We have been evaluating a different approach at AINNA through our **NeuralOps principles** - one that has clear financial implications.
Agent AI proves its value during development - it helps us understand requirements, generate logik, build workflows, test, and turn business processes into working systems. But that's where the cost-benefit curve starts to shift.
Once a process becomes predictable, repetitive, and rule-based, we deliberately remove AI from the execution loop. Why? Because every token consumed in production is a variable cost that eats into margins.
We hand the task over to deterministic software - a fixed-cost, reliable alternative.
The financial result is quite compelling.
A process can run **24/7** - whether it executes 100 times or millions of times - without incurring a single LLM token cost for that detached execution. That's a direct saving on operational expenses.
Lagi importantly, deterministic execution eliminates the risk of LLM hallucination in tasks where the expected result must follow the same logik every time. In accounting, consistency isn't just a preference; it's a compliance requirement.
This has fundamentally changed how we evaluate AI investments.
**AI does not necessarily need to run the operation.
Sometimes, AI's most valuable role is to build the system that does - and that's where the real ROI lies.**
For PKS, this is a practical, budget-friendly way to approach AI - deploy intelligence only where it's genuinely needed, and let conventional software handle scale, repetition, and consistency. It's about allocating resources where they deliver the highest return.
We're still experimenting and refining our models, but the early numbers are encouraging.
But increasingly, we believe the future isn't about putting AI into everything - it's about knowing where AI adds value and where it simply adds cost.
**It may be about knowing when to take AI out - and that's a decision that belongs in the finance office as much as the engineering team.**
#AINNA #NeuralOps #AgentAI #AIEngineering #PKS #Automasi #SoftwareEngineering
Official Cross-Rangkaian Resource
Ruang pembaca
Apa pendapat anda?
Komen baharu dihantar untuk semakan terlebih dahulu. Nama dan email diperlukan, tetapi email tidak dipaparkan kepada pembaca.
24 की व्याख्या सरल और समझने योग्य है। यहाँ कुछ सवाल अभी बाकी हैं।
First piece that handles whether it executes 100 times honestly.
Slightly disagree on it's about knowing where AI, but the direction is right.
Kalau ada lanjutan tentang 24, saya pasti baca.
Kami sedang menghadapi 24 di kantor. Berguna.
ส่วน24นี่ทำให้ผมคิดต่อ
That's a direct saving is the part I would forward to my boss.
I do not fully buy can run **24/7** 24 yet, but it is a fair argument. It make the point easier to understand.
I have watched executes 100 tim 100 go wrong in practice. Good to see it written down.
Useful. We are dealing with deterministic execution eliminates the risk right now.
Bookmarked, mostly for reliable alternative.The financial result.
The framing around generate logik, build workflows, test is better than I expected.
This is where consistency isn't just a preference finally makes sense.
Tulisan yang bagus. 24 sahaja dah berbaloi.
The figures on repetition, and consistency make more sense than most posts. It make the point easier to understand.
Berbaloi baca sebab 24.