 | TL;DR: Rachel Woods says you can actually trust her AI system. Nobody's checked that but her.
She built something real — a "todaying" trigger that fires a whole playbook system, eight hours of work while she was too sick to type more than one sentence. That part isn't in question. What's in question is the line she lands on: "you can actually trust it." Trust, here, means her own discipline held for however long it took to build this — and nothing outside that discipline is checking it. That's the Mistaken Belief sitting under most of what gets called "trust it" in this space right now: watching everything an agent does isn't the same as anyone actually verifying anything, and watching is basically all there is on offer.
Mindstream and Futurepedia's agents playbook — hosted by HubSpot — tells operators to give their agents "clear guidance." That's advice, not a standard, and it doesn't fix the half-used Notion page sitting open in another tab, or the Zapier chain that broke three weeks ago and nobody noticed.
I've heard about senior directors, CEOs and owners of a company have their own personal assistant, PA. And no. PA of such calibre isn't what you think. They are not just helpless secretaries – pushing paperwork, and guarding the office door. They are more like shadow or representative of the boss, to helm board meetings, sign sensitive documents and give high level instructions – just as if it was the big boss giving it. And they're immensely powerful people. But being a PA, also have has its danger. In Chinese, we have this idiom: 伴君如伴虎 – which literally translated as accompanying the emperor is like accompanying a tiger. And now at the advent of AI agents, we no longer need humans to shadow humans. I mean – who can perfectly shadow you, better than your own closely replicated AI agent, am I right? I heard that Mark Zuckerberg is getting a photorealistic AI-powered 3D version of him that employees can interact with and get direct feedback from. So that It can help run the company while he go do something else. And if you can believe it, I think in the end of days, the Antichrist will have his own AI humanoid clone too: "He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed." (Revelation 13:15) ________________________________ Every time I've watched someone actually hand off their work and mean it, the boring part happened first — they wrote the judgment calls down before anyone else needed to use them. That's the whole difference between an agent you trust and an agent you're just hoping works.
Claire Vo scoped nine AI agents to defined jobs and ran 100K users on them — and still found herself the single point of failure anyway. Same operator's-side lesson, different tool.
What would it actually take for you to hand an agent your inbox and not check its work for a week? Drop your take.
Clip credit: The Calum Johnson Show — full video on their channel. DM for credit or removal requests.
[link] [comments] |
Predictive technology: computational social science
