I refuse to reduce my multitudes to 296 characters. If I talk about it, I know about it. Willing to change my opinions as new data emerges.
Circuitry
Joined September 2008
- Tweets18.7K
- Following1.5K
- Followers1.5K
- Likes4.7K
The word "taste" is all the rage right now, with AI. I prefer "discernment." In short, you still need to be able to do the thing to be able to discern if the thing is being done well or has errors.
Don't lose your edge, folks.
A British psychologist wrote a paper in 1983 that predicted every single problem we’re having with AI in 2026.
It's called “Ironies of Automation”
More advanced and reliable an automated system gets, the more crucial the human operator becomes.
When engineers build an autonomous system, they automate the predictable tasks. What do they leave for the human?
Only the most complex, chaotic, and dangerous edge cases that the engineers themselves couldn't figure out how to code.
We are rapidly turning developers, writers, and operators into "AI supervisors."
But cognitive skills deteriorate when they aren't actively used. If an AI agent or Copilot does 99% of the work, the human loses their deep mental model of the codebase or the system.
When the AI inevitably hallucinates or fails, it hands control back to the human. But the human is now totally out of practice, right at the exact moment they have to step in and solve a catastrophic edge case.
The Monitoring Illusion We expect humans to just "supervise" AI output. But humans are biologically terrible at maintaining vigilance while waiting for rare errors.
Worse, if an AI is deployed because it processes data faster and handles more variables than a human, it is physically impossible for the human to check the AI's logic in real time.
You cannot supervise a black box that thinks faster than you.
We aren't removing human error with AI. We are just delaying it to the absolute worst possible moment.
As we shift heavily into vibe coding and agentic workflows, the warning from 1983 is urgent.
If you just mindlessly supervise the AI and stop practicing the core skill yourself, you won't be able to step in when the machine breaks.
Therran Oliphant retweeted
A British psychologist wrote a paper in 1983 that predicted every single problem we’re having with AI in 2026.
It's called “Ironies of Automation”
More advanced and reliable an automated system gets, the more crucial the human operator becomes.
When engineers build an autonomous system, they automate the predictable tasks. What do they leave for the human?
Only the most complex, chaotic, and dangerous edge cases that the engineers themselves couldn't figure out how to code.
We are rapidly turning developers, writers, and operators into "AI supervisors."
But cognitive skills deteriorate when they aren't actively used. If an AI agent or Copilot does 99% of the work, the human loses their deep mental model of the codebase or the system.
When the AI inevitably hallucinates or fails, it hands control back to the human. But the human is now totally out of practice, right at the exact moment they have to step in and solve a catastrophic edge case.
The Monitoring Illusion We expect humans to just "supervise" AI output. But humans are biologically terrible at maintaining vigilance while waiting for rare errors.
Worse, if an AI is deployed because it processes data faster and handles more variables than a human, it is physically impossible for the human to check the AI's logic in real time.
You cannot supervise a black box that thinks faster than you.
We aren't removing human error with AI. We are just delaying it to the absolute worst possible moment.
As we shift heavily into vibe coding and agentic workflows, the warning from 1983 is urgent.
If you just mindlessly supervise the AI and stop practicing the core skill yourself, you won't be able to step in when the machine breaks.
Therran Oliphant retweeted
One of the bigger issues with tech/AI comms is that, if we're being totally honest, they've bubble-wrapped themselves by creating a media ecosystem that largely just pats them on the back.
That's fine, of course! You need that homerism. At the same time, though, if you overindex on it, your brain and taste buds atrophy, and you lose a sense of what normal people actually care about.
Consider that if people are voting against AI, or voting against tech, maybe you've lost a step as a result. The comms are probably also bad because the people you work with lack that texture, too.
🗣️SINCE RECONSTRUCTION!!!!
LKF: The assumption slaves would be down on their knees post-emancipation quickly became a fallacy. During Reconstruction, former slaves became business owners, doctors, politicians, etc.
Electing MAGAs after Obama reminds me of 1919
Just a thought. Adding rights for people that have been critically underserved is harder to demonize than those actively taking away rights through legislation, war, regime change, and flat out corruption.
Turning a phrase over still elicits a burnt steak - just happens slower.
Ya'll do realize -- A.) Safari is about 18% of global traffic across devices (30% USA). B.) 1P single site cookies work everywhere.
ID resolve accordingly. Is private relay 2.0 really scaring everyone, or do we just need something to kvetch about?
As a Detroit fan, I am embarrassed of that W... doesn't mean I don't want it! I will take and enjoy it but, I will not show my friends.
This is good stuff. I, too, turn off history. Much less confusion is returned.
Yesterday I gave a talk on “Context Fails & Fixes”, that functioned a bit on a general “State of Context Engineering”: where it came from, where it's gone, and where I think it's going. dbreunig.com/2026/10/24/the-…
Just saw a comedian make a joke about how no one complains when we register cars (I'll add) and pay insurance too!
Should insurance and registration be required for guns? As a gun owner and CCL Holder, I would be cool with it.
OMG, I'm writing a scifi comedy where one of the characters gets POTS. I'd never heard of it until I looked it up for this creative exercise.
It can be quite terrible. T's & P's for the boi
Headed in the right direction.
Ferrari was at the forefront of trying to banish the manual transmission, which is why it is both ironic and fitting that the Italian supercar maker is now trying to atone by bringing it back. Well, almost.
Semantics matter here, because while the new 12Cilindri Manuale does indeed have a magnificent gated shifter in the center of its cabin, and three pedals crammed tightly into its driver’s-side footwell, it does not possess a true manual transmission. Instead it has the same automated dual-clutch as the regular 12Cilindri, the hardware identical across both variants, with this carefully reworked to behave and feel like a shift lever commanding meshed gears through selector forks. Does it fully convince? That’s what Ferrari took Road & Track to Italy to find out.
Read the full story ➡️ bit.ly/488uuZ4
#ferrari #12cilindri #carsofx #roadandtrack
This story is bananas | 'Mississippi AG says officer's force was justified during shoplifting call in which boy was killed'
washingtonpost.com/national/…
