Technology / A practical calculator
Compare the whole task, not just the moment an answer appears. This free calculator includes setup, assisted production, checking, repairs, and upkeep. It shows a loss when the new workflow takes longer.
No AI runs here. The page performs arithmetic on numbers you enter. It does not observe your work, check your output, or predict productivity.
Use minutes, with up to two decimal places, from 0 to 100,000. Fill every number, including an explicit 0 when a cost does not apply. Use active effort consistently; count waiting only when it prevents other useful work, and never count the same minute twice.
Entries stay in this page and clear when you leave. The calculator does not send or store them. Site-level analytics and web fonts still operate as described in Privacy; your browser and clipboard have their own handling. Do not enter confidential information.
Compare the same task at the same acceptable quality. Must be greater than 0.
Include prompting, input preparation, active production, and blocked waiting.
Include fact-checking, corrections, failed attempts, and cleanup. Do not count time already included above.
A whole count from 1 to 100,000. Use the same window for upkeep.
Include learning, configuration, and template preparation. Use 0 when none.
This is the total for the window, not per task. Use 0 when none.
Save or copy the result first if you need it.
These inputs are fictional teaching examples, not results from Nolan or claims about any AI service.
Usual effort: 30 minutes. Assisted production: 8 minutes. Review and repair: 7 minutes. Six repetitions, 60 minutes of setup, and 15 minutes of upkeep.
Usual total: 180 minutes. Assisted total: 165 minutes. Net saving: 15 minutes. The per-task difference is 15 minutes, against 75 minutes of overhead. Five repetitions exactly recover that overhead; positive savings start at six. Quality still needs checking.
Use the same 30, 8, and 7 minutes, but do the task once, with 60 minutes of setup and no upkeep.
Usual total: 30 minutes. Assisted total: 75 minutes. Extra effort: 45 minutes. A quicker draft does not recover the setup. A one-off task may be better handled by the simpler method.
Usual effort: 20 minutes. Assisted production: 5 minutes. Review and repair: 18 minutes. Ten repetitions, 10 minutes of setup, and 5 minutes of upkeep.
Usual total: 200 minutes. Assisted total: 245 minutes. Extra effort: 45 minutes. Each repetition costs 3 additional minutes even before overhead. Repeating this unchanged workflow will not create a time saving.
Let N be repetitions, M usual effort, A assisted preparation and production, R review and repair per task, S setup, and K total upkeep for the window. All time inputs use minutes.
Usual total = N × M Assisted total = S + K + N × (A + R) Net time saved = N × (M - A - R) - S - K
When the per-task difference M - A - R is positive, the first repetition with no net time loss is the ceiling of (S + K) divided by that difference, with at least one repetition. Strictly positive savings start one whole repetition beyond the floor of that ratio. A result of zero is break-even, not a saving.
Both thresholds hold setup and upkeep fixed. They are not a prediction of calendar time. If more repetitions require extra maintenance, or if task difficulty changes, enter a new comparison. The calculator uses integer hundredths of minutes so exact break-even does not depend on binary decimal rounding.
Time is only one cost. Subscription fees, cognitive effort, enjoyment, privacy, reliability, and the effects on other people are not converted into a score. A workflow that fails the acceptance standard is not an equivalent replacement, even when its time result is positive.
For observations, keep comparable tasks and include failed attempts. A simple before/after comparison is not a controlled experiment and cannot isolate whether AI caused a change. Label estimates as estimates and revisit them after doing the work. Read Did the tool actually make life easier? for the broader decision.
Save the blank workflow review (.txt). Nothing needs to be submitted to this site.
WORKFLOW TIME REVIEW Use privately. Do not include confidential task material. Task and acceptance standard: Comparison window and repetition count (N): Basis: planning estimates / observed times (describe how collected) Usual effort per task (M), minutes: Assisted preparation and production per task (A), minutes: Review and repair per assisted task (R), minutes: One-time setup (S), minutes: Upkeep across the comparison window (K), minutes: Compare the same work at the same acceptable quality. Use a consistent measure of effort. Count waiting only when it prevents other useful work; do not count a minute twice. Include failed attempts and cleanup. Usual total = N * M Assisted total = S + K + N * (A + R) Net time saved = N * (M - A - R) - S - K If M - A - R is positive, no net time loss begins at the ceiling of (S + K) / (M - A - R), with at least one repetition. Strictly positive savings begin at floor((S + K) / (M - A - R)) + 1. These thresholds hold setup and upkeep fixed. Recalculate if they grow. If the per-task difference is zero or negative, repeating the workflow does not create positive time savings at those costs. Quality check: not yet checked / met / not met What was checked, against which source or independent example? What failed or needed repair? Privacy, money, reliability, enjoyment, and effects on other people: Uncertainty and what would change the decision: Decision: keep / adjust / stop / gather more observations Next review point: An estimate is not a measured outcome. A before/after observation alone is not proof that AI caused the change. This is a time comparison, not financial ROI, a safety assessment, or a quality score. Nolan Kido | https://nolankido.com/technology/ai-time-savings/
Before the task, write a clear AI task brief. Before accepting the output, see how a real website change was checked. Afterward, ask what the time you keep is actually for.
Prepared with AI assistance. The arithmetic is transparent; examples are fictional. Your entries and quality assessment are not independently verified.