Not employer-owned automation. Personal productive capital.
The economic model starts from a different premise than ordinary enterprise AI. The employer does not buy and own the person's +. The individual develops a portable augmentation within the Human Capital .+ platform and may use it across employment relationships under explicit data and IP boundaries.
The individual
Contributes teaching effort, corrections, experience and potentially money. This strengthens both commitment and the ownership logic.
The employer
May contribute because an augmented worker creates more reliable output, frees scarce capacity, reduces errors or avoids additional labor cost.
The + itself
Once productive enough, a portion of created economic value can pay model, compute, storage, verification and continued-development costs.
Working baseline: <€50k salary, 37.5 h/week.
The first model is deliberately personal and practical. Salary remains stable while the human requirement falls only if the combined person + augmentation continues to create sufficient value.
The + should gradually pay for itself.
Subsidized learning
The person and possibly the employer fund the early stage while the + is still learning and produces little independent value.
Useful assistance
The + begins removing measurable human minutes from repeated work while remaining under close review.
Economic contribution
Created value exceeds operating cost. A defined share can now fund the + itself.
Time+ compounds
As mature capability expands, less human time is needed for established work and more time can be reclaimed.
Access to augmented capability, not ownership of the person’s asset.
An employer hires the person and gains access to the productive capability of that person's + for the duration and scope of the employment relationship. The employer may also pay platform or usage fees because it benefits from the combined capability.
This resembles professional equipment, continuing education and accumulated expertise more than a transfer of ownership.
Value must be real, not “hours saved” on paper.
A theoretical hour saved is not automatically worth an hourly labor cost. Value may come from avoiding a hire, increasing throughput, reducing error, decreasing overtime, improving quality, shortening lead time or enabling work that otherwise could not be completed.