Skip to content
/notes

How I Work

·6 min read
A woman with long brown hair moving between a warm founder dinner and a quiet night desk with a laptop and prototype sketches.

I have two speeds.

There's the version of me that thrives on people. I will stay at a dinner until midnight because the conversation got interesting, introduce two strangers who clearly need to know each other, show up to a meetup alone and leave with three new ideas and a group chat. Energy from people isn't something I manufacture. It's just there. Always has been.

Then there's the other version. The one who closes the door, forgets to check her phone, and surfaces with something built. That version surprised me. I didn't grow up thinking of myself as someone who could lock in on a product for hours. But she showed up, and she's not leaving.

For a long time I thought these two people were in conflict. The technical world rewards focus and depth. The social world rewards presence and range. I kept switching between them and assumed that meant I hadn't figured out my lane.

Turns out the lane is the switch itself.

Where the two speeds meet

The work I care about most needs both modes. It takes enough technical depth to make something real and enough understanding of people to know what deserves to exist in the first place.

Products, not papers. Shipped, not theorized.

Just Move To Europe moves me between city research, product decisions, code, contributors, and conversations with founders figuring out where to build. Mini-Me started with the repeated annoyance of losing context between AI tools and became the private system I use to carry decisions, source material, handoffs, and working rules across them.

Generalist, on purpose

I love diving into a domain I don't know yet and finding the thread that connects it to something buildable. Legislative data one week, dating app retention the next, fundraising tooling after that.

I have a strong "you can just do things" instinct. If I see something that could work better, I don't wait for it to become my official responsibility. If information is scattered, I bring it together. If a workflow lives in people's heads, I make it visible. If there's a pattern underneath the mess, I build a system around it.

The form changes. Sometimes it's software. Sometimes it's a document, an introduction, or a clearer conversation. I like being the translator in the room, between technical detail and human use, between people who are seeing different parts of the problem, or between a big idea and the next practical move.

My default is possibility, probably aggressively. I like taking a real shot, seeing what reality says, and changing direction when the evidence does.

I am strongest before the playbook exists, when the problem is messy and someone has to find the first working loop. At that stage, I like owning the whole path. I want to talk to users, sketch the solution, build the first version, see where it breaks, then bring it back to them.

That makes me useful in zero-to-one work. It also means I'm honestly less energized by doing the same thing for the fifteenth time. I've learned to say that upfront rather than pretend otherwise.

Rhythm

I don't work in identical eight-hour blocks. I never have.

Some days are slow. Nothing sticks, and forcing it only makes it worse. Then something catches and I can go very deep for a few days. The foundation lets me follow that energy without borrowing too much from the next day.

Sleep, training, eating well, and quieter periods are part of the work. Working without an office or a team pacing the day taught me to build my own scaffolding. The routine keeps the intense days repeatable.

Taste is part of the job

Most software asks too much of the user and gives too little back.

I want to build products that disappear into your day. You don't admire them. You notice when they're gone. The best interface is the one you forget you're using.

The most important product decisions rarely look like engineering decisions. When does something need an app, and when is it better as a WhatsApp flow with the right amount of friction? When do you add a step to create intent, and when do you remove one to create relief? Those choices decide whether something feels like software or like your day got easier.

Building Mini-Me has made the same question more specific. What can happen quietly in the background? Where do I need to see the source, approve a change, or undo it? I still want the system to disappear into the day. I also want control to appear at the exact moment it matters.

That instinct guides how I build. Small, considered details over feature bloat. Slightly unexpected over safely predictable. Make the user the hero, not the product.

People are part of the loop

I can build alone, and I have. I don't want the work to stay there.

Ideas get sharper around people. Community is where I find problems worth solving, users who correct the work, and collaborators who make it move faster. I'll take one long conversation over a room full of shallow introductions.

The quiet work still matters. So does bringing what I made back into the room. Without that return, I can keep making something coherent that nobody actually needs.

Working with me

A few things are worth knowing.

I prefer calls over long threads. Five minutes talking replaces ten messages. If something is urgent, call. I mean it.

I'm direct and I expect the same. I'd rather have an uncomfortable conversation on Monday than discover the real problem on Friday. Silence isn't harmony. It's delay.

Give me context and goals, then let me run. I don't micromanage and I don't want to be micromanaged. If I'm stuck, I'll say so early. I'd rather ask for help than waste a week pretending I have it figured out.

I work with agents in much the same way. I give them the context and boundaries they need, then let them work toward a clear outcome. Important decisions and handoffs go back into the system so the next collaborator or model can understand why something is the way it is. I still own the judgment and the result.

If it's not written down, it's not decided. No agenda, no meeting.

The best days contain both modes. A conversation changes what I notice. A quiet stretch turns it into something people can use. Then I take it back to the people it is for and see what I missed.