What You Had to Do
A department of a hundred writers documented mainframe billing programs. Every one of them had something else they'd rather be doing. They knew.
The intersection of human cognition and machine intelligence
45 posts
A department of a hundred writers documented mainframe billing programs. Every one of them had something else they'd rather be doing. They knew.
A late friend had two sayings. The first one gets you started. The second one keeps you going. In the age of AI, the second one has gotten more useful, not less.
Blade Runner's replicants, Asimov's Three Laws, the US Constitution, and Constitutional AI are all failing the same edge cases. In real time.
The neuroscience has been clear for decades. LLMs just gave us the first working schematic of why.
Before we debate AI governance, we should reckon with the test case already in evidence. We had the tools. We didn't use them. Here's why.
AI governance has one advantage the ancients didn't: you can turn it off. What that buys us — and why 'it's not conscious' is shakier ground than it sounds.
AI alignment isn't a new technical challenge. It's the oldest governance problem civilization has ever faced — now running at 100% sociopath base rate.
Sociopathy is a clinical absence of stakes and empathy, not villainy. Every AI system meets the definition. Not by accident. By design.
Sting, Voltaire, Einstein, and Geordi La Forge — a small taxonomy of the monomym, plus the graph theory hiding inside genealogy, gut bacteria, Star Trek interfaces, moral foundations, language models, and evolutionary psychology. The name is the node. The projects are the edges.
A friend I lost in 1986 had a saying that keeps fitting new situations. The AI automation question is the latest one it answers perfectly.