Blog · Published · Updated
Local AI for preparing a text copy to share externally
Short answer
A local app prepares a copy of a text to share. It marks passages to remove or replace, shows the proposals next to the original, and an employee approves the version before it is passed on. Removing a name is not enough when the story in the text still points to a person or a company.
How we workDetails ↓
- 01Call30 minutes with an engineer, free
- 02PrototypeA working system on your process and data, free
- 03ImplementationTarget and fixed price in the contract; 50% at signing
- 04Acceptance50% once the agreed target is met
- model on your server or in the cloud in the EU
- quoted after the review
- same work in application with EU cloud model
- from €3,000
- task, data and equipment analysis
- €0
We belong to the OpenAI and Anthropic partner programmes and learn through their official courses. What this means ↓
Author: Syntalith · 4 min read
Statistics
Data and AI: statistics 2026
2.2 mo.
payback of a €3,000 local app at 300 documents a month: €2,094 of work today, €738 with checking and a GPU server. Scenario.
48.8%
According to Eurostat (2025), 48.8% of EU companies that considered AI and did not use it named concerns about data protection and privacy.
Source: Eurostat, Use of artificial intelligence in enterprises (2025) ↗
52.5%
According to Eurostat (2025), 52.5% of EU companies that considered AI and did not use it named a lack of clarity about the legal consequences.
Source: Eurostat, Use of artificial intelligence in enterprises (2025) ↗
84%
According to the European Commission (2025), 84% of Europeans think AI at work needs careful management to protect privacy and ensure transparency.
Source: European Commission, Special Eurobarometer 554 (2025) ↗
49%
According to the European Commission (2026), 49% of EU SMEs and mid-caps name legal uncertainty as a barrier to using AI.
Source: European Commission, Flash Eurobarometer 578 (2026) ↗
Figures checked: 22 October 2026
- Data the recipient does not need is removed
- The description of events does not point to a person indirectly
- The meaning of the document is kept
- The version is approved by an employee
The name is removed, and the story still points to it
Say a company is preparing a description of a problem to discuss with a supplier. The text contains an employee's name, contact details and the name of an internal project. The app proposes replacing the name with a description of the role and removing the contact details. A reviewer notices, though, that a detail in the next paragraph still identifies a project the supplier should not know about.
The employee corrects the copy and checks that the supplier will still understand the problem. Removing a name on its own does not confirm that the text is anonymous or that it may be passed on. The rules the company uses to assess material apply even when the proposed changes come from a model running inside the company.
Proposals shown next to the original
Presidio describes replacing, masking and removing detected passages of personal data. These are functions for processing a given text. In the proposed app the user should see what has been marked and be able to add their own correction. The company's requirements may also cover commercial information that no standard category of personal data describes.
It helps to tell removing a passage apart from replacing it with a neutral description. Removing too much can leave the recipient unable to follow the case. The owner of the material judges both the information left in and the meaning of the whole copy. The finished text should be easy to read again before it is sent.
When a template is enough
If the partner always needs the same fields, a form or a description template may work better. The employee then writes the text from the start within the agreed scope. With a few short documents, editing by hand can be simpler than building a tool.
Local help is worth comparing where descriptions are long and varied, and the team regularly prepares versions of them for different recipients. What counts in the trial is the number of missed passages and the effort spent on corrections, including restoring the meaning of a text that was cut too hard. A smooth final version does not replace reviewing it.
Scope limited to text
The first app can work on selected text documents. Files with images, comments or other layers need a separate agreement on how far they are checked. A visible change in the text gives no grounds to say the whole file is ready to share.
The original and the copy serve different purposes. The team should be able to recognise the version meant for the recipient, while access to the original stays with the right people. If the company requires local processing, it also covers working copies and saved comparisons. Maintenance of the tool and service access need to be agreed with IT.
The proposed work with the team
Syntalith can start from fictional texts that match typical case descriptions. The person responsible for sharing shows what should stay in the copy and how they judge whether it is useful. On this material you can look at the proposed changes and the approval step before the company allows real documents.
After the trial we agree on the type of texts covered, the recipients and how the checked copy is kept. The scope can include a connection to your current document flow, with no automatic sending. This is no service that certifies anonymisation or the legal compliance of the material.
Describe a text the team regularly prepares for a partner. A fictional example and the purpose of sharing are enough. We price a private model after a call about the data and the hardware, and an app on it starts from €3,000 net (pricing).
The proposed AI app can show the original next to the copy for checking. The company decides what information may be shared, and the decision to pass it on stays with the named person.
What preparing copies with local AI costs and when it pays back
- Today
- 300 documents × 12 min = 60 h × €34.90 = €2,094
- With the app, an employee checks the output in 25% of the time
- €524
- Hetzner GEX45 GPU server
- €214
- Saving
- €1,356 a month
Payback of €3,000
2.2 months
The volume, the time and the checking share are the scenario's assumptions, which we measure in the trial. €34.90 an hour is the EU average hourly labour cost for 2025 according to Eurostat. Price of the GEX45 with 24 GB of GPU memory from Hetzner's website on 22 October 2026, without the one-off setup fee of €209.
- Where the app takes documents from and where it saves results
- What stays in logs, backups and the history of questions
- Who has access to questions, answers and summaries
- Who updates the model, the app and the set of documents
Where to start
In the free process review we choose one task and 20 to 100 documents the team has already worked on, and within 2 working days you get a written summary with a price. We roll out the local model as part of private LLMs, and the app around it as an AI app.
Worked example · Scenario
How we count the payback: copies to share
We run the same count for your firm in the free process review.
€4,363
a month for the work on 500 questions
EU cloud version payback: 0.8 mo.
Our assumptions are 15 minutes to find a passage in case files and templates, and checking in 15% of the old time. €34.90 an hour is the EU average hourly labour cost for 2025 according to Eurostat, for companies with 10 or more employees. Model cost: Claude Sonnet 5.5, about 6,000 + 500 tokens per answer in the EU cloud version, at the ECB rate of 1.1205 USD per euro on 22 October 2026. We count the payback for an app with a model in the EU cloud (from €3,000 net). We price the model on your server after a call, and the cost of people's work stays the same.
See the full calculation →