:An Answer Isn't the Same as a Decision 🤖🧠 AI can give you an answer in seconds. It can process...:An Answer Isn't the Same as a Decision 🤖🧠 AI can give you an answer in seconds. It can process...
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
What if you could reduce AI infrastructure costs by 82% without sacrificing performance? 🤔
Chinese open-source AI models are changing the economics of AI.
Would you trust open-source models over expensive commercial APIs?
Full breakdown: https://blog.webdevlab.org/chinese-open-source-ai-models-cut-ai-costs
Built image search for a furniture catalogue with 50,000+ products.
The problem with big catalogues: people know what they want but not what it's called. "That curved velvet chair with brass legs" doesn't match any product title.
So the customer uploads a photo, and the site finds the closest items in the catalogue.
Numbers after launch:
the right product shows up in 99% of searches
15.6% of all visits use the photo search
17,000+ searches so far
Then a second feature on the same base: AI try-on. The customer uploads a photo of their room and sees the piece in it before buying.
The model is the easy part. Clean catalogue data is where these projects live or die.
I’ve been working on a small skill called Manual Orchestrator to make longer projects with AI agents easier to manage.
The problem started with a familiar situation: one chat would accumulate plans, implementation details, corrections, and test results. By the time I was ready for the next phase, I wanted a fresh conversation without losing the decisions we’d already made.
Manual Orchestrator gives that process some structure. One chat acts as the orchestrator: it breaks the work into stages and writes a prompt for the next one. I run that prompt in a new session, then bring the result back. The orchestrator reviews it against the stage’s criteria before preparing the next prompt. If something needs fixing, I go back to the same worker session.
The skill also keeps a record in the project with the current stage, decisions, evidence, and next steps. That makes it easier to pause, resume, or hand the work to another session.
The handoff is manual. I choose when to open a session and carry the result back. The orchestrator and worker sessions can also use different agent CLIs, with the prompt adapted to the capabilities available.
It’s open source and still a work in progress. I’m using it to learn what helps in practice and where the workflow needs to improve. Installation has been checked for Codex, Claude Code, and Gemini CLI, but the full workflow hasn’t been tested across every CLI or version.
If you try it, I’d be interested in hearing what works and where it gets in your way.
I like that the handoff is manual. A written record with decisions and next steps is what I miss most when a long AI chat gets messy. How do you decide when a stage is finished: with tests, or with your own review?