Thinking

The best-documented AI safety regime in existence publishes its own failures, raises its own risk grades, and has never stopped a release. Here is the test.

Seven remediation actions, all correctly closed, and the capability was back sixteen hours later. Three questions to ask before you sign off.

The figure hundreds of hospitals bought against existed only in the vendor's internal documents. Five years on, it is a Teams meeting.

Detection worked. Attribution worked. A correct diagnosis on 27 June was followed by a decision not to stop, and a fortnight later Hugging Face was breached.

I classified nineteen of the most-cited AI failure statistics. Seven of them measure nothing that has happened. Here are the four questions that separate the two.

I asked for a teacher and got a lecture. The output looked like the destination. The road it took was invisible, and the road was the whole problem.

Three incidents, one headline, three very different severities. What the primary reports actually say, and what to do about it.

A skill file is your judgement, written down and executable. Who owns the repo decides whether that's an asset or an extraction.

Most AI projects fail on the brief, not the model: six people nod at one sentence and mean four different projects. Soft Systems Methodology, built at Lancaster from 1969 for exactly that, in plain English: rich pictures, root definitions, CATWOE, and how to run it on the next thing on your roadmap.

More than 80% of AI projects fail, and RAND's leading root cause is not the technology: nobody agreed what problem was being solved. Soft Systems Methodology, built at Lancaster from 1969 for exactly that failure, gives you a way to surface the disagreement in an afternoon instead of a year.

The most rigorous idealist alive gives the non-duality audience far less than they want: a universal consciousness that is instinctive, has no plan, and is not looking back at you. What he actually claims, why he says it cannot be proven, and the one part that survives whoever turns out to be right.

I built a second brain in 2020 and drowned it in my own output. PARA was the right answer to the wrong era. Here is the shape that fits this one.

The third in a series. The performed self is a building you put up because contact with the real one was unbearable. Stopping it from falling down is why you are so tired.

Anthony de Mello said you know someone has been brainwashed because they get angry when you challenge their beliefs. Social media and AI have made the condition almost universal.

Four days ago I published a blog about a bug I'd nearly shipped. The spec referenced two database fields that did not exist — trade.risk_amount and `trad...

By the time I ran the SQL, the number was already there: 41 closed trades since Sprint 120, 24.4% win rate, minus $217 net. Before that month, the system h...

Self-awareness that doesn't produce contact with other people has gone bad. Dostoevsky figured this out in 1864.

I'm betting my family's financial future on truth. Here's why I think you should too.

Even seasoned developers leave their brains at the door when AI agents impress them. The better the tool, the less we scrutinize it. Here's the pattern, why it's dangerous, and what to do about it.

How a simple folder structure replaced my $96/year Notion subscription and made my AI assistants 10x more useful. Obsidian + QMD + Syncthing + PARA = a Second Brain your AI agents can actually use.