Imitating the style, I simulated a deep conversation between Wang Chuan × Naval (fictional dialogue for inspiration).

Because Teacher Wang Chuan @Svwang1 and Naval @naval share some commonalities in thinking and underlying codes, and they are both teachers I admire, I attempted this simulation:

Note: The following is a "thought experiment" dialogue based on the expression style of "Wang Chuan's Bible" and Naval's public philosophy, not a real dialogue record.

Naval: You say "choice is more important than making money." But choice ultimately needs to be supported by assets. How do you avoid turning "choice" into an excuse for procrastination?

Wang Chuan: Choice is not inaction; it’s about not binding yourself to a single path. You can take action, but you should avoid the "locked-in strategy of fighting for victory." My preference is "as long as I don't lose, I keep playing," because there are too many black swans in reality.

Naval: I agree that "you shouldn't bet everything on one game." But I've also observed that many people treat "avoiding risk" as their main life goal, resulting in never having compound assets.

Wang Chuan: That's because they understand "safety" as static savings, real estate, or identity. But the essence of wealth is energy and information efficiency; static wealth preservation is actually more dangerous.

Naval: So you’re actually saying: you need to stand in a stronger "system." What are your standards for that system?

Wang Chuan: Can it achieve "long-term compound growth"? Is there a strong positive feedback mechanism? Is it difficult for external forces to stifle it?

On a personal level, I look at two things:

1) Do I have time redundancy?

2) Do I have combinability?

Naval: Time redundancy is somewhat like what I call "buying back time." But you say it’s "de-leveraging," what do you mean?

Wang Chuan: Being busy to the point of exhaustion is essentially full-scale speculation—if you have no redundancy to deal with the unexpected, you will be forced to make choices at the worst times.

Naval: I would put it more simply: attention is the only thing you truly own. If you sell your attention to others, you lose your freedom.

Wang Chuan: There’s also a "more insidious sale": people are tempted by short-term benefits, quietly giving up their choices, and in the end, they lose both money and choice.

Naval: That’s why I emphasize "leverage," but it must be used correctly. Code and media are a form of leverage: they won’t kill you like debt does in a downturn.

Wang Chuan: I don’t oppose leverage. What I oppose is "leverage that can lead to liquidation." Speculating with leverage essentially means giving up choice.

Naval: We are actually talking about the same thing: capping the downside and opening up the upside.

You talk about "anti-fragility," I talk about "optionality."

Wang Chuan: Exactly. How does optionality come about? Through combinability. Wealth growth comes from your ability to form open connections with the outside world and not easily be destroyed by external forces.

Naval: So on a personal level, what is the most direct way to achieve "combinability"?

Wang Chuan: Turn yourself into an "interface." What you create should be reusable, referable, and combinable.

You’re not just doing a job; you’re creating a stackable component library.

Naval: I would say: that’s "productizing yourself." Solidify your unique knowledge into replicable products or content, and then let distribution amplify it.

Wang Chuan: Weak relationships are also very important. Strong relationships help you do current things better, while weak relationships allow you to discover new things and even bring unexpected luck.

Naval: I prefer "long-term people." But I admit: weak relationships are "the entry point for new opportunities."

Perhaps the best structure is: a core circle built over the long term, with an outer circle that continuously opens up.

Wang Chuan: There’s another risk point: people are often hijacked by narratives, treating money as the only narrative. Once the narrative collapses, their spirit collapses too.

Naval: I would call it "the desires implanted by society." What you think you want is actually what others want you to want.

Wang Chuan: So I emphasize: first define the problem you want to solve. Making money is just one of them, and often not the most important.

Naval: Ultimately, the two paths will converge:

You use systems and redundancy to guard "freedom,"

I use unique knowledge and leverage to create "freedom."

Only after achieving freedom can we talk about happiness.

Wang Chuan: Happiness may be: after comprehensive compound growth in efficiency and ability, still being able to maintain a high degree of freedom and multiple options, without becoming a prisoner of complexity.

⸻

2) Simulating a deep conversation between "Wang Chuan × Naval" (not original words, based on the styles and viewpoints of both).

Scene: The two sit in a very quiet café, discussing "wealth, freedom, compound interest, and optionality in the AI era."

Naval: There’s a line in your book that I really like—"the greatest wealth is leisure time."

Wang Chuan: Leisure time is not for lying flat; it’s to improve strategic quality. Without leisure, you will always be treating symptoms and never have time to address the root causes.

Naval: Right. Wealth is for freedom, not for show. You wrote it as "not tired, free," which is very accurate.

Wang Chuan: Moreover, "freedom" must be able to withstand risks. Many people are busy to the point of exhaustion, which is essentially full-scale speculation—without redundancy, an unexpected blow can be fatal.

Naval: So how do you define "true wealth"?

Wang Chuan: The essence of wealth is "energy and information efficiency." Whoever can convert information/energy into value with higher efficiency is richer.

AI will continuously redefine scarce resources, so we cannot just focus on traditional money; we need to anticipate what will be "long-term scarce" in future scenarios.

Naval: Your statement sounds like "upgrading the operating system." A common problem I see is: people treat money as the endpoint, when in fact, money is just a "tool variable."

Wang Chuan: I put it more bluntly in my book: the essence of making money is to increase choice; in conflicts, choice is superior to making money.

Naval: So why does "making money" become a pitfall?

Wang Chuan: Because they think that working hard will lead to more earnings, but if their efficiency is only about the same as others, no matter how hard they try, they won’t earn much. The key is scalability, repeatable references, and cost-sharing.

Naval: That’s leverage. You say "repeatable references," I say "using code and media"—it’s the same thing: making your output independent of linear time.

Wang Chuan: But many people still can’t achieve compound interest because they lack "reusable labor results" and don’t have the freedom to act—superiors are the bottleneck.

Naval: So you need to create "assets," not just "jobs."

Wang Chuan: Assets are not enough; they need to be "combinable." You don’t know in advance which components will create value; by the time others combine explosively, it’s too late for you to imitate.

Those who can persist to the critical point are mostly driven by true love, not external pressure.

Naval: That’s what I call "specific knowledge": you must truly love it to invest long-term without feeling pain.

Wang Chuan: You also mentioned that "what did you accomplish this week" is a good question; I’ve quoted that in my book.

Naval: What I want to ask is: what "reusable results" did you actually deliver? If you spent a week just in meetings, firefighting, and aligning, then you are consuming your choice.

Wang Chuan: Right. One of the killers of time redundancy is meaningless debates and inefficient socializing, as well as not automating or accumulating reusable results.

Naval: So how do you improve "error correction speed"?

Wang Chuan: Writing. When writing opinions, you must list both supporting and opposing evidence and try to quantify it, then publish it publicly to let the public challenge you, avoiding bubbles.

Social media is like RLHF for me—low feedback costs, fast iteration.

Naval: Writing is also a form of leverage. You are assetizing your thoughts in a public space.

Wang Chuan: Lastly, don’t lock yourself into a path. My "high-dimensional approach" is "as long as I don’t lose, I keep playing," not limiting paths, and bypassing obstacles is more anti-fragile.

Naval: Agreed. Many people pursue "winning," only to end up betting themselves on a single point. The true strong ones are those who can continuously retain options.

Wang Chuan: So the conclusion is simple:

• To be free, you need time redundancy;

• To have time redundancy, you need reusable assets and automation;

• To have assets, you need combinability and scalability;

• To achieve scalability, you need to enter high-dimensional connections and leverage media;

• To do the right thing long-term, you need public writing + counter-evidence mechanisms.

Naval: And one more thing:

• To avoid long-term collapse, you need inner peace.

Otherwise, you will be driven by desires and fears, pushing all systems toward the short term.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。