Hi everyone! I want to share a recent experience with AI. Although at this point, “odyssey” might be a more accurate word. A while ago, I attended a webinar by Czech AI enthusiast Petr Ludwig about building your own AI team on a virtual server: connecting different models, talking to your agents through Telegram, assigning tasks from your phone, and creating a Human-Agent Wiki where both humans and agents can store knowledge and retrieve it later. 📖 You may know Petr Ludwig as the author of The End of Procrastination. He’s Czech, but the book has been translated into more than 20 languages. He’s also a somewhat controversial figure in the Czech online space. I knew that. What I didn’t realize was how relevant that little detail would become when I decided to share my progress on LinkedIn. So I built myself an AI team Following the webinar, I set up a system with four agents. ⚙️ One acts as the CEO/orchestrator of the team, while the other three specialize in different types of tasks. Under the hood, I’m experimenting with different combinations: - one specialist uses Hermes + ChatGPT - another uses OpenClaw + a lower-tier ChatGPT model - the third uses Hermes + Gemini and is my expensive specialist — I only send it in when I need deeper research rather than everyday tasks And it works. That was basically the point of my LinkedIn post: Hey, I actually built this thing and got it running. I also shared a couple of things I had discovered along the way. ☝️ First, the cheapest ChatGPT Go subscription Ludwig suggested in the webinar wasn’t enough for my setup. I burned through its limits in less than four hours while I was still configuring everything. ✌️ Second, the OpenClaw command-line installer had changed since the webinar was recorded. Somehow, after a fair amount of wrestling with it, I managed to get the original setup running anyway. And let me tell you: troubleshooting becomes significantly more entertaining once you can already complain about the troubleshooting to the CEO of your AI team via Telegram.

I spoke with 10 experts this week in different fields and the same concerns kept coming up... ⁉️ "If AI can generate a 10-page strategy document, a month of content, or a course outline in 30 seconds... what happens to the value of my intellectual property?" ⁉️ "How do I charge premium prices when clients think a machine can do half of what I do?" ⁉️ "How do I explain that the magic isn't the raw information, but it's my strategy, my intuition, and the best practices I've learned from trial and error?" If any of this is echoing your inner thoughts, don't worry, you're not alone in there. The problem isn’t using AI for content, prompts, or automation. Those things can absolutely create leverage. The problem is thinking a pile of tools, prompts, and automations is an AI strategy. AI becomes a real business advantage when it is connected to the outcome you are trying to create, the workflow it is meant to improve, the context it needs to work well, and the human judgment required to make sure it actually strengthens the client experience. What will differentiate you in this next phase of the AI era is not how much content you can generate. It is your flair, your relatability, your signature method, your judgment, your stories, and the perspective you have earned through lived experience. That is your advantage. If you've felt hesitant to fully hand your business over to "agents," that’s not fear; I call that your discernment saving you from using AI in ways that make your expertise look generic, replaceable, or disconnected from the transformation you actually deliver. 💬 Quick Question for the Community: How are you protecting your "secret sauce" as you leverage AI in your business? Finish this sentence: “AI can help me with ____________ , but my clients still hire me for _____________.”

The official community roll call is LIVE! 👉 What to Do Introduce yourself in the comments and share: - Who you are - What you do for a living — not a full pitch, just context - What you personally love, value, or geek out on - What lights you up about being here Important: ❌ No links in this post, please. ✔️ We want to get to know you — the human behind the work. 👉 Then Take a Minute to Connect After you introduce yourself: - Scroll through the comments - See who’s here - Reply directly to at least THREE people - Share encouragement, resonance, or something you noticed in their intro Let’s meet you. Re-introduce yourself or share for the first time. We’re excited to know who’s here. 💛

How to stop re-briefing Claude Code. Anthropic launched this only about a day ago. The problem this actually solves You know the forty minute briefing? You explain your offer. You upload your brand voice. You go back and forth on positioning until Claude finally gets it. And then you hit a fork in the road. You want two versions of the landing page. Or you want to keep working on the copy while something else builds the email sequence. Your old options were both bad. Start fresh and explain everything again. Or ask for both in the same chat and watch it get cluttered and slow. That is what these two commands fix: You type /fork and Claude Code makes a complete copy of your conversation. That copy becomes its own separate Claude, running in the background. Your original chat carries on exactly as it was. The copy remembers everything. Every message. Every file. Every decision you made together. It also keeps your settings, so you do not have to set anything up again.

AI is a confident first drafter and a terrible self editor. It won't tell you the output is mediocre. It'll hand it over like it's finished. Unless you make it look again. Try this after any output you're not thrilled with 👇 "Before I use this, critique it. What's generic? What could have been written about any business in this industry? Where did you make assumptions about my audience that I didn't give you? Score it out of 10 for how specific it is, and tell me what a 10 would require." Then, read the critique before you ask for a rewrite. Because the critique tells you what YOU left out. Nine times out of ten it says something like "I assumed your audience was time poor but you never told me who they are." That's not the AI failing, that's a gap in your brief. The next level: give it the criteria upfront. 👇 "You'll be judged on: specificity to my business, whether it sounds like me, and whether a reader would stop scrolling. Draft it, then score yourself against those three and revise once before showing me." Now it does two passes before you ever see it. Why this works ➡️ evaluating is a different task from generating and AI is much better at spotting a weak sentence than at avoiding writing one. Try it on something you've already generated this week and tell me what score it gave itself. 😄