Article
The Strength of Perseverance: Self-Discipline and Willpower
When reflecting on my greatest strengths, I do not point to talent. As I have written before, I do not see myself as exceptionally gifted. I know people who are more talented than I am. But what drives my progress is something different: energy, perseverance, and the ability to reflect critically on my own actions.
I have already written about the importance of being critical of myself. Now, I would like to focus on perseverance, which I see as a natural outcome of two other traits: a forward-looking mindset and the ability to pick goals that are exciting enough to sustain my effort.
A Future Orientation and Strength from the Past
We live in a world that often champions the mantra of carpe diem, emphasising the importance of living in the moment. While I respect this perspective, and occasionally embrace it, my natural inclination is toward the future. For me, most actions I take today must have a purpose rooted in the long-term, which is typical for INTJ personality type.
At the same time, I draw strength from looking at the past. The blood of those who fought in the First and Second World Wars runs through my veins. My family history is rich with resilience and leadership. I see it in figures like my great-grandmother’s brother, a general, and the first political official to oppose the autocracy during the turbulent 1990s in Slovakia. It is also present in my immediate family, my father, who in his youth adeptly navigated Slovakia’s post-revolutionary economy, and my uncle, who led our hometown hockey club with resolve. And I could go on; there are many more examples that remind me of the strength and potential within my lineage.
This legacy inspires me to approach challenges with determination and confidence.
But looking to the past and future is not enough. Perseverance requires something more.
Continue reading for free
Enter your email to keep reading for free. This also subscribes you to my monthly newsletter. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
Summary
If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.
LinkedIn
Related articles
These two steps are, right now, shaping my life and the direction I am heading in.
More articles
I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.
Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.
For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?
A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.
Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.
AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?
In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.
Prague, 13 May 2026. On my way to work I started thinking about something that stayed with me for days. If most routine work on a computer disappears in the next ten years, and a large share of repetitive manual work disappears with it, what happens to the flow of money? Who pays whom for what? Which economic layers will exist, how large will they be, and what relationships will run between them? This is the six-layer map I sketched as an answer.
I am building an AI system to predict the S&P 500. It runs on my own machine, uses free public data (yfinance, FRED, the Shiller dataset), and grades every forecast against reality. This series documents the build itself: the decisions, the methodology, the mistakes. What I will eventually share from the running system is a separate question, and an honest one.
Yesterday I could not tear myself away from the computer. When I lifted my head, it was half past eight in the evening. I had been sitting alone upstairs for about three hours.
Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.