so much to solve for

yes ofc. You're describing the important human parts

Perhaps "in-the-loop" feels trite, but to me humans must lead, machines learn, humans learn and modify, machines pick that up etc

The tech direction to date has made it harder for humans to collaborate in all the ways. Love Bertrand's breakdown

why humans-in-the-loop is critical

Thanks for spotlighting this! Not the least of which is because we’re solving for it

I get what you're saying, but I spend my life trying to get people to understand you can't analyse any data well if you don't pay attention to how it was produced....

“This wasn’t a showdown. It wasn’t a humiliation. It wasn’t a triumph for either man. It was something far more revealing: a case study in how a bully behaves when he can’t rely on fear, and how a principled politician behaves when he refuses the role of the victim.”

He’s compelling to some people because he notices genuine failures. But in my framework these failures come from the collapse of the verification–deliberation–accountability cycle. Fix that and the system can work, ignore it and nothing will.

Yarvin sees the hollowed-out version of this and assumes the hollowing is inherent. He ignores how neoliberal incentives, bureaucratic drift, and algorithmic platforms have eroded our truth systems.