Tell us three things: 1. What you do (job, industry, student, career-changer, whatever) 2. What brought you to Clief Notes 3. One thing you're trying to figure out right now related to computing or AI I'll respond to every single one. And read each other's intros too because the person who's stuck on the same problem as you might already be in this thread. I'll go first I am Jake, I have been working in tech for 15 Years, building with Generative AI for 3 Years straight now! Excited to teach and learn! That's it. Simple, scannable, gives you data on who's joining and what they need, and keeps the feed clear for content that retains people past week one.

Six months in, I noticed I was outsourcing the thinking, not just the tasks to AI. I'd open a chat before I'd actually sit with the problem. I put the friction back deliberately: reading without it, first drafts without it, 20 minutes on a problem before I touch anything. I still use AI constantly. But I've found the line between tool and crutch is entirely about what you let it replace. Anyone else drawing lines like this? What did you fence off?

I think we all can agree — we're all looking for results. We're here to up our game by providing ourselves a finely honed knife that cuts through the clutter and delivers the best AI has to offer. Below is a response to one of our members who built a solid workflow around Jake’s Method / ICM, only to keep running into error after error. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- " Exactly — “exposed by a tool, not failed by it.” If you're running into error after error with Jake’s Method or ICM, it’s almost never the method itself. It’s almost always incomplete context. Think of it like this: You’re the best chef in your circle. You’re hosting a backyard barbecue. You spared no expense on ingredients and prepped everything perfectly… but you forgot the one secret ingredient that actually makes the dish hit. What hits the table ends up tasting like generic diner food. Same thing with AI. AI doesn’t fail. It simply delivers exactly what the context allows. No more, no less. When using Jake’s Method or ICM, the difference between clean one-shot builds and constant errors usually comes down to: - Crystal-clear definition of the final desired outcome - Tight, focused context files (I keep mine under 150 lines each) - One task, one outcome — chained together properly Most people fail because they either expect the AI to magically fill in the gaps, or they dump multiple sub-tasks into a single prompt and wonder why it falls apart. Give it the full map up front — role, constraints, success criteria, architecture decisions, everything. Do that consistently and the errors drop dramatically. How’s your Context MD file structured right now? That’s usually where the real leverage is. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The real skill isn’t finding the perfect prompting framework. It’s learning to brief the AI with the same precision and clarity you’d demand from a top-tier teammate or system architect. Master that, and everything else starts falling into place.

I'm curious what everyone here likes to do for fun (of course building stuff with Claude is fun too lol), and if you've applied any AI to your hobby. For me it's been super useful for DND planning and I find I get to stay in creative flow more. Curious what other people are doing

Well well well. Turns out my favorite troublemaker @David Vogel is only a hop skip and a jump away from me. We took this community to a new place…real life! Appreciate all of you! Continue reaching out and helping each other… who knows maybe we go live sometime.