Dialogue Wang Qiao: Currently, cryptocurrencies are not very appealing to me; I heavily invested in Google in 2026

整理 & 编译：Deep Tide TechFlow

Guest: Wang Qiao

Host: Jason Yano

Podcast Source: Empire

Original Title: Claude Opus 4.5's Breakout Moment & Investing in 2026 with Qiao Wang

Release Date: January 12, 2026

Key Points Summary

This week, Qiao Wang joined the show to discuss how artificial intelligence will redefine what it means to be an investor in 2026. We delved into the breakout moment of Claude Opus 4.5, why Qiao chose to invest in Google, how to build a portfolio for 2026, and how to allocate time wisely in the age of AI.

Highlights of Insights

• The current market sentiment is overly optimistic.
• "About 40% of my portfolio is in cash."
• The appeal of crypto tokens is limited, but there will always be opportunities in the market; focus on analyzing assets individually rather than just looking at overall asset classes.
• The ratio of stocks to Bitcoin in my holdings is about 50/50.
• My largest investment is in Google, and I also hold shares in Tencent, which is an excellent company.
• One area currently overlooked by the market is AI-driven biotechnology, where AI has tremendous potential.
• By 2026, we may see some unicorn startups with only one or two people.
• Some of the most successful AI startups are not companies like ChatGPT or OpenAI, but rather small businesses leveraging AI.
• The essence of a company's moat hasn't changed, but the moats in the software sector are rapidly weakening.
• Code itself is no longer the bottleneck; the key is designing the right "prompts."
• Gemini's value is underestimated by at least two orders of magnitude. "I would be willing to pay $2000 a month for Gemini."
• I think Adobe could be this year's Google, as its current valuation is very cheap, and the market's perception of it is somewhat similar to how it viewed Google back then.
• Everyone should learn to code, and it is essential; people can use automation tools to optimize certain aspects of their lives and work.
• AI tools will make those who are already efficient and capable even more efficient and smarter.
• In terms of health, the three fundamental factors remain the most important: diet, sleep, and exercise.

Qiao's 2026 Investment Portfolio

Yano: About a month ago, you mentioned the current state of the market and expressed some level of concern. You also referenced the internet bubble period, like in 1996, when some predicted the market was about to peak, but it continued to rise for another three years.

Additionally, I saw a tweet of yours discussing the relationship between forward P/E ratios and returns over the next decade. You raised some counterpoints, but you ended with, "I still feel scared." I'm curious, what is your current view of the market?

Qiao:

I feel scared because the current market sentiment is overly optimistic. While I can't say everyone feels this way, you can see many people boasting about their investment gains on social media, especially with the market fluctuations over the past week; this sentiment is indeed very apparent. From a quantitative perspective, current market valuations are close to historical highs. Of course, some will argue that companies today are more profitable, have stronger competitive advantages, and that the economic structure is more stable, coupled with monetary easing policies pushing the market, making current valuations reasonable. But regardless, we cannot deny that market valuations are indeed at historical peaks. Therefore, I have not fully committed to risk assets. In fact, about 40% of my portfolio is in cash. While I might miss some opportunities if the market continues to rise, at least I can sleep more soundly.

Yano: I listened to an interview with Drucker and Muller, where he mentioned, "In my 50 years of investing, this is the hardest time to predict market trends." If even Drucker can't predict, how can we ordinary investors?

Qiao:

That's why I focus more on stock selection. If you look at the overall market, valuations are indeed high, but if you study individual companies one by one, you sometimes find very attractive investment opportunities. This way, even if the overall market declines, your fear will decrease. During the internet bubble in 2000, although tech stocks performed poorly in the following decade, small-cap and value stocks did very well, with an average annual growth rate of 10%. I believe this is the best time for stock pickers.

Yano: What do you think about investing in stocks and crypto tokens right now?

Qiao:

Currently, I think the appeal of crypto tokens is limited, but there will always be opportunities in the market, like in 2022. At that time, many worthwhile investment opportunities arose. Therefore, I am still focused on analyzing assets individually rather than just looking at overall asset classes. From a broad perspective, there are almost no particularly attractive assets right now, except for the dollar. But if you analyze assets one by one, you may find some opportunities. As for cryptocurrencies, I still hold some Bitcoin and a small amount of tokens, but the overall investment proportion is very small.

Yano: If we try to break down your portfolio, 40% is cash; what about the remaining 60%? How much is in stocks and cryptocurrencies? What is the ratio of Bitcoin to other crypto assets?

Qiao:

Between stocks and Bitcoin, it's about 50/50. I still hold a significant amount of Bitcoin, but this is not my ideal portfolio because if I sell Bitcoin, I would have to pay high taxes, and the proportion of crypto tokens is very small, less than 1%.

Yano: So what stocks do you currently hold?

Qiao:

My largest investment is in Google, and I also hold shares in Tencent. Tencent is an excellent company; although its business is relatively low-key, its fundamentals are very solid.

Yano: Do you think Tencent is better than Alibaba?

Qiao:

Currently, yes. Alibaba has more advantages in AI, but its retail business is highly competitive. I also hold some Amazon stock. I think last year's market sentiment was very unfavorable for Amazon, as the stock prices of all tech giants rose, while Amazon lagged. Additionally, I am very optimistic about Amazon's developments in robotics. These investments of mine are all long-term, with a target of ten years.

Yano: Amazon is indeed leading in robotics; they may become the first large company with more robotic employees than human employees.

Qiao:

In the past five years, the number of human employees at Amazon has remained stable, while the number of robotic employees has grown by 20% to 30%. They have significantly improved their profit margins in recent years, despite slow revenue growth.

Yano: In the healthcare sector, like Eli Lilly or other companies, what are your thoughts?

Qiao:

I hold some Eli Lilly stock, but this is a short-term trade, not a long-term investment, as my understanding of the pharmaceutical industry is limited. I don't know what will happen in ten years; I know I might still be using Amazon in ten years, but there are too many competitors in the pharmaceutical industry. Although Eli Lilly has strong patent barriers, there are many cheap and effective gray market peptides in the market that directly compete with Eli Lilly.

I believe one area currently overlooked by the market is AI-driven biotechnology. While everyone is focusing on robots, drones, and AI chatbots, I think AI has tremendous potential in the biotechnology field.

Yano: What about the automotive and fintech sectors? Do you hold stocks in Tesla or Rivian?

Qiao:

No, Tesla's valuation is too high, and I don't know much about Rivian.

Yano: What about the fintech sector? For example, Robinhood and Coinbase?

Qiao:

From a valuation perspective, I think Coinbase is more attractive, but neither company is particularly excellent as an investment. I hold stock in Coinbase, while Robinhood's valuation is too high.

Yano: Do you think someone in the West will develop a super app like "WeChat"?

Qiao:

Are you referring to a super app that integrates messaging, payments, social networking, etc., like WeChat? I think there is already a trend in the financial sector, like Robinhood. But if it's a super app that comprehensively covers all aspects of life like WeChat, I don't see that possibility for now.

Claude Opus 4.5's Breakout Moment

Yano: I want to talk about Claude and Opus 4.5. I think the best entry point is to mention a "wow, this is it" moment you referred to on Twitter. Over the past few years, there have been several similar moments that gave me the same feeling: one was the release of ChatGPT, another was the first reasoning model, and then Tesla's FSD V13 (full self-driving). Why do you think Opus 4.5 is a "wow" moment?

Qiao:

I can't explain what happened behind it, but I can tell you how I feel as a user. The last time I wrote code was probably a year ago, but I haven't seriously coded in three years. From 2010 to 2017, before entering the cryptocurrency space, I was engaged in quantitative trading, writing code daily, from low-level C++ to more advanced Python data science code. This was my field for seven years, and I also wrote some front-end and back-end code. But since leaving Messari, I haven't seriously coded; I've only done some personal projects in recent years, taking some time at the end of each year to work on them.

What sets Opus 4.5 apart is that previously, you could quickly assemble a demo, but the last 5% was always difficult for AI to complete fully; you still needed an excellent engineer to handle details like errors and edge cases. However, with Opus 4.5, I just need to tell it what I want to do in simple English, providing a very clear specification, and as long as the specification is clear and comprehensive enough, it can complete it all at once.

Claude and Opus may be experiencing a hype cycle on Twitter, as I have engineer friends telling me that OpenAI's latest GPT-5 Pro is almost as good as Claude.

Yano:

I've used both, but Opus was the first tool that made me switch from ChatGPT. For me, ChatGPT's memory feature made me so dependent on it that I felt I might use it forever because it knows everything about me, but now Opus 4.5 is superior for me.

There is a new way of working now, and I'm not sure how to classify it as a chatbot because the boundaries between the two are becoming blurred. For example, I just completed a task with Opus 4.5; we have an eight-person sales team at Blockworks, and usually, we need to decide who should be responsible for each account and prioritize them, like Tier 1, Tier 2, etc. Each salesperson has their own judgment, like someone handling 10 Tier 1, 30 Tier 2, and 100 Tier 3 accounts. This allocation work is often complex. So, I handed this problem to Claude and let it consolidate the relevant information. I told it that if a token's FDV (Fully Diluted Valuation) exceeds $1 billion, that account could gain extra priority; if the project corresponding to that token is a public company, even better.

Claude extracted relevant information from multiple data sources like CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap and ranked those accounts. Then, it analyzed the trading records of each salesperson in our team with Blockworks over the past eight years, understood the types of products we sold, and allocated accounts to the appropriate people based on the likelihood of each salesperson closing a deal with those accounts.

Qiao:

During the holidays, I also realized what you mentioned: the line between general chatbots and traditional coding is gradually blurring. When you converse with a general chatbot, it usually generates a piece of code on the fly based on your needs, and now when you need to write code, you don't even have to write it yourself; you just need to express your needs in simple natural language. This makes the functions of code assistants and general chatbots gradually merge.

Yano: Absolutely right. So why don't you just use Replit or Lovelace to complete your Vibe coding work? Why choose Claude?

Qiao:

I think their target user groups are different. I haven't tried the latest version of Lovelace, but I feel Lovelace is more suitable for users who want to quickly build a nice demo or simple application; they perform well in front-end development, although I haven't actually used it myself. So I initially used Cursor with Opus 4.5, then tried Claude and Opus 4.5. To be honest, I didn't feel a significant difference in productivity enhancement. For me, their performance is about the same, but that's just my personal experience.

How AI Affects Startups?

Yano: You've witnessed the growth of thousands of crypto startups; how is AI impacting these companies now?

Qiao:

AI has a significant impact on startups, and this change has been particularly evident in the past three years. Basically, I ask in every group, especially the technical partners of each startup, how much their productivity has increased since the release of ChatGPT in 2022. Almost every time, the answer is higher than the last. This trend is very consistent. The most recent group's response was that their productivity has increased by about 3 to 4 times.

I believe this impact is more pronounced in early-stage startups, while the impact on later-stage large companies is relatively small, because one limitation of code assistants is their "context window." For example, if Claude can handle a million tokens, it means it can help you kick off a new project very efficiently and effectively. But if you ask Claude to modify the entire Google codebase, that would be nearly impossible, right? So these tools are more helpful for early-stage small startups and relatively limited for large companies.

In large companies, the most effective way to utilize code assistants is by establishing clear inter-departmental abstraction layers. This can break down complex tasks into smaller chunks, narrow the context, and input them into the AI system, making it easier for the system to understand.

Yano:

However, I think using the term "productivity" to describe the impact of AI is not entirely accurate, especially for early-stage startups. If you are a company with 100, 200, or even 1000 people, a 3x or 4x increase in productivity can be a significant change. But for early-stage startups, they may not even consider "productivity." Their mindset is more like: why do we need to hire more people? I often see this in the companies I invest in and my friends' startups.

They feel that with AI, we don't need to hire new employees at all. This phenomenon is really interesting. For example, I recently created two tools for sales: one is a sales commission calculator. The sales team often asks me how much they can earn. Previously, we needed to consult the finance team to calculate, and the finance team found it cumbersome; now, with this tool, the problem is solved.

The other tool is a dashboard for sales data. This tool can calculate the cost of the dashboard. Previously, we needed to consult the data team and consider whether they were using Dune or Gold Sky to index the data. If neither, we had to pay extra fees. Now I've developed a dashboard cost calculator based on all ports.

What do these small tools signify? They mean we no longer need to hire someone specifically for sales support, so by 2026, we may see some unicorn startups with only one or two people. These startups may have already started, and although they haven't reached a billion-dollar valuation yet, they are rapidly growing.

Qiao:

Absolutely. I know many people who are now running subscription revenue businesses with annual revenues of $10 million by themselves; these are often former engineers from companies like Meta and Uber who are tired of the bureaucracy of large companies and choose to start their own ventures.

Yano:

However, I find an interesting phenomenon: some of the most successful AI startups are not companies like ChatGPT or OpenAI, but rather small businesses leveraging AI. These companies are reluctant to disclose their core business. Generally speaking, if you have a startup that is doing well and growing rapidly, you would want to tell the world to raise funds or promote it on social media.

Do Moats Still Exist?

Yano: What do you think about a company's moat? Do you think the definition of a moat will change?

Qiao:

The essence of moats hasn't changed, but the moats in the software sector are rapidly weakening. For early-stage startups, there is almost no moat. Companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Apple still have solid moats. AI code assistants cannot destroy these moats. For example, Apple's moat is its developer ecosystem, while Microsoft's moat is the high cost for users to switch from PCs to other platforms. In the cloud services sector, the moats of AWS, Azure, and Google GCP are the high costs for customers to switch cloud platforms. Additionally, platforms like YouTube that have vast proprietary data can leverage this data to develop very powerful video models. For instance, Microsoft's enterprise software is also a super critical tool. Of course, you can replicate Office's functionalities, but will enterprises really switch from Office to other software? For them, these tools are too important, and the switching costs are too high.

However, I recently noticed an example that might be one of the most undervalued cases in the current financial market, which is Adobe. Photoshop and Adobe's creative suite are very famous, and there is a prevailing view in the market that the latest video models and image generation models will replace Adobe's products. But I think this view is completely wrong because Adobe's moat lies in its enterprise-level integration capabilities; many enterprise users using Adobe's creative suite will store their images and videos in Adobe's cloud. For these creative industry professionals, switching from Adobe Cloud to other services is very costly.

Moreover, many creative workers have been using Photoshop for many years, and the operation has become muscle memory. For them, switching to other tools is very difficult. Therefore, Adobe's current P/E ratio is only 12 times, which is incredibly undervalued for such a high-quality company.

Yano: Suppose you work at a company, like a startup that has been operating for ten years and has about 500 employees. How should the company respond? Many young entrepreneurs may already be familiar with these technologies, but for a more mature company, it may not be so easy to adapt. Employees may simply throw things into ChatGPT and then send out automated emails.

Qiao:

I believe you cannot force companies to adopt new technologies; you must let them find the immediate applications of AI technology themselves and see the significant impact it can bring. By the way, this is actually what we've experienced at Alliance over the past three years. We knew three years ago that AI would become an important trend, and we proposed to become an "AI-first" organization, but we didn't try to impose AI on every corner of the organization.

Instead, we used AI to automate some specific processes. For example, we receive thousands of applications every year. Three years ago, I had to read all the application documents personally, about 5000 a year. This work was very labor-intensive and exhausting. But now, we have automated about 50% of the work using AI.

Yano: How did you do it? Did you use Opus 4.5? How was the system built? What was the input, and what was the output like? Why can it only automate 50%? Why not reach 99%?

Qiao:

Yes, this software was developed by our engineers. I believe the code itself is no longer the bottleneck; the key is designing the right "prompts." I wouldn't say this is a secret weapon because everyone actually knows some characteristics of excellent founders.

I just converted these heuristics about excellent founders or excellent startups into prompts to filter applications. Currently, this system's main function is to exclude obviously unqualified applications rather than directly telling me which are the best candidates, as I believe this part still requires human interviewers' judgment. AI hasn't reached that level yet, but I believe by the end of this year, you will see AI and AI-driven venture capitalists outperforming humans in this regard.

Yano: I think the prices of these tools are incredibly low right now, just like when Uber first launched, and it only cost $5 to go from the Financial District to the Upper East Side. At that time, you would think this price was obviously wrong, but they were attracting users through venture capital subsidies.

How valuable do you think these tools are? How much do you think the pricing of these tools is underestimated? For example, how much would you be willing to pay for Opus 4.5?

Qiao:

As for Opus, I'm not quite sure yet; it depends on what I can build with it. However, for Gemini, I think its value is underestimated by at least two orders of magnitude. Right now, I only need to pay $20 to use its professional version, and I haven't even upgraded to Pro Plus.

Yano: If Gemini charged $2000 a month, would you be willing to pay?

Qiao:

Yes, because its capabilities are very powerful. In fact, I mentioned on Twitter that it serves as a research assistant, a junior researcher, a junior coding assistant, a pretty good medical consultant (to verify doctors' advice), and a fairly decent legal assistant. Overall, if you combine these functions, the price of $2000 is simply a bargain.

Decision to Invest in Google

Yano: How much time do you spend daily using applications like Gemini and Claude? What daily activities do you cut back on to make that time? For example, did you reduce Zoom meetings or spend less time on social media?

Qiao:

Actually, I analyzed my time allocation six months ago, which prompted my decision to invest in Google. I checked my iPhone usage records and found that the three apps I use the most are Chrome, YouTube, and Gemini, all of which are Google products.

Of course, I was initially concerned that ChatGPT would threaten Google's search business, so I discussed it with my wife. She inspired me by saying that the most common scenario she uses Google Search for is shopping, and in the short term, ChatGPT cannot fully replace this function. Then I did some research and found that actually over half of Google's search revenue comes from shopping ads, which made me feel that Google's core business is still very solid.

In the short term, no one can shake its position. Additionally, Google has technological advantages like GCP (Google Cloud Platform) and TPU (Tensor Processing Unit), which are key points I realized later. I believe these factors indicate that Google's moat is very solid. Therefore, last year I decided to invest in Google, which was almost my only large investment last year.

Yano: On New Year's Eve last year, I had dinner with an employee from Google, and we talked about these things. Everyone was discussing the tools they commonly use. That Google employee mentioned that many people overlook a fact: Google has a vast amount of shopping data, and people in the market seem to not fully realize this. Are there other similar opportunities?

Qiao:

I think Adobe could be this year's Google because its current valuation is very cheap, and the market's perception of it is somewhat similar to how it viewed Google back then. In fact, I've never used it, but I know it has many use cases.

Yano: No new users will use Adobe. Just like Google, my commonly used app is YouTube; I use YouTube very frequently and also use Gemini. But Adobe? I don't use it at all, so I think new users won't choose Adobe either.

Qiao:

But all new users will use Google. I think a common misconception in the market is that Adobe is not a consumer-facing product but an enterprise-level product.

Yano: Enterprise-level products are correct, but my company wouldn't consider using Adobe; Figma is more popular.

Qiao:

Figma and Adobe actually serve two different markets. In the market competition for new project demos and website development, Adobe has already lost, with Figma dominating this field. What about Canva?

Yano:

Canva targets the low-end market and is more suitable for amateur users, while Adobe serves high-end enterprise users. So I agree with your point that Adobe's new user growth has indeed stagnated for a long time, but its pricing power is very strong, allowing it to continuously raise subscription fees.

How to Allocate Time Wisely in 2026

Yano: As a Google user, I want to talk about investment, but I also want to explore a question: how should we allocate our time wisely in 2026? How do you think AI will change the way we allocate time?

Qiao:

Well, I believe everyone should learn to code, and it is essential. If you don't, you may be left far behind. However, coding here doesn't mean traditional programming; it refers to optimizing certain aspects of your life and work through automation tools. I believe there will be many B2B SaaS software in the future, like Gmail and Zoom, and people will still pay to use these general tools. But at the same time, everyone will have some specific needs in their workflows, and these needs are very personalized, which third-party software companies may not develop targeted solutions for.

Yano: For example, we can develop a commission calculator ourselves at Blockworks. That's a great example; no one will develop a dedicated SaaS software to do that.

Qiao:

And when I say "everyone should learn to code," it shouldn't be something that scares people. Because current technology has made it so we don't need to write complex code anymore. You just need to converse with the system in natural language to achieve automation.

So, I would strongly recommend that everyone doesn't necessarily have to use complex tools like Claude Opus. I can recommend some simpler, more user-friendly tools. For example, Replit; when I first realized the potential of AI, it was through Replit. That's when I understood that AI is not just a chatbot; it can help you build anything. This technology will fundamentally change our world. I highly recommend everyone to try Replit; it’s really cool.

Yano: What impact do you think this gap will have on the labor market?

Qiao:

I think it will be like the popularization of the internet; these tools will make those who are already efficient and capable even more efficient and smarter, while those who are inefficient may fall further behind. AI is an extremely powerful tool that can significantly enhance efficiency, but ultimately, it depends on how much you are willing to use it.

Using AI Models for Investment

Yano: In a sense, from an opposing perspective, do you think the time you spent building the Warren Buffett stock tracker was really worth it?

Qiao:

Yes, it did take me quite a bit of time. Although the results are decent, more importantly, I gained a deeper understanding of the relevant technology during the process of building this tool.

This tool can be seen as a digital clone of investment masters like Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, Howard Marks, Peter Drucker, and Bill Miller. It regularly scans thousands of stock codes and conducts in-depth research on each stock, trying to simulate the investment logic of Buffett and Munger.

The coding part is actually quite simple, but designing the prompts took me months of adjustments. I designed a very detailed set of prompts to simulate the thought process of Buffett and Munger when evaluating potential investment opportunities.

This process is divided into six steps: first, it collects information on six key aspects they might focus on through deep research models, then calls another API to analyze using reasoning models. Deep research and reasoning models are two independent segments.

The deep research model is very good at collecting facts and data, while the reasoning model, although it sometimes generates incorrect information, performs better in logical inference. Once accurate data is input into the reasoning model, its analytical capabilities far exceed those of the deep research model.

Next, I will call the reasoning model in the second phase to simulate the "digital Buffett and Munger" investment committee to analyze whether it is worth investing in a particular stock. Ultimately, it will output a specific recommendation, which is the entire process.

Have you heard of a theory? Some believe that Renaissance Technologies discovered large language models (LLMs) before others, but they kept this technology secret, which may be why their investment returns are so high. However, my intention in designing the Buffett and Munger model was to avoid competing with Renaissance Technologies. They excel in short-term trading, like day trading or operations within a week. On such short time scales, the latest AI models indeed struggle to compete.

Yano: Are you also competing with companies like Susquehanna?

Qiao:

That's right, but my model leans more towards long-term investing. In today's market, almost no one has the patience to hold a stock for more than five minutes, which is where language models can play a role.

Yano: So how do you combine the advice of different investment masters? For example, Howard Marks' advice and Peter Drucker's advice may be completely different, and their thoughts are often contrary to Buffett's.

Qiao: I would weight their advice and consider it comprehensively.

Yano: Do they all recommend buying Adobe?

Qiao:

Yes, and an interesting phenomenon is that if you run the same prompt multiple times, the model may give different answers each time. So if you run the same question multiple times and average the results, and each time the result suggests buying a particular stock, then the credibility of that recommendation increases significantly.

It recommended about ten stocks, four of which are actually already in Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio, such as Chubb, an insurance company, and Google.

How AI Changes Branding and Distribution?

Yano: How will AI change the way brands communicate and distribute content? For example, we previously mentioned Delphi; I wonder if you've noticed OpenAI's recent launch of the Sora tool. With Sora, you can clone someone's likeness and embed it into your videos. This makes me think about the changes in marketing and branding. In the near future, brand marketing will clearly become more personalized.

Qiao:

This trend has actually already begun. A few days ago, I saw an ad on LinkedIn that said, "Hey, Jason, as a co-founder of Blockworks, I really think you would like Rippling."

Yano:

AI will make their advertising algorithms smarter, and ads will become very precise. In fact, a few days ago, I searched for a term online—High Rocks. It’s a marathon-style fitness event similar to CrossFit, and I've been training for High Rocks recently, so I searched for fitness apps for High Rocks in the App Store and found some apps specifically targeting High Rocks training. But High Rocks is a very niche activity, so logically there shouldn't be so many dedicated apps.

I found this strange, so I wondered if these apps were genuinely designed for High Rocks or if they just tailored their ads for users searching for "High Rocks." Sure enough, these apps are actually ordinary fitness and nutrition apps, but their advertising targets are very precise, so I believe this kind of customized advertising will become more common in the future.

Health and Longevity

Yano: What do you think is the most effective change in health?

Qiao:

Ultimately, the three fundamental factors remain the most important: diet, sleep, and exercise. In 2021, I was very focused on optimizing details, trying various supplements, saunas, and other methods. But after four or five years of personal practice, reading a lot of research, and listening to countless podcasts, I found that nothing is more effective than getting enough sleep for eight hours a day, maintaining a healthy diet, and sticking to regular exercise.

Yano: How do you arrange your diet and exercise?

Qiao:

To be honest, I no longer pursue extreme optimization of my diet. Doing so puts a lot of pressure on me. I just try to maintain a healthy diet without putting too much burden on myself.

Yano: This reminds me of a neurological meme, where the person in the middle prepares complex meals every day and takes 17 supplements in the morning. Your current attitude is "just eat healthily, no need to overthink."

Qiao:

Yes, I found that if I try to optimize everything to the extreme, like Brian Johnson (note: Brian Johnson is known for extreme health management), I feel a lot of pressure. And stress raises cortisol levels, which is not beneficial for longevity.