Technology assessment.

A technology assessment is an independent judgment on a technical decision that is still open: the artificial intelligence (AI) model you are about to depend on, the data it needs, the open source stack you could build on, or the claim in a paper or a pitch.

You receive the question stated precisely, the options that remain, what each assumes about the people who will use it, and what each commits you to.

My perspective is holistic and socio-technological: I look at how your stack, processes, people, and AI agents work together. Human needs, judgment, and responsibility stay at the centre.

You might be a founder deciding what to build on, or a leader deciding whether to train, buy, or wait. You may be responsible for a system that nobody has examined from the outside, or for a promise a vendor made to you.

You may be working through questions of AI leadership: where to invest, which capabilities your organisation needs, and who remains accountable when people delegate work to agents.

You may be asking about AI readiness, technical debt, or vendor lock-in. We look at where automation would help, how humans and agents share the work, and what digital sovereignty would mean in practice: what you can inspect, change, operate, or move elsewhere.

You can bring an architecture, a dataset, a repository, a paper, or a pitch. A vague worry is enough to begin.

I have worked with open source technology and systems for more than twenty years, using and adapting Linux, writing code, and building stacks that people and machines can inspect and control. My work on artificial intelligence and consciousness spans more than fifteen years.

I studied mathematics, computer science, and analytic philosophy of technology. Information ethics grounds my assessment of whose purposes a system serves, what it assumes about people, and who bears the consequences.

For more than ten years, I have assessed technology in international, interdisciplinary research and development at the University of Stuttgart and Fraunhofer, four of them leading a team.

I translate between the people who build a system and the people who decide about it, so that a technical finding becomes a decision you can explain.

I am independent of every vendor and build only with open source. The judgment you receive has no product to sell.

See my background.

We begin with a conversation about the decision and what a good answer would have to settle. Once we have agreed the scope, I examine what you bring and how it fits the work it is meant to support.

You receive my judgment and its reasons in plain language, with the technical detail where a specialist can check it. We discuss the findings together, in person or by video, including what remains uncertain. A written assessment is available if you want one.

What you do with the assessment remains your decision. Where it raises questions about your own direction or responsibility, we can explore them through personal counsel.