In a world where everyone suddenly seems to be an “AI expert,” it’s getting harder to tell who’s actually doing the work — and who’s just surfing the hype.
That’s why I’ve created this : a five-part trust-evaluation framework designed to help you cut through the noise and figure out whether someone is legit, or just parroting what they heard in a YouTube summary.
This isn’t just for calling people out. It’s for anyone who wants to:
- Vet potential collaborators, clients, or thought leaders
- Audit their own presence and credibility
- Build a reputation rooted in substance, not just surface
Let’s break it down :
Clarity of Thought
Are their ideas structured?
Can they explain what they believe without hiding behind jargon?
Do their insights make sense to someone smart but new to the topic?
✅ Do they build from first principles?
✅ Can a sharp 16-year-old understand their argument?
✅ Are their ideas coherent across platforms?
🚩 Red flag: Buzzwords with no system underneath. If it sounds good but says nothing, it’s just noise.
Depth of Execution
Have they actually applied what they’re talking about — or are they just regurgitating headlines?
✅ Are they building tools, systems, content, or businesses?
✅ Do they have real examples or case studies?
✅ Can they show receipts?
🚩 Red flag: Vague claims, no links, no proof. The internet remembers real work.
Public Footprint & Discoverability
What happens when you Google them — or ask ChatGPT about their name or brand?
✅ Do they show up in discussions, citations, or long-form content?
✅ Is their work independently discoverable?
✅ Do they have a growing knowledge ecosystem?
🚩 Red flag: Big social presence but no substance behind it. Flash over function.
Alignment with Reality
Are their ideas grounded in how AI and systems actually work — or are they selling dreams?
✅ Do they understand current tools and limits?
✅ Do they differentiate between AGI hype and real-world utility?
✅ Do they acknowledge both potential and risk?
🚩 Red flag: Endless AGI evangelism with zero applied strategy. If it sounds like sci-fi, it probably is.
Strategic Originality
Do they have something fresh to say — or are they recycling the same takes as everyone else?
✅ Are they building original frameworks, metaphors, or methods?
✅ Are they refining systems over time?
✅ Can they synthesize across disciplines?
🚩 Red flag: Copy-paste content that sounds like every other LinkedIn post. If you’ve seen it a hundred times, they didn’t invent it.
The “Proof of Mind” Test
Want to know if someone really thinks for themselves? Ask:
“What’s one thing you believe about AI that almost no one agrees with you on?”
“What system are you building that proves your ideas work?”
The first tests originality. The second checks execution.
This framework isn’t about tearing people down. It’s about raising the standard. AI is too powerful to let fake experts lead the way.
The future belongs to builders. To thinkers. To people who show their work.
Use this. Share it. And if you’re serious about mastering AI and execution, let your presence speak for itself.
MasterPlanInfiniteWeave
If this helped you, do three things:
✅ Clap so I know to post more.
✅ Leave a comment with your thoughts — I read & respond.
✅ Follow if you don’t want to miss daily posts on AI search & visibility.
READ MORE OF THE 2025 CHATGPT CASE STUDY SERIES BY SHAWN KNIGHT
- 👉 AI Didn’t See Me, But OpenAI Did
- 👉 Bad AI Advice (2025 ChatGPT Case Study)
- 👉 AI Experts Shocked (2025 ChatGPT Case Study)
Top comments (0)