PROOF

Dmitry Vaneev · digital products

I turn business problems into digital products that work

I start with the real task, choose proportionate architecture, and take responsibility for the product in operation.

View projectsDiscuss your project

First flagship · in development

Kernel: traceable work with engineering documents

The target system connects source data, findings, and human-approved decisions without presenting an AI suggestion as fact.

The deployment foundation is verified. The product workflow is not public yet.

Target workflow

  1. Source

    The document and exact evidence remain attached to the extracted fact.

  2. Review

    Rules and AI identify discrepancies without making the specialist's decision.

  3. Decision

    A person approves the conclusion while the system preserves its evidence and history.

Working products, not promises

Three different projects demonstrate the ability to choose an appropriate implementation and sustain the result, rather than a list of technologies.

Ultra Hi-End audio

DoMiSoul

Presents tube amplifiers, private listening sessions, and personal audio-system setup.

Role
Founder and engineer
What this demonstrates
Connects the commercial presentation of a real product with an operating digital system.
Read the caseOpen the operating product

Personal reputation site

Vaneev

Connects a personal position, a system of projects, editorial practice, and direct contact.

Role
Owner and author
What this demonstrates
Shows how to add an independent product area to a working site without replacing its existing root.
Read the caseOpen the operating product

The kinds of work I can own

I take on work that requires understanding the real process, agreeing on trade-offs, and bringing the solution into operation.

  1. Digital products and business processes

    I design a complete operating flow rather than an isolated screen or disconnected feature set.

    Still Stage

  2. Documents and AI under human control

    Automation helps find and connect facts while approval and responsibility remain with the specialist.

    Kernel

  3. Integration with an existing environment

    I work with current infrastructure and constraints without making the business fund an unnecessary rebuild.

    Vaneev

  4. Field and international workflows

    I account for work away from the office, language differences, and data moving between participants.

    Meridian and Facility

  5. Operations, security, and support

    Release, recovery, and maintainable operations are part of the solution wherever they materially reduce risk.

    Still Stage

Technical decisions should reduce risk

Engineering depth is not measured by the number of technologies, but by how well a solution fits the task and withstands the consequences of real operation.

Depth where it matters. Simplicity where it is the better choice.

  1. Complexity follows risk

    I define the business outcome and material constraints first, then choose the smallest sufficient architecture.

  2. A change must be verifiable and reversible

    Critical changes pass checks and have a clear recovery path before they reach production.

  3. The system limits authority

    Access for a person, service, or AI is shaped by the data involved and the acceptable consequences of error.

  4. The result must survive handover

    Structure, instructions, and operating decisions should remain understandable after development ends.

You do not need a perfect specification to begin

A real business challenge, the outcome you need, and the constraints that cannot be ignored are enough. We create the remaining clarity before and throughout the work.

Turnkey

When the result matters more than involvement in technical detail.

The client defines the challenge and expected outcome; I take responsibility for architecture, infrastructure, and engineering complexity.

Collaborative design

When active participation in decisions is important.

We discuss options, trade-offs, risks, cost, security, and the path forward openly.

Experience informs decisions; it does not replace evidence

Work across software, management, physical engineering, and entrepreneurship helps surface the cost of failure earlier.

20+years in software

Running companies, building owned products, and working with hardware-software systems shaped a practical standard: a solution must withstand operations, cost, and the consequences of failure.

  • Operating owned systemsRelease, monitoring, and recovery are designed before launch, not after the first failure.
  • Running companies and productionI study the real process, ownership, and human constraints before designing the interface.
  • Physical engineeringFailure modes, tolerances, and verifiability become part of the design rather than a late addition.
  • Building businesses and productsCost, adoption, and ongoing operation are considered alongside technical quality.

Future directions, with their status made clear

They indicate where the broader capability is heading without being presented as operating products.

Future direction · not implemented

Meridian

International trade, complex technical documents, and careful integration with existing systems.

Future direction · not implemented

Facility

Safe AI actions in property operations with approval, audit trail, and shutdown controls.

Show me the challenge — I’ll work out a sound solution

Two or three sentences about the process, constraints, and expected outcome are enough to begin.

Discuss your project

Still Stage, DoMiSoul, and Vaneev are real operating projects. Kernel, Meridian, and Facility are labelled according to their actual status.