AI with Pie

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie — the human behind AI with Pie.

“Could you see yourself living in Dubai?” I asked that question in early 2024. In this Personal Note, I share how it led to conversations about possibilities in Dubai, and how I came here for a project myself in 2025.

Young women on stage at WETEX and a question at AI Next get me thinking about how my work with AI is changing: dividing tasks among agents, checking answers that disagree, and asking questions that help me think further. Different perspectives can lead to new questions. Several agents can also make the same mistake.

What skill is becoming more important to you as you work with AI?

And today, November first, I’m sending a special birthday message from Dubai to my Mama: Thank you for making so much possible for us. Happy Birthday, Mama!

AI with Pie. Useful. Awkward. Fun.

Website: https://aiwithpie.com/

The show cover includes AI-generated imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

Chapters

00:00 A Question and the Road to Dubai
01:16 WETEX, AI Next, and Skills for the Future
02:35 One Agent and Several Agents
03:17 Thinking Further with Different Answers
04:27 A Question for You and a Birthday Message

Content note: This episode briefly mentions suicide in connection with AI conversations. No methods or detailed circumstances are described.

Why this matters to Pie: “I’m excited about what AI makes possible. That’s precisely why I care about discussing its risks, especially when people turn to it in emotionally difficult moments. Through my training sessions and this podcast, I want to help us make the most of AI while recognizing when validation can narrow our judgment and when human support is needed.”

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

AI keeps getting better. How do we keep our judgment sharp when an answer feels reassuring? A question Pie asked at AI Next in Dubai leads into a fictional example about canceled appointments, assumptions, and boundaries. We distinguish acknowledging a feeling from endorsing an interpretation, examine research on excessive agreement, and offer three concrete ways to make the exchange more useful.

Earlier episode: EP009 — Six Pages. And I Was Blown Away.. Background, goals, examples, and constructive challenge already feature in that episode; here we apply that preparation to personal conversations.

Sources and further reading

• The 2025 Top-100 Gen AI Use Case Report, pp.1/3. Curated public accounts, mainly Reddit; not a representative survey or evidence of therapeutic effectiveness. HBR article.
• Cheng et al., Science, 2026. Experimental findings on excessive agreement and interpersonal judgment; not a claim about every AI conversation.
• MIT Media Lab, longitudinal chatbot study, 2025. Heavier voluntary use was associated with worse outcomes. Association does not establish causation; assigned experimental conditions showed no significant effects.
• Raine complaint and OpenAI’s response. Opposing-party accounts, not a judgment or established causal finding. Sensitive legal material; no methods or private case details are discussed in the episode.
• WHO: suicide prevention and multiple risk factors. In immediate danger, contact local emergency services or an emergency department. AI is not a substitute for professional crisis support.
• Dr. Bock Institute, current successor institution/program information. Pie refers to her earlier business-coaching training at the Dr. Bock Coaching Academy, not a psychotherapy qualification or the current program’s credential.

Pie’s microphone question is recalled in substance, not quoted from a recording. No other participant’s reply is used. Training observations are personal; the canceled-appointment example is fictional. Independent research is not presented as conference conversation content.

A Personal Note about Pie’s February2025 experience of AI support is planned for early2027. No fasting advice or health claims. Visit aiwithpie.com.

The show cover includes AI-generated imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

Chapters

00:00:00 A second opinion
00:00:25 A brief content note
00:00:35 A question at AI Next
00:02:27 Two canceled appointments
00:05:10 When agreement shapes judgment
00:05:59 Preparing the collaboration
00:07:13 Is the conversation helping?
00:09:01 The limits of AI support
00:09:17 Three Things to Go
00:10:14 What comes next

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

Six pages of AI-assisted research once felt like a breakthrough. Pie looks back at library research, ChatGPT and WebPilot, later analyses and shared fieldwork in Dubai, and today’s AI agents. The conversation explores marketing groundwork, reasoned pushback, and human decisions informed by critical dialogue. Three Things to Go offer practical steps for the next research assignment, followed by a look ahead to Pie’s personal Dubai story in PN003.

https://aiwithpie.com

The show cover includes AI-generated imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

Chapters
00:00 Six pages and a red pen
01:03 Library research and early AI work
03:01 Later analyses and shared fieldwork in Dubai
03:43 Research with AI agents today
06:00 Marketing groundwork and critical dialogue
07:04 Three Things to Go
07:51 Next: the personal path to Dubai

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

An objection can expose the gap between what we have observed and what we have claimed. Pie and her AI co-host revisit a moment when “never” went further than her own conversations could support. Codex challenged the conclusion—and helped turn it into a more precise question.

What makes a counterargument worth examining? And when should you reject it? A conversation about trying things out, questioning assumptions, and keeping human judgment in the loop.

https://aiwithpie.com

The show cover includes AI-generated imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

A draft can change more than the wording. It can reveal that you need a different result. Pie and her AI co-host explore how an article accompanying the podcast became an editorial essay in its own right. Pie brings experience, direction, and editorial judgment; AI contributes proposals, structures, and alternatives.

Three questions for your next draft: Who is this for? What does that person need to follow it? What should they know or be able to decide afterward?

Editorial independence: Products mentioned are examples from Pie’s own work, not a request to buy. Pie pays for the use of ChatGPT and Codex described here and receives no compensation or other benefit for these mentions. Depending on their capabilities and limitations, other AI systems can also be used to explore these approaches.

https://aiwithpie.com

The show cover includes AI-generated imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

AI-generated voices. Conscious human direction. Every episode is created in collaboration with AI — under Pie’s direction and with her final approval. And yes: she’s the human behind it.

What deserves my energy? On my birthday, I share the moment I decided to redirect mine into something of my own — and how AI with Pie began.

The decision was human. AI helped make it happen. This Personal Note explores experience, clarity, new possibilities, and the people whose presence no technology can replace.

To my inner circle: this one is for you. You know exactly who I mean. Thank you.

AI with Pie. Useful. Awkward. Fun.

https://aiwithpie.com

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

What if the problem isn’t missing information, but two reasonable instructions that cannot both be followed?

Pie and her AI co-host explore the difference between adding context and making a decision. A real priority decision while building AI with Pie leads into an imagined report due on Friday—with figures that won’t be approved until Monday.

Together, they consider three questions: Can the system do the work? Does it have the relevant information? Can the instructions fit together? These are useful distinctions, not a universal method or a guarantee of correct results.

Three things to take into the next piece of work:
- Put the competing instructions next to each other.
- Make the choice explicit: what proceeds, what waits, and what no longer applies?
- Check the next proposed action against that decision.

What are we still doing because it used to make sense?

Visit https://aiwithpie.com and follow AI with Pie wherever you listen to podcasts.

The Show Cover includes AI-assisted imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie’s voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. Every episode is shaped and approved by Pie—the human behind AI with Pie.

A useful answer can make the next handoff feel easy. But what, exactly, are you trusting AI to do? Pie and her AI co-host examine a dated GPT-4 experiment, challenge the leap from a good result to a bigger decision, and offer three practical ways to keep the help without skipping the evidence. This is not a review of today's models.

Case and evidence note

This is a scripted editorial conversation, not a recording of study participants. The episode discusses a 2023 randomized experiment and distinguishes the reported findings from AI-with-Pie interpretation and practical advice.

Research: Dell'Acqua et al., Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality, Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2025.21838

Artwork transparency

The Show Cover includes AI-assisted imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

Website

https://aiwithpie.com

Chapters

(00:00) AI-generated voices. Deliberate human direction.

(00:12) Episode highlight: same model, different task

(00:18) Faster, better work—and the next job

(00:39) What was actually tested

(01:10) A useful tool, a tempting conclusion

(02:09) The turn: when AI hurt accuracy

(03:07) Where confidence gets ahead of the check

(04:09) A better handoff

(05:05) Three Things to Go

(05:54) Follow AI with Pie

(06:00) AI with Pie. Useful. Awkward. Fun.

This is the first AI with Pie Personal Note.

Some things remain unresolved for decades. In my family, there was one of those missing pieces.

On September 6, 2026, my father would have turned 80. And somehow, right around this date, a connection in his family story that had been missing for a very long time finally fell into place.

AI wasn’t the answer. But it helped us get moving again — finding possibilities, following leads, discarding the wrong ones and helping make an old question workable again.

This episode is about that moment — and about a side of AI we talk about far less often: its ability to help us revisit things we had long ago filed away as unresolved.

Personal, yes. Private, no.

And one question to take away:

Is there something you filed away as unresolved a long time ago — something that, with the possibilities we have today, might be worth a second look?

AI with Pie — Useful. Awkward. Fun.

What happens when an AI-generated voice says the right words, passes technical QA — and still does not sound consistently like the person it is meant to represent?

In Episode 004, Pie and her AI co-host revisit a real AI-with-Pie production case. A short voice test sounded convincing. The longer episode did not. Some passages felt warm and recognizably Pie; others sounded younger, more metallic, more distant or simply unlike the way she hears herself speaking English.

The difficult part was not finding one perfect setting. It was learning what actually needed approval: not a voice label or configuration, but each concrete take, sentence, thought group and assembled episode.

They discuss:

- why a technically clean file can still fail a human identity gate;

- why repeated regeneration is not automatically an improvement;

- how local repair protects performances that are already right;

- why content, technical and identity checks answer different questions;

- why the complete assembled episode still requires a full human listen;

- three practical rules for working with synthetic media that represents a real person or brand.

The next case begins with one tiny visual change — and a different room.

AI transparency

AI-generated voices. Human judgment. Pie's voice is generated from her own recordings with her consent; the AI co-host uses an AI-generated synthetic voice. This authored conversation was developed with AI, then reviewed, shaped and approved by Pie. It is an editorial reconstruction, not an unedited recording of a live conversation.

Case and evidence note

This episode reconstructs a documented AI-with-Pie production case. It reports observed voice inconsistency and the resulting repair process without claiming one proven technical cause. It does not identify clients, participants or private third parties and does not include private historical before-and-after voice clips.

Artwork transparency

The Show Cover includes AI-assisted imagery, art-directed and approved by Pie.

Chapters

(00:00) AI-generated voices. Deliberate human direction.

(00:12) Episode highlight: it passed QA

(00:21) The tinny voice from Oz

(01:29) A real-world field test

(01:51) The part that made no sense at first

(02:58) The setup looked the same. The result didn't.

(03:59) The tempting fix: render it again

(04:30) Why micro-patches were not automatically better

(04:55) Then technical QA passed

(05:53) The real diagnosis

(06:30) Repair the affected layer

(06:49) Why the full listen changed everything

(07:59) The rerun

(08:48) Why this is bigger than a podcast voice

(09:50) Three Things to Go

(10:56) The core shift: stabilize the approval process

(11:36) Next case: one tiny change, a different room

(12:10) AI with Pie. Useful. Awkward. Fun.

Website

https://aiwithpie.com