My AI Practice

Turn scattered AI use into a considered practice: what you use it for and why, what you dropped, what you never use it for, how you check, and where you stop in the advice areas.

Practice, not research. The reasoning rests on mixed research on the uneven edge of AI capability (Dell'Acqua et al., 2026) and on official data protection guidance (IMY; EDPB). The page itself and its boundaries are practitioner craft.

Use it when:

• You use AI tools here and there and cannot say why for each use.
• You are skeptical and want to state under what conditions you would use it at all.
• Tools or terms have changed and you want to check that your habits still make sense.

Skip it when:

• You want to sort your work tasks for AI: use 10.7 AI Task Map.
• You need rules for a team: use 10.10 Team AI Policy.

Use of AI tends to spread by convenience: a tool is there, so it gets used. The evidence argues for choosing instead. In a preregistered experiment, consultants did better with AI on tasks within its reach and worse on one task just outside it, and the edge between the two did not follow how hard the tasks looked (Dell'Acqua et al., 2026). Gut feeling about what AI can do is therefore a poor guide, and each use needs its own reason you can state.

The study covers one firm and one model generation, so it shows that the edge exists, not where it runs for you now. Personal data is a second reason to decide in advance: regulators treat personal data in AI tools as ordinary data protection (IMY; EDPB, 2024), and in private use the settings and the line are yours. This page makes both choices explicit on one page you can revisit.

Fill every row with something specific. A use has a reason when you can say it out loud: "It saves me 20 minutes on a draft I then edit" is a reason, "it's there" is not.

Strong answer: "Uses: first drafts of routine mail, because it saves time after I edit; a counterargument to my plan, as a thinking partner. Dropped: news summaries, after two distortions against the originals."

Illustrative example: the person and the firm are made up.

A project manager at a construction firm in Norway writes her page.

Step 1: uses: meeting-prep summaries of her own notes, first drafts of routine mail, and a thinking partner ("argue against my plan"). Dropped: news summaries (she found two distortions against the originals) and workout plans (too generic). Never: feedback on named colleagues. Check: any fact she will repeat gets a source first.

Step 2: health: plain-language explanations of terms before an appointment, nothing about decisions. Money: concepts only; a human above her own threshold.

Step 3: she keeps her own first drafts of anything strategic, because drafting is where she finds out what she thinks.

Step 4: after a week she notices one paste she had not thought through. Review trigger: the next major tool change, or the next time she pastes before thinking.