Real pieces of work, written up from their session records. Each one names no place, person or company. Each has two pages: an account for a general reader of what happened, who did what and what it cost, and a technical page on how throughline was used.
Residents of a housing estate were each fighting private parking charges alone. In three days, one person and an AI turned a one-page idea into an agreed specification, the legal paperwork and a working service. One person signed off 185 decisions; a second reading of the law found six duties the first had missed; a reversed design decision cost an afternoon, not a rewrite.
A consultancy's blog essay had been through four drafts in Word. In one evening a person and an AI took it apart into what it claimed and how it said it, checked every claim against a source, and put it back together as a fifth draft. Three facts the four human drafts had carried were wrong; change one character of a paragraph and the generated essay changes with it.
Residents of a housing estate were being charged for two short visits that the cameras read as one long stay. In one evening a person and an AI put a public page live that shows how likely that is, then reshaped it as he used it, taking features out as well as putting others in, with the reason for every change kept on a record he signed: 40 decisions, 2.1 hours of active work, 14 commits, 2 signed decisions changed afterwards and signed again. The map the page needed became a tool with a record of its own, 18 decisions and 8 tests.
A person with a 3D printer wanted a tool that makes a posting box shaped to any model, and asked for the record of decisions before the code. In one Sunday morning an AI wrote 71 decisions, the person signed every one, the tool was built to them in forty-three minutes with a test for each, and a change of mind, cutting the outside of the box back to a bounded wall, went through the record first. 13 signed decisions moved afterwards; the tool reported each; 2.4 hours of active work, 9 messages from the person.
A browser editor was already built, deployed and serving readers. Over three days a person and an AI wrote down in full what it does — 664 statements describing behaviour that already existed — so its engine could be taken out and reused. No new behaviour was created — though 466 of those statements had never been written anywhere, the editor's own record holding 198. Seven faults came out anyway, every one already being carried by a product in use: a security policy weaker than the standard it follows, two unguarded routes at a sign-in relay, a rule already broken twenty-eight times, a number wrong in nine places at once, sixty-one claims of conformance that quietly stopped being made, and one reason standing in for two decisions. 473 statements were waiting to be signed on the morning of the third day; 81 had to be signed twice; 7.7 hours of the AI's working time and 101 messages from the person.
A consultant asked an AI for a monthly briefing deck and, thirteen minutes in, for a record of decisions instead. By the evening the briefing was a signed record built into a deck and published behind a sign-in; over nine more days the script became a product that builds, narrates, subtitles, shares and presents decks from records in their own repositories, itself on eight records of 1,060 statements, every one written by the AI and all but two signed by him. On the tenth day the narrated video of his fifty-slide conference talk, built from a record of its own, was uploaded to send; that record was never signed, by his choice, and the product was changed to allow it. 371 commits, 173 pull requests, 55 of them signatures given in a browser; 34 signed statements moved afterwards and signed again; 69.7 hours of the AI's active time and 840 messages from the person.
A consultant with a thirty-minute talk to give asked an AI for the slides and called the result boring. What he asked for instead was the argument: five acts, twenty claims, thirteen pieces of evidence and six constraints, written in an evening on a record shaped for a talk. A week later the slides, claims and sources became a second record that a product built into a deck, spoke in his cloned voice, subtitled and filmed, while he rewrote it one comment per slide, each comment one commit. A demonstration built from nothing in an evening lost to a signed page reworked in thirteen minutes. 246 statements across three records; 95 commits; the deck's 167 statements published unsigned by his decision, and the story's signatures never committed; 33 hours of the AI's active time and 448 messages from the person.