AI Guides › Workbench
By Nigel Guy · 6 min read
Most people who want to "understand AI" subscribe to six newsletters, bookmark forty videos and finish none of them. It feels like progress because the pile keeps growing, but a pile is not understanding. A few well-chosen sources, read in order and tested against something you actually do, will take you further than a feed ever will.
The rule: pick one source per format per rung, finish it, then use what it taught you on a real task before you climb.
This kit is a short, checked list of free or cheap sources. Each is something we could confirm exists and is described accurately at the time of writing. Where we could not confirm something, we say so below rather than pad the list.
| Source | Format | What it does | Cost at time of writing | Best for | Catch |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elements of AI | Course | University of Helsinki and MinnaLearn course for non-specialists, no maths or programming needed in the introductory part | Free | Rung 1 | Self-paced, so nothing forces you to finish |
| AlphaGo (2017) | Documentary | Ninety-minute film on the Go match in Seoul, directed by Greg Kohs | Free on the DeepMind YouTube channel | Rung 1 | A story about one system, not a survey |
| The Thinking Game | Documentary | Five-year film on Demis Hassabis and AlphaFold, free on YouTube since late 2025 | Free | Rung 1 | Made with DeepMind's cooperation, so it is a portrait, not scrutiny |
| Karpathy, "Intro to Large Language Models" | Video talk | One-hour explanation of how chatbots work, no maths needed | Free | Rung 2 | Recorded November 2023, so product details are dated |
| Co-Intelligence (Ethan Mollick) | Book | Working with AI as a colleague | Cover price varies by shop | Rung 2 | Written for general readers, light on mechanism |
| AI Snake Oil (Narayanan and Kapoor) | Book | Princeton authors on what AI can do, what it cannot, and how to tell the difference (Princeton University Press, 2024) | Cover price varies by shop | Rung 2 | A sceptic's lens by design |
| The Alignment Problem (Brian Christian) | Book | History of technical AI safety and human values (Norton) | Cover price varies by shop | Rung 3 | Dense in places |
| Human Compatible (Stuart Russell) | Book | Argues the standard way of building AI is flawed | Cover price varies by shop | Rung 3 | One author's thesis, not a neutral survey |
| One Useful Thing | Newsletter | Ethan Mollick's research-based writing on AI at work and school | Free, with paid option | Rungs 1 to 2 | Not on a fixed schedule we could confirm |
| The Batch | Newsletter | Weekly AI news from DeepLearning.AI | Free | Rung 2 | News-led, so it rewards context you build elsewhere |
| Import AI | Newsletter | Weekly research frontier digest by Jack Clark, an Anthropic co-founder | Free, with paid option | Rung 3 | Written by someone inside the industry; read with that in mind |
| Latent Space | Podcast and newsletter | Technical talk for people building with AI | Free | Rung 3 | Aimed at engineers |
Goal: be able to explain, in your own words, what a model is, what training means, and why chatbots get things wrong.
Goal: know why the tools behave as they do, and use one daily.
Goal: hold an informed view on risk, policy and limits.
After each source, write five sentences explaining it to a friend with no background, then name one thing you will try this week. If you cannot, you consumed it rather than learned it. Use this prompt to get an honest critique of your five sentences.
You are a patient tutor helping an adult beginner build AI literacy.
Context: I have just finished [SOURCE_NAME], which is a [FORMAT]. My level is [BEGINNER / INTERMEDIATE / ADVANCED].
My task: Below is a five-sentence explanation of what I learned, written for a friend with no background.
[YOUR_FIVE_SENTENCES]
What a good result looks like: you tell me what I got right, what I got wrong or oversimplified, and what I left out that matters.
Steps:
1. Check each sentence against what you know about the source. If you do not know the source well, say so and ask me for the key claims instead of guessing.
2. List errors first, then gaps, then what is solid.
3. Ask me two questions that test whether I understand the idea rather than the wording.
4. Suggest one small task I could do this week with [TOOL_OR_WORK_CONTEXT] to apply it.
Constraints: plain English, no jargon without a one-line definition, no invented facts or quotes. If you are not sure something is true, mark it as uncertain.
Before answering, re-read your feedback and delete anything you cannot defend.
Fill in the source, your level, your five sentences and a tool or work context you use.