User
Write something
🔒 Q&A w/ Nate is happening in 15 hours
Pinned
🚀New Video: Is n8n Dead?
Is n8n dead? This was a HIGHLY requested topic, and the biggest question I've been getting lately, especially as Claude Code has started surpassing n8n in search interest and YouTube views. In this video I share my honest thoughts on what's happening with n8n, whether you should still learn it as a beginner, and how I'm personally thinking about these two tools.
Pinned
🚀New Video: I Turned Clawdbot Into the Ultimate Personal Assistant
I turned Clawdbot into my 24/7 executive assistant, and in this video, I'm showing you exactly how to do the same. After spending 100+ hours refining this setup, I've built a system where my Clawdbot, Klaus, proactively manages my tasks, checks in on what I'm working on to offer help, and even builds things while I sleep. I walk you through the custom dashboard I use to track everything it's doing, share the exact setup you can copy, and reveal the hacks I've discovered along the way that most people miss.
Pinned
🏆 Weekly Wins Recap | Jan 24 – Jan 30
This week inside AIS+ was all about momentum kicking in. First real client conversations, confidence breakthroughs, retainers locked, and builders finally seeing doors open after consistent effort. Here are a few standout wins inside AIS+👇 👉 @Dion Wang sparked serious interest from a real estate client after sending a Loom - now prepping for a director-level presentation. 👉 @Sarah Swendseid landed her first two clients through warm outreach and is kicking off February with active builds. 👉 Sven Loeffler stacked back-to-back wins with two client calls - one for a lead-gen agent and another for executive coaching automation. 👉 @Wayne Dowden turned years of knowledge into income, landing a retainer deal by finally building what he used to only design. 👉 @Chris Shon booked 5 discovery calls, secured his first testimonial, and is now closing in on a paid engagement. 🎥 Super Win Spotlight | @Dion Wang This week’s standout story comes from a member who went from watching to committing. After joining AIS+, getting comfortable with n8n, and leaning into the community, he finally took the leap - booking his first real business call and realizing: “I can actually do this.” 🎥 Watch his short story here 👇 His journey is a reminder that progress isn’t just about tools - it’s about confidence, support, and choosing to go all-in instead of staying on the sidelines. ✨ Want to see wins like this every single week? Join AI Automation Society Plus and start turning learning into real conversations, real builds, and real opportunities 🚀
🏆 Weekly Wins Recap | Jan 24 – Jan 30
99.4% Accuracy Still Lost Client $42,000 🔥
Built document extraction system. 99.4% accuracy on test data. Client lost $42,000 in first month. The 0.6% errors hit their highest-value transactions. WHAT WENT WRONG: System accuracy breakdown: - 99.9% accurate on standard invoices - 96% accurate on invoices $5,000-$10,000 - 91% accurate on invoices $10,000-$50,000 - 87% accurate on invoices over $50,000 The bigger the transaction, the worse the accuracy. And that's where the money was. THE $42,000 INCIDENT: Invoice: $420,000 construction vendor payment Extracted amount: $42,000 (missed a zero) Payment processed: $42,000 Vendor called: "Where's the other $378,000?" Bank reversal fees: $850 Staff time to fix: 12 hours Client trust damage: Severe WHY HIGH-VALUE INVOICES FAIL: - Custom contract formats - Handwritten notes and exceptions - Multi-page complex layouts - Non-standard payment terms - Executive approval signatures All the edge cases. All on the expensive invoices. THE FIX - THREE VALIDATION LAYERS: LAYER 1: Format Validation - Extracted amount matches currency format? - Dates within valid business ranges? - Line items actually sum to total? - All required fields present? LAYER 2: Business Rule Validation - Amount within vendor's 6-month history range? - Payment terms match vendor profile? - Missing PO number for amounts over $5,000? - Unusual discounts or adjustments flagged? LAYER 3: Confidence-Based Routing - High confidence (>95%) + Low value (<$5,000) = Auto-process - Medium confidence (85-95%) OR Medium value ($5-20K) = Review queue - Low confidence (<85%) OR High value (>$20K) = Always human approval RESULTS AFTER IMPLEMENTING LAYERS: - Zero high-value errors: 8 months and counting - Human review required: Only 8% of documents (was 100%) - Processing speed: Still 82% faster than full manual - Errors caught before processing: 23 incidents - Estimated damage prevented: $187,000 THE LESSON: Accuracy percentage means nothing without context. What matters: What happens when it fails? Does it fail safely?
Small WINS!
What’s a small win you’re proud of but haven’t shared yet?
1-30 of 12,751
AI Automation Society
skool.com/ai-automation-society
A community built to master no-code AI automations. Join to learn, discuss, and build the systems that will shape the future of work.
Leaderboard (30-day)
Powered by