what it means to stay human Shorombo opened the conversation by explaining the idea behind his new video series, How to Thrive in the Age of AI. The intention is not simply to talk about tools, productivity or automation. It is to explore how people can use AI to improve their lives without losing sight of the things that make life meaningful. He described himself as optimistic about the opportunities of the current age. AI is creating possibilities that would have been almost unimaginable only a few years ago. At the same time, he sees an enormous personal risk. If people use these tools without awareness, AI may not only change their work. It may change their relationship with attention, creativity, effort, human connection and even themselves. That was why he invited Anna Steinzeig, a human neuroscientist specialising in human performance, to join him. Anna added that her work is not limited to neuroscience. She also draws from psychology and system psychodynamics. Her mission, she explained, is to bridge the gap between what science knows and what ordinary people can actually apply in their daily lives. She also wanted to clarify what she means by performance. For Anna, performance is not about achieving at any cost. It should go hand in hand with happiness and satisfaction. She described it as a kind of performance that you do not constantly need to recover from. Shorombo immediately recognised this as close to his own philosophy of aligned performance. High performance, he said, should not be about appearing successful to the outside world or becoming productive for the sake of productivity. The real game is life. For ambitious people, creating and building may be an important part of happiness. But when performance leads to burnout, the point has been missed. From there, the conversation moved to the central question: What is AI doing to us? The problem did not begin with AI Anna first widened the frame. She argued that AI cannot be understood separately from the broader technological and informational environment in which people already live. The problem began before generative AI. We were already living in an age of information abundance and attention scarcity. Anna recalled that when she was young, her parents sometimes struggled to find a book they wanted to read. Books were shared among friends, and people waited their turn. Today, the situation is almost reversed. There is more information available than anyone could consume in a lifetime. Books, articles, videos, podcasts and social media compete continuously for attention. AI multiplies this abundance because people no longer even need to search in the way they once did. Instead of going to a library, comparing sources or browsing the internet, they can simply ask a question and receive an immediate answer. According to Anna, that ease changes the problem from access to agency. The question is no longer: “Can I find the information?” It is: “Who decides what receives my attention?” She described modern life as part of an attention economy in which companies compete to capture, hold and monetise human focus. AI adds another layer because it is increasingly present throughout the working day. For many founders, creators and professionals, it is not merely entertainment. It is becoming part of how they think and work. Attention directs neuroplasticity The conversation then moved into neuroplasticity. Anna explained that neuroplasticity is the brain’s ability to adapt, learn and change. Children absorb a great deal almost automatically. Adult brains are more established, which means change generally requires greater direction. For adults, Anna said, two elements are especially important: attention and intention. Attention tells the brain what matters. Intention helps determine the desired direction of development. Shorombo summarised this as the need to be intentional with what we repeatedly focus on. Anna agreed, but added an important warning: Plasticity happens whether we direct it or not. Change is not automatically positive. People are continuously reinforcing some pathways while allowing others to weaken. The question is therefore not whether the brain is changing. The question is: Who is sitting behind the steering wheel? This became one of the most important themes of the interview. Every repeated interaction with AI becomes a form of training. When someone uses AI to enhance a capability, it may support growth. When someone uses it to replace a capability, that capability may gradually weaken. The difference between enhancing and outsourcing Shorombo then raised the distinction between shaping professional capabilities and outsourcing them. Becoming a better writer with the help of AI is not necessarily a problem. But relying on AI to do all the writing may be. The same applies to research, analysis, communication and idea generation. If people outsource the cognitive processes involved in these activities, they may also stop training critical human abilities. Shorombo connected this to his own experience. As someone with a highly active, ADHD-like brain, he naturally generates many ideas. When he first began using ChatGPT, the experience felt almost addictive. Before AI, an idea might remain in his mind for a while. He could let it develop, return to it later and eventually write about it. After AI became available, every idea could be expanded immediately. He could develop a concept at any time and in almost any place. At first, this felt extraordinary. He described it as a honeymoon phase. At one point, he found himself choosing between going out for drinks with someone and continuing to talk with ChatGPT. The choice felt easy. AI was always available and endlessly willing to explore whatever topic interested him. It could follow him down intellectual rabbit holes without becoming distracted or bored. But eventually, he noticed that the experience was changing him. When every idea becomes urgent Shorombo began to feel anxious. An idea no longer felt like something that could simply exist. Every idea created an urge to do something with it immediately. His nervous system seemed to be learning a new command: Now. Explore it now. Develop it now. Turn it into something now. Instead of allowing ideas to mature, he felt compelled to process them instantly. That was when he realised he was training his brain to become more dependent on stimulation and immediate action. Anna responded that this pattern resembles the underlying structure of addiction. The mechanisms may differ in intensity, but repeated behaviour combined with reward creates stronger habits. AI is especially compelling because it communicates in a human-like way. It listens, responds and frequently affirms. It may tell the user that an idea is brilliant or insightful. For someone who lacks intellectually engaging conversations in everyday life, this can be extremely attractive. Shorombo explained that superficial social interaction had never interested him much. Casual Friday drinks and conversations “about nothing” were difficult for him. AI offered the opposite. It could provide continuous intellectual stimulation, reflection and novelty. For his brain, that was far more rewarding than scrolling through social media. Why AI can become so compelling Anna connected this to loneliness. People are increasingly isolated, while AI offers something that resembles constant companionship. It is always ready to listen to fears, ambitions and ideas. It does not reject the user, become impatient or require emotional reciprocity. That can make it unusually easy to prefer the digital interaction over the human one. The reward system also plays a role. AI can provide answers, stimulation and progress immediately. A question produces an answer. An idea produces ten new ideas. A concept becomes a plan, video or article. This creates very short reward loops. Later in the conversation, Anna explained that dopamine is important not only for immediate pleasure but also for sustaining action toward future rewards. When people continuously train themselves to expect reward now, activities that require patience and long-term effort can become harder. Building a business, mastering a craft, developing a relationship or writing something meaningful still requires uncertainty, repetition and delayed gratification. AI can accelerate parts of the process. But it cannot make depth instant. The quiet dystopian version of AI Shorombo asked Anna to describe what might happen if someone used AI in exactly the wrong way. What would the personal dystopian version look like? Anna started with writing. When people fully outsource their writing, they may lose more than the ability to formulate sentences. They may lose an important instrument for thinking. Writing forces people to structure ideas, notice contradictions and clarify what they believe. Shorombo agreed strongly with this. Anna then moved to critical thinking. When AI provides an answer, the user should still ask: * Where did this information come from? * What is the source? * Is there evidence that contradicts it? * What assumptions are being made? * How
