kiktmog@gmail.com 
TL;DR: Building autonomous AI agents to run your weekly reports sounds like the ultimate productivity victory. But three months in, the “maintenance tax” comes due: schema drifts break scripts, LLMs hallucinate explanations for sales dips, and you spend more time babysitting the automation than doing the work. After deploying five automated weekly reports using Make, … 더 읽기
TL;DR: Automated AI “second brain” tools promised that we could delete our note folders and let semantic algorithms connect our thoughts forever. After running an autonomous PKM setup across 2,400 work notes for six months, I abandoned the automated knowledge graph. AI connects notes by semantic similarity, but human operations run on causal timelines — … 더 읽기
TL;DR: AI search engines like Perplexity, Genspark, and ChatGPT Search are brilliant at summarizing complex web topics with clickable footnotes. But in industrial market research and procurement, they have a dangerous blind spot: they frequently cite authentic industry URLs while quietly altering the numbers inside the text by 15% to 40%. After an AI search … 더 읽기
TL;DR: Speaking is 3.5x faster than typing (180 WPM vs 50 WPM), but drafting is only 20% of knowledge work. After testing AI dictation tools like Wispr Flow and Superwhisper for 30 consecutive workdays, I found that dictating analytical memos created “transcript debt” — turning a 15-minute typing session into a 35-minute editing marathon. Here … 더 읽기
TL;DR: AI PDF summarizers are brilliant at condensing a 100-page document into a tidy executive summary in 20 seconds. But in commercial contracts, “the gist” gets you sued. When I tested NotebookLM, Claude, and ChatPDF on a real 142-page supply agreement, all three generated clean summaries that completely erased three deal-breaking liabilities: unilateral freight surcharges, … 더 읽기
TL;DR: AI writes polite, beautifully structured 4-paragraph emails in 5 seconds. In manufacturing and supply chain operations, that conversational cushioning hides the only three things a supplier actually needs: the PO number, the hard dock cutoff time, and the binary decision. After an AI-drafted email delayed a critical component shipment by 3 days, I replaced … 더 읽기
TL;DR: I didn’t touch ChatGPT or Claude for 4 days — not by plan, just how the calendar fell. Nothing in my actual job broke. What piled up was busywork. What I noticed, only because I slowed down, was a habit I’d quietly stopped doing myself. Here’s the short answer: my job survived 4 days … 더 읽기
TL;DR: The one habit from my first year in supply chain planning that no AI formula generator has replaced: before I trust any number, I calculate it two structurally different ways and make sure they match. It takes about 30 seconds and it catches exactly the kind of silent errors I found when I tested … 더 읽기
TL;DR: After testing AI formula generation (ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3.5, and Formula Bot) across 50 real enterprise datasets, complex REGEX text extraction and multi-criteria lookups proved 100% reliable. However, dynamic array spills, circular inventory logic, and multi-sheet date offsets consistently created silent calculation errors. Here is where I rely on AI in Excel, where I refuse … 더 읽기
TL;DR: After 6 months of relying on AI meeting notetakers across 150+ operational calls, I discovered a critical flaw: AI tools transcribe 100% of spoken words, but consistently miss hesitant resistance, unspoken ownership handovers, and dealbreaker disclaimers. Verbatim transcripts create a dangerous illusion of consensus. Here is the 3-minute post-meeting protocol I use to fix … 더 읽기