A practical AI workshop with Jeremy

Useful AI
begins with
your before.

Learn AI through the work you already care about. Refresh the information you have. Build the idea you keep coming back to.

Choose a starting point See the transformations
Learn together ↗Refresh ↗Build ↗
Illustrated reconstruction of the method. Not original project material.
For small businesses, family operations
and people with something worth making.Keep what matters.
Make the next version useful.

Your knowledge

Human judgment

AI, put to work

Something useful.

01 / The workbench

A better after.
An honest before.

Four stories from existing work. Look at what changed—and the human decision that made the difference.

01Existing work

Three pages.
A whole field library.

For a family with useful knowledge on paper. Personal notes became a collection someone could browse, plan with, and print.

The human decision

Keep the original record intact. Make it clear where the notes end and new suggestions begin.

What exists & what still needs review

Recorded outputs: a searchable 100-idea picture catalogue, ingredient reference, planning tool, editable website files, and a combined 46-page printable library.

Evidence described in the supplied record: source and output files, image provenance, print checks, and a historical browser check. The diagram illustrates the method. Open published work ↗

Still needs care: new suggestions need the family’s review. Serving illustrations were AI-generated, not photographs of prepared meals. This is information design, not nutrition advice or tested recipes. Historical checks do not establish current availability.

Notes → usable collection

Before / 3 photographed pages

PAGE 01
PAGE 02
PAGE 03

The knowledge existed. Finding and using it was the next problem to solve.

After / more ways into the knowledge

The family
field library

Original notes
+ labeled additions
100ideas to browse
46printable pages
↗a tool to plan with

One source collection. Search, reference, planning, and print.

Schematic reconstruction. Original notes and project assets are not shown.

02Existing work

First, find out
what’s actually there.

For a training team inheriting an incomplete archive. OSHA 4 US became a clearer English/Polish learning and review system.

The human decision

A file called “PDF” was a ZIP. The source contained 48 actual slides. Name the missing material; don’t pretend to recover it.

What exists & what still needs review

Recorded outputs: bilingual course and website materials, reviewable lessons, instructor and learner companions, and downloadable learning packages. A browser-reviewed website retained ten original course identities.

Evidence described: source normalization, a bilingual glossary, course artifacts, browser checks, and correction records. The diagram illustrates the method. Open published work ↗

Still needs review: current primary sources, terminology, and instructor/provider approval. No OSHA trainer authorization, course credit, legal compliance, completed video, or replacement of a production school website is claimed.

Old files → reviewable lessons

Before / an incomplete handoff

Presentation ASOURCE
Presentation BSOURCE
“PDF” → actually ZIPINSPECT

Mixed versions and missing material. The archive needed reading before rewriting.

After / a visible review path

Source → lesson → instructor review
ENEnglish learning material
PLPolish learning material
Source intake48 slides accounted for
Missing finalUnresolved
Instructor approvalStill required

A clearer learning system, with source gaps and approval boundaries visible.

Schematic reconstruction. A design and learning case, not a certification claim.

04Existing work

“Done” is a claim.
Open the file.

For anyone learning to trust AI appropriately. A working review practice grew from comparing attempts and keeping track of corrections.

The human decision

Separate making from critique. Compare the result with the source, then test the page, image, or download people actually receive.

What exists & what still needs review

Existing method: independent attempts, source records, human selection, and browser/output checks. Project histories and correction records support this practice.

Inspect here: a reconstructed review sequence and, below, a small judgment exercise you can try yourself.

Still needs checking: every new deliverable. Model agreement is not proof. Historical passing checks are not a current system audit, and no current audit result is claimed here.

Plausible output → inspected work

Before / confidence without a receipt

Illustrative response, not a transcript

Looks finished.

But did anyone open the download?
Does the result match the original?

Polished language can hide a missing check or a misunderstood task.

After / a repeatable review sequence

01Compare independent attempts.
02Check meaning against the source.
03Open and test the actual output.
04Record what still needs review.

The useful skill: knowing what evidence would make you trust the result.

Reconstructed method diagram. These are review steps, not current test results.

02 / Three ways to work together

Make the thing.
Learn the thinking.

You don’t need to become an AI expert first. Your actual work can be the lesson—and the thing you take away.

01 / DO IT TOGETHER

Build it
with me.

Bring one real task and a willingness to try the tools yourself.

What we do
Read the source, try prompts, compare outputs, and check a useful first version.
You take away
The artifact, editable files, prompts, source notes, a short guide, and repeatable checks.
Your part & the boundary
You make decisions and perform an update. A focused task sets the scope; this is not a promised course credential.
Start with a real task
02 / KEEP THE GOOD PARTS

Refresh
what you have.

Bring the old content, aging data, or workflow that needs attention.

What we do
Keep useful work, trace sources, date claims, and separate clear updates from open questions.
You take away
A refreshed reference or tool, a source list, an owner review queue, and update instructions.
Your part & the boundary
You confirm the business facts. Specialist approval and ongoing maintenance need their own agreed scope.
Choose something to refresh
03 / GIVE IT A FIRST SHAPE

Make the
idea usable.

Bring the sketch, rough idea, or prototype you stopped working on.

What we do
Choose who it helps, test the key action, and remove assumptions the idea no longer needs.
You take away
A focused prototype, editable source, a record of the test, and a clear next step.
Your part & the boundary
You help define useful and try the result. A prototype tests an idea; production readiness is a separate decision.
Put the idea on the bench

These are proposed ways of working. Scope, cost, timing, and any ongoing support would be agreed together. No fixed program, booking availability, or guaranteed outcome is implied.

03 / Try a little of the work

Small experiments.
Useful possibilities.

Six proposed demonstrations, using made-up material. Open one. Change something. See where your judgment belongs.

All six are concepts and exercises, not completed customer projects.

05 / FINDProposed demonstration

The useful-notes session

For a small team whose answers live in scattered notes. Turn a pile into a reference you can search and update yourself.

Open the searchable notes demonstration
Before
Three fictional shop notes, with one missing instruction.
The human decision
Organize by the question people ask. Don’t invent the missing closing step.
After & still to review
A small searchable reference. The owner still needs to confirm the closing procedure.

Synthetic shop notes / 3 entries

  • DeliveryPut incoming boxes on the receiving shelf.
    Fictional owner note · confirm before use
  • SuppliesRecord the item name before adding it to the reorder list.
    Fictional owner note · confirm before use
  • ClosingThe lock-up sequence is missing.
    Owner review needed · no steps invented

3 notes shown. Source gaps remain visible.

06 / REFRESHProposed demonstration

The content refresh

For a business with an aging FAQ. Separate what you know from what needs a fresh source or an owner’s decision.

Inspect a source & review ledger
Before
A fictional FAQ mixes undated opening hours, pickup instructions, and an unsupported service claim.
The human decision
Keep the useful structure. Require evidence for facts that can change.
After & still to review
A dated review ledger. None of these synthetic business facts is cleared for publication.

Synthetic review ledger / 09 Sep 2026

Fictional FAQ claims and their required review
Old contentSource to seekDecision
Opening hoursOwner’s current scheduleConfirm
Pickup stepsWalk through with staffTest
“Always same-day”No support suppliedRemove claim

The improvement is a clearer review path. A timestamp alone doesn’t make a claim current.

07 / TRANSLATEProposed demonstration

The bilingual front desk

For an English/Polish business. Keep one set of facts and preserve a person’s inquiry when the language changes.

Try the language handoff
Before
Two fictional shop pages could drift apart or lose a typed inquiry.
The human decision
Translate the interface; keep the person’s words untouched.
After & still to review
A shared inquiry field and two interface versions. A fluent owner must review terminology and business facts.

Fictional shop / no message sending

How can we help?

Leave a question about an item or a pickup.

Your words stay in this field. Nothing is sent.

08 / UPDATEProposed demonstration

The owner’s update desk

For an owner who changes a menu or service list. Make an edit once, and keep an unconfirmed value visibly unresolved.

Try a price update
Before
A fictional shop has a proposed new price on a sticky note.
The human decision
Don’t silently treat a draft value as a confirmed price.
After & still to review
A live item preview with an explicit confirmation state. A real owner would check the price and both website and print layouts.

Fictional item & price / local preview

Garden sandwich$8.50
Draft · needs owner confirmation

This sandbox changes only this preview. It does not update a restaurant’s menu.

09 / CHOOSEProposed demonstration

The AI judgment workshop

For someone learning to spot a plausible mistake. Compare three constructed answers to the same small task.

Which answer preserves the source?
Before
Fictional source: “Pickup Friday. Time still to be confirmed.” Task: write one customer-facing sentence.
The human decision
Keep what’s known and make the missing time explicit.
After & still to review
A repeatable check: underline every added fact. The actual pickup time still needs the owner’s confirmation.

Constructed answers / not model transcripts

Choose an answer to inspect its assumptions.

10 / KEEPProposed demonstration

The teach-it-back handoff

For the person who will own the finished tool. The last step is trying one real update yourself.

Open a handoff rehearsal
Before
A finished-looking tool with no evidence that its owner can maintain it.
The human decision
Watch the owner perform the update. Use any difficulty to improve the guide.
After & still to review
An editable tool, a short guide, and a repeatable acceptance checklist. These self-reported ticks do not establish a completed customer handoff.

Proposed acceptance method / rehearsal only

Use these prompts to rehearse a handoff. A person still needs to observe the actual update.

A small lesson you can actually try

Put your judgment
to work.

Three complete sample exercises, using fictional material. Compare with the source, try a change, and explain the result in your own words.

01 / Refresh

Is the old answer still true?

Compare an old FAQ with a new owner note. Update the supported facts and carry one unresolved question forward.

Take away: refreshed copy and a source ledger.

Try the source refresh ↗
02 / Build

One edit. Two useful views.

Change a fictional service list and watch the website and printable sheet agree. See why unknown and zero mean different things.

Take away: editable data and a printable reference.

Try the update desk ↗
03 / Learn

Three answers. Your decision.

Spot promises that a small source never made. Compare authored AI-style answers and build a check you can repeat.

Take away: a practical judgment checklist.

Try the judgment workshop ↗

Borrow the pattern. Keep the context.

A menu and a training archive both need a clear source and a place for unresolved questions. A catalogue can make a lesson easier to browse. We can carry those useful structures between projects while keeping each person’s information, audience and voice distinct.

Explore all 17 stories and ideas ↗See how the method developed ↗

04 / Why this guy?

Hi, I’m Jeremy.
I care about Monday.

“I come from family businesses. I care about whether the work is useful on Monday.”

I’m a designer, builder, and practical AI teacher. I studied Digital Arts & Design at Full Sail. I come from family businesses connected to Greenpoint, Brooklyn and the Polish community. That background keeps my work in websites, physical making and workflow tools connected to the person who will use it.

Design, family business and teaching meet in the work above.

I start with what you know.

Your rough notes can contain decisions a clean AI answer would miss. Reading them is part of the work.

I help choose what belongs.

AI can make many versions. I help decide which one preserves your intent, what needs checking, and whether it works.

I want you to understand it.

Explaining unfamiliar things is part of building. A useful handoff includes the knowledge to make the next change yourself.

05 / From your before to your next step

A simple way through.

01 / Bring

Put it on the table.

One document, repeated task, or unfinished idea. We start with the real material.

02 / Decide

Find what matters.

Who needs this? What must stay true? What’s missing? Agree on a useful first result.

03 / Make & check

Try. Compare. Open it.

Use AI where it helps. Check against the source and test the actual thing together.

04 / Hand over

Make the next edit.

You try the update. Keep the files, notes, and checks—and know what still needs attention.

06 / Your turn

What’s your
before?

You don’t need a polished pitch. Choose a starting point and make a short brief you can keep. A few honest sentences are enough.

1. What would help most?

Describe the material. No private records needed.

This worksheet stays in this page while it’s open. Nothing is sent to Jeremy, uploaded, or saved by the site. Copy or download it before you leave; refreshing clears your entries.

Or download a blank worksheet
Your starting-point briefYOURS TO KEEP ↙
WHYTHISGUY — MY STARTING POINT

Way of working:
Build it with me / Refresh what you have / Make the idea usable

What I have now:
[Describe your before]

A useful after:
[What would help? Who would use it?]

What must stay true or needs checking:
[Meaning, facts, and open questions]

First check: compare with the source and try one real update.

Nothing was sent. This is a personal worksheet, not a booking.