Anyone know how to break Claude writing rules? I have been grinding on a LinkedIn post generator for supplemental content. May have been your's @Nate herk Ai I added rules to Airtable, rules in the nodes and even a deny cycle that runs it through another rewrite. Same patterns keep coming back. Examples: "This isn't a tech problem. It's a people problem." — that's an inversion reframe. Delete the first sentence and the second one is stronger on its own. "Not hypothetical. Not uncommon." — two fragments placed for rhythm, technically avoids the no-triples rule, still reads as produced. I've added eleven anti-pattern rules to a workflow. The model reads them and writes around them. Ban the triple parallel and it does pairs. Ban pairs and it does inversions. It's insightful writing, but once you see it, you can't unsee it. LinkedIn is full of it. Who's got the solution? Or are we stuck as Millions of raters preferred the version that sounded insightful over the version that communicated clearly. The model learned what insightful looks like. Now it dies on that hill.

New vendor. 15-page privacy policy. Legal review takes 2 weeks. We need to sign this week. Built GDPR scanner. Policy scored 42%. Three gaps flagged. Remediation requested before signing. THE COMPLIANCE REVIEW BOTTLENECK: Every vendor needs privacy review. Legal team backlogged. Policies written in legalese. Required elements buried in paragraphs. Signed contract. Discovered GDPR gap. Six months of remediation. THE DISCOVERY: Document extraction checks all GDPR requirements. Code calculates compliance score. Gaps identified automatically. Systematic verification. Same checklist every time. Nothing missed. THE WORKFLOW: Google Drive trigger watches policies folder → Download document → Document extraction checks data controller, DPO contact, user rights, legal bases, international transfers → Code calculates compliance score and identifies gaps → Sheets logs scan results → IF checks if not compliant → Alert Slack with specific gaps. 7 nodes. Vendor compliance automated. THE COMPLIANCE SCORING: Code checks 6 required user rights: Access, Rectification, Erasure, Portability, Objection, Withdraw Consent. Score starts at 100%. Deducts 10% per gap: - Missing DPO contact - No legal basis - No breach notification - International transfers without safeguards - Missing user rights THE STATUS THRESHOLDS: - 80% and above: Compliant - 50-79%: Needs Attention - Under 50%: Non-Compliant Conditional alert only for non-compliant policies. Specific gaps listed. THE TRANSFORMATION: Before: 2-4 hours per policy for manual review. Gaps discovered after contract signed. Inconsistent checking. After: 45 seconds with compliance score. Issues flagged before relationship begins. THE NUMBERS: 23 policies scanned last month 8 non-compliant policies caught 14 missing user rights identified 2 hours → 45 seconds per review Template in n8n and All workflows in Github

In this video I'm going to be teaching you how I'd make money with AI in 2026, if I had to start over from scratch. This will be the most actionable video you've ever seen about making money with AI. I'll breakdown everything, and fitting it all into this easy to learn 24 minute guide. Hope you enjoy!

1) 🚫 No Business Promotions → NO “DM me for…” or "Comment 'Automation'" posts. 2) 🔗 No Linking Your Own Community/YouTube Videos 3) 🏷️ Title Specifically 4) 🔍 Search for Help First (searchbar) 5) 🙌 Stay Respectful 6) ❌ Enforced Clean‑Up Posts that break these rules will be removed without warning. If you ever have questions, feel free to ask. Let’s make this the best AI Automation community out there by sharing, collaborating, and learning together. 🚀