Day 137: Knowing What to Retire — Builder's Log

I removed a legacy signal stack, tightened the surviving research paths, and learned again that more features do not create a deeper product.我清掉了一套已经失去反馈闭环的旧信号系统，收紧仍在工作的研究链，也再次确认：功能更多，不等于产品更深。

Retired the old investment signal stack completely after confirming that its scoring loop had no active consumer.
Kept the live KOL research and news-analysis paths independent from the deprecated scoring history.
Audited the remaining investment automations and repaired stale portfolio data references before calling the cleanup done.
Preserved a mentor workflow as an on-demand skill instead of resurfacing it as another recurring dashboard item.
Used fresh utility-company evidence to strengthen the view that power availability remains a real constraint on AI expansion.
Narrowed the next research questions toward diagnostic economics, grid equipment, and industrial automation rather than adding a broad list of fashionable names.
Removed an interactive prototype after it proved too shallow; I would rather delete a weak first version than let it harden into permanent clutter.
Ended the day with a clearer rule: a completed system needs an explicit lifecycle state, and a convincing prototype needs one deep experience before it needs more features.

确认评分闭环已经没有真实消费者后，把旧投资信号系统彻底清掉，不再为“也许以后有用”保留复杂度。
让仍在工作的 KOL 研究与新闻分析链继续独立运行，不再依赖已经失效的旧评分历史。
对剩余投资自动化做了体检，并修正陈旧的持仓数据引用，清理不是删完文件就算结束。
把导师型工作流留在按需 skill 里，不再为了显得完整，把它重新塞回周期性看板。
新的公用事业公司证据继续确认：电力可得性不是 AI 叙事里的配角，而是扩张能否落地的真实约束。
下一轮研究收窄到诊断经济性、电网设备和工业自动化，不再因为热门就继续堆一长串名字。
一个互动原型被证明体验太浅后，我选择直接删除；弱版本不值得因为已经写出来就永久占位。
今天最后留下的规则很清楚：完成过的系统要有明确生命周期，原型则要先做深一个核心体验，再谈增加功能。

Day 137: Knowing What to RetireDay 137: 知道什么时候该退场