Regulated-industry boundaries
Some of the most valuable workflows sit next to regulated decisions. The opportunity is real, but only if you stay firmly on the administrative side of the line.
This is orientation, not legal advice. Regulated deployments require qualified legal and domain review in the relevant jurisdiction.
Healthcare: administration, never diagnosis
Scheduling, reminders, intake paperwork, translation of routine messages and back-office documentation are fair game. Clinical assessment, triage of urgency, and anything touching diagnosis or treatment are not. The product schedules and organises; qualified staff decide anything medical.
Municipal and public services: guidance, not adjudication
Helping a citizen find the right form, check completeness and submit an application is valuable. Deciding whether a right or benefit is granted is a public-authority decision, made by authorised officials under law — not by a model. Keep the system on navigation, completeness and routing; leave the ruling to the authority.
Money: propose, but let rules and people commit
Prices, quotes, invoices and totals must be produced by deterministic logic and confirmed by a person. AI may draft and extract; it must not be the final authority on a number that someone pays.
Safety and compatibility: authoritative data only
Anything where a wrong answer is dangerous — part compatibility, structural figures, legal deadlines — must come from an authoritative source with a human accountable, not from a model's best guess.
Design the boundary into the product
- Make the hand-off explicit in the UI: "This needs a qualified person."
- Log the boundary crossing for audit.
- Never let a confident-sounding output blur a line the law draws sharply.
Respecting these boundaries is not a limitation to apologise for — in regulated markets it is precisely what makes you trustworthy enough to buy.