Each project is described the way a field guide describes a creature: where it was found, how it behaves, and what encountering it revealed. Thirty seconds per entry is a complete reading. So is twenty minutes.
specimen 01
This website alive
first seen
2026, after nine rounds of research that were partly wisdom and partly hiding
habitat
plain HTML, hand-written CSS, one small script — under 100 KB, no trackers
behaviour
organizes itself by personal taxonomy; refuses templates; keeps its errors public
status
alive and expected to change
The most honest thing I can tell you about this portfolio is that making it nearly became a way of not making it. I generated a hundred concepts, audited them three times, tested them against a ten-year survival rule, and built a six-hundred-principle design genome — before writing a single page. Some of that was rigor. Some of it was fear with a bibliography.
the longer reading — what the process actually was
The research produced five principles that survived every audit: organization reveals thinking; show the unfinished; give the viewer something; keep contradictions; make care visible in small details. Everything you're looking at is those five sentences, executed.
What surprised me: the audits kept killing my favorite ideas and sparing the plain ones. The concept I mourned most — an elaborate fictional archive — failed the simplest test: it impressed people without letting them meet me. The audit that did the killing is kept, verbatim, in 004.
What I'd do differently: fewer rounds, earlier drafts. The tenth version of a plan is worth less than the second version of a thing.
specimen 02
The rule-leakage experiment resting
first seen
2026, a Python simulation built out of curiosity about AI systems
habitat
a simulation script, two rule files — one public, one private — and a results pickle
behaviour
tests how much of a hidden rule set can be inferred from a system's visible behaviour
status
resting — results collected, conclusions not yet written up
A small experiment about a large question: if a system follows rules you can't see, how much do its answers give away? I built a toy version — public rules, private rules, and a probe that measures the leak. ask me about this
the longer reading
What I found, what surprised me, and what remains unresolved belongs here. The honest current state: the results file exists, the write-up doesn't. That gap is itself information about how I work — collection comes easily, conclusion takes discipline.
specimen 03
Automations that outlived their novelty in use
first seen
2025–2026, workflow experiments — n8n pipelines, research agents, call-automation studies
habitat
the unglamorous middle of my computer
behaviour
quietly does the same boring thing correctly, every day
status
in use — which is rarer than impressive
Not portfolio pieces in the usual sense. But a tool that a person actually uses every week says more than a demo that was used once, for a screenshot. The one I'd show you first is the research briefing pipeline.
the unfinished
Things I want to build and haven't
Listed publicly, because incompleteness is a fact and not a flaw, and because a wish written down behaves differently from a wish kept private.
The rule-leakage write-up, done properly, with the humility the data deserves.
A tool that turns my reading into a searchable personal library.
Something physical. I have spent too long inside the screen.
placeholder page-note: specimens 02–03 need your real details where marked ＊. Specimen 01 is fully real — it is this site's own history and needs no editing.