AI Practice
AI is driving the cost of execution toward zero — an idea can become a working product in hours. But once execution stops being the bottleneck, judgment becomes the scarce thing: AI can generate endless options, yet can't tell which one is right.
This is exactly where I come in. Years of interaction design have given me a clear sense of what "good" means, letting me cut the mediocre and keep what's right out of everything AI produces — and refine it to a quality I'm satisfied with.
Tools keep changing; methods endure: breaking needs into clear tasks, building stable workflows for each stage, holding output to my own standards. That process from concept to launch is my real, stable capability.
And so the ideas that once stayed in my head, or stuck in a prototype, can now be built one by one. That's what AI has given me — and my answer to it.
Before building, I use AI to map a field fast — market, competitors, real pain points. Research shrinks from days to hours, but telling real problems from noise still takes a designer's eye.
Diverge widely with AI, open a vague notion into multiple directions, gauge risk and feasibility, then converge on the one worth doing.
With AI I produce two key documents: a product design doc that pins down features and boundaries, and a development plan that breaks the design into executable steps.
Interfaces and interactions designed primarily in Figma, with Claude and Midjourney woven in to iterate fast. Tools combine as needed; quality stays my call.
Claude Code turns the designs into real code. I test screen by screen, log issues, give precise directions, until what's built matches what was designed.
Ship a minimum usable version first, then refine through real use — filling in details, growing "usable" into "mature."