A human is
always responsible.
We build with AI. We do not publish what it produces without reading it. Every change to our code, every page of documentation, and every blog passes a person before it goes out. The human stays responsible. The AI stays a tool.
The rule
We are a human-in-the-loop organisation. That is one rule, and it applies everywhere.
Nothing we produce is published on the say-so of a model. Code, documentation, blogs, research notes: a person reads the output, judges it, and decides. If nobody checked it, it does not ship.
This matters for accountability. A model cannot be responsible for a claim. The person who published it can, and is. When you read something on this site, someone at Conduction stands behind it.
Where we use it
Four places. Each one produces a draft, and a person takes it from there.
We write code with AI agents.
Our pipeline is called Hydra. An agent writes a change, a second agent reviews it, and a third checks it for security problems. Every change then runs through the same quality gates as any other pull request. A developer reads the result and merges it, or sends it back.
Read the Hydra series in the academy →We draft documentation with skills.
Two skills do most of the work. The journeydoc skill turns a real click-through of an app into a tutorial, with screenshots captured from the running product. The tutorial skill drafts the surrounding explanation. Both produce a draft. A person checks it against the product before it ships.
Browse the academy →We use AI to find and read sources.
AI is good at gathering material and summarising it. We use it to find standards, tenders, prior art, and documentation we would otherwise miss. We check the sources it returns. A summary is a starting point, not a citation.
We use AI to check our writing.
Spelling, grammar, and clarity. Most of our team writes in Dutch and publishes in English as well. AI helps us catch the mistakes that come with that, and tightens sentences that run too long.
Blogs and articles
Our blogs deserve a separate answer, because the question behind it is fair. Did a person write this, or did a machine.
A person wrote it.
The idea comes from a human. So does the subject, the angle, and the scope we set for the piece. The point being made is a human point. The opinion in it is a human opinion. If an article argues something, someone here believes that argument and put their name on it.
The AI does three jobs, and they are all support jobs.
The AI is a research tool and a writing tool. It is not the author.
The editing is human. A person decides what goes in, what comes out, and what the piece finally says. That is the job we do not hand over.
AI at Conduction.
Is anything on this site written entirely by AI?
No. Everything published here has been read and approved by a person. Some pages started as an AI draft, and the academy tutorials in particular are drafted with skills that capture the product as it actually runs. A person then checks that draft against the product and edits it. Nothing goes out unread.
Who is responsible if something is wrong?
We are. A model cannot hold responsibility for a claim, so we do not let it. The person who approved the text or merged the code is accountable for it, and Conduction is accountable as a company. If you find an error, write to [email protected] and we will correct it.
Do AI agents merge their own code?
No. Agents open pull requests and review each other, which catches a lot. The merge is a human decision, and the change runs the same quality gates as any other pull request: linting, static analysis, tests, and a security review.
Do you use our data to train models?
No. We do not train models on customer data. What we process, and why, is set out in our privacy policy.
Which parts of a blog are the author's own?
The idea, the subject, the angle, the argument, and the conclusion. Those are human every time. AI contributes source material, a spelling check, and suggestions on phrasing. The author decides what to keep.