We stopped building software and hired an employee instead
This page is the reasoning behind Nika, including the parts that are not finished. If you are deciding whether to hand a real job to something like this, you should have both halves.
What an owner actually wants
Nobody running a shop, a clinic or a workshop wants software. They want the invoice pile gone before dinner. The gap between those two sentences is where almost every business tool quietly fails. What owners describe, when you ask, is not a feature. It is a feeling: the relief of knowing the paperwork is handled, the way it would be if you had just hired the right person. That feeling is the product. Everything else is a means to it.
The wall: a tool still needs an operator
You have probably already tried to fix this. There was an app with a good demo, and for a fortnight it worked. Then it became another tab, and instead of typing invoices you were maintaining the thing that was supposed to type them for you. It is a Sunday evening in November. The laptop is open on the kitchen table. There are thirty-one unprocessed invoices in the inbox. Three are blurry photos. One is from a supplier who still faxes. You have been at this for forty minutes and you have entered four. The app you bought six months ago is still in your bookmarks. You have not opened it in five. This is not a failure of willpower. It is a structural problem: a tool does not do the work. A person does. The tool just changes which person.
Two futures, and the question that split them
Picture the same Sunday evening, one year from now, under two different futures. In the first, you bought another tool. It sits unused, next to the last one. The pile is still there, slightly larger, and you are still the one typing. In the second, you hired someone. The pile is gone before you open the laptop, because she did it during the day, and the only thing waiting for you is her evening report: three done, one held for your confirmation, no guesses. The question that splits those futures is not which tool to buy. It is whether the work gets done by someone who is not you. The only thing that ever took work off an owner's evening was somebody else doing it. So we stopped asking which features to build and asked what you would hand a person, if a person for this job existed. Two accesses. One narrow task. The same instructions you would give a new hire on their first day.
So that is what she is
Nika takes those two accesses and does one narrow job properly. She works like an employee works. She does the task. She asks when she is not sure instead of guessing. She writes you a plain-language report every evening. And she never sends money, deletes anything, or touches a case she is not certain about. This is not a chatbot with a job title. It is a job description with the accountability built in.
The cause: a number you can check
Every AI tool on the market right now has the same line somewhere: “trusted by 40,000 businesses”, “saving teams 30 hours a week”. Ask which 40,000, and there is no list. Ask how the 30 hours were measured, and there is no method. It is not a statistic. It is a costume. We are not going to do that, and we need you to know why that costs us. It costs us the easy headlines, the press quotes, the instant authority of a big number. We get one honest sentence instead: Nika is new, she has no employers yet, and when we have a number we will show you the list it came from. That is the trade we are making on purpose, and the whole point of this page is to make it loud enough to hold us to it. The cause is not Nika. The cause is a market where a vendor's claim can be checked — where “trusted by 40,000” means you can ask which 40,000 and get an answer. We are publishing the standard so you can test us the same way you would test anyone else. And we are saying it out loud, because a belief you cannot be held to is just a mood.
What we do not know yet
Nika is new, and she has no employers yet — you would be the first. Of the thirteen roles on the wall, one is live. The rest are job descriptions, not products. That is deliberate: the wall exists so employers can say 'I want that one next', and the ones with the most demand get built first. We do not know the error rate yet, because there are not enough finished jobs to measure it honestly. We do not know the industries where she struggles. We will tell you the moment we do, because the whole point of the standard is that it is testable, and a standard you cannot test is a marketing claim.
Which is why the price of finding out is five euros
You can reserve a spot for nothing, and a founding balance starts at the price of a coffee. Refundable. Untouched until she actually finishes something. We are new and money is the only signal that cuts through hope, so the first employers get the best terms we will ever offer. The risk is five euros and ten minutes. The upside is the Sunday evening pile, handled.