"Learn backpropagation" is a roadmap item you can tick without being able to do it.
In my handbook it reads: implement backprop for a two-layer net in NumPy and match PyTorch's gradients to 1e-6. You either have that artifact or you don't.
It's a free AI/ML engineering handbook for people who ship ML systems, not notebooks. No signup, no email, no tracking.
All 42 roadmap nodes get the same three lines:
- prove it: an artifact, not an activity
- why it matters: what breaks in production without it
- an honest time estimate for someone studying around a job
Also inside:
- a RAG deep dive with a failure-mode taxonomy: symptom → cause → diagnostic → fix
- 122 interview questions and, where it matters, a weak answer next to a strong one
- a startup playbook: build, buy or fine-tune, with the cost arithmetic shown
- 3 calculators: GPU memory and KV cache, cost per successful outcome, vector index sizing
- 50 field notes and 6 long reads
Don't start at stage 00. Read the prove-it lines, and whatever you couldn't produce this afternoon is your list.
Link in the reply.
What would you make an ML engineer prove before you'd trust them with production?
You've cut the same three things out of every AI draft: the exclamation marks, the "excited to share", the closing line that reads like a press release.
None of it carries over. The next chat opens with the same default voice.
A style note inside one chat dies with that chat. A Skill doesn't: it's a folder of instructions Claude loads on its own when the task matches. It reads the short description of each skill, picks what fits, and pulls in the full instructions only then.
What goes in it:
1. The description, in third person, with the trigger inside: "Writes customer emails in the user's voice. Use when drafting outreach or follow-ups." That sentence is what makes it fire.
2. Three samples you'd send as they are — a cold email, a follow-up, a reply to a complaint — each with one line on why it works.
3. A never list, copied from your own edits: no exclamation marks, no "excited to share", no opener that stacks three adjectives.
4. The shape: 80-120 words, open with what changed for them, close with one question.
Then run it on an email you already sent. When it fires you'll see "Using [skill name]" in Claude's thinking; if it stays quiet, fix the description, not the samples.
Common mistake: writing the description for yourself ("my writing style") instead of for the model — it never matches a request, so the skill sits unused.
What's the first thing you delete from every AI draft?
Follow @ka1manov — next: web search or Research, and how to tell which one a question needs.
Hey everyone
I'm looking to #connect with people who are interested in : Vibe Coding | Fullstack | AI/ML | Data Science
If you’re into any of these, let’s connect. Do your thing @X
You type "write a landing page for our product" and get something that reads like a press release. The model didn't fail. It did the job it was given, and the job had no reader, no example and no context.
When an answer is weak, I check the setup before I blame the model. Five gaps come up again and again:
1. No standing context. A new chat opens with none of your background, so the customer profile and product details are retyped or skipped. One workspace with instructions and your key files fixes that for every chat inside it.
2. No reader. "Write an email" gives the model nothing to aim at. "Write an email to a store owner who ignored two follow-ups, under 80 words" gives it a target.
3. No definition of good. Without one, the model picks the average answer. Paste one you'd sign off on.
4. Style by adjective. "Make it sound like me" produces the same generic voice you'd get without it. Three real samples of your writing and a short never-say list produce yours.
5. One model for every job. A two-line rewrite and a 40-page contract review don't need the same one. Run 20 real cases through two candidates and keep the cheaper one that passes.
In Claude those are a Project, a structured prompt, a voice Skill and a model test. Other assistants cover the same ground under different names.
Which of the five do you skip most often?
I consulted on a crypto trading system for BTC and ETH on Binance and helped build it. We wrote and backtested over 210 strategies.
Your guess: how many of them were still profitable after 6 months? After a year?
@elonmusk Hey Elon, yesterday me and my friends were voting to be a part of Head management of Tesla. We decided to release you. So friend just go away and sell your stocks. You are nobody for Tesla. You are nobody for world.
@elonmusk Hey Elon, yesterday me and my friends were voting to be a part of Head management of Tesla. We decided to release you. So friend just go away and sell your stocks. You are nobody for Tesla. You are nobody for world.