Poe seems like an obvious candidate no one listed.

The concept of a bioweapon attack is commonly cited but in fact there are many other defenses against actually developing and deploying such a weapon. It's commonly portrayed as easily achievable but is in fact very, very far from it. Moteover, although there is no evidence that AI makes it easier in any way, somehow this is constantly invoked as an example of a thought crime that must be forestalled at all costs.

In the AI era people seem to want to redefine the criminal act from "doing the thing" to "asking or investigating how to do the thing". Not a mindset I share.

Of course, to do that, a business, and in turn the DRI, would have to empower the team to act in its business's best interest and stop micromanaging them.

Code reviews are a productivity tax. No truly effective team would rely on them. The fact that so many software teams view them as indispensable just shows how few effective software teams there are in our industry.

They are akin to a quality check step in manufacturing. Part of what Deming did in revolutionizing manufacturing was eliminating the step in favor of a holistic quality metric owned by all participants and enforced with rigorous statistical process controls. As you say, we in the software industry have all the pieces (autoformatters, tests, benchmarks, etc) to operate this way, but it seems our organizational and management dynamics combat this shift at every turn.

Relevant: When this conversation comes up at work, I like to share Avery Pennarun's post about the review tax: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20260316

I often found myself falling into patterns of poor judgement, e.g. mentally filtering out resumes based on the layout because, to my tired and bored mind, they looked similar to the resumes I had seen from unqualified candidates. I actually think some automation is helpful in evaluating them more rigorously.

But the problem is LLMs can't do those things. All they can do is "edit files" and "send messages".

I'm so tired of seeing these companies trivializing other people's work! Nobody's job is "edit files" and "respond to messages"! People have jobs like "find and close leads" and "reconcile accounts" and "arrange student field trips" and "make sure the hospital has enough inventory", not "generate reports" and "write code".

Editing files, producing reports, even writing code is just a byproduct. This is like the idiotic "lines of code produced" metric, but now they apply it to all of society.

That's what the 400k/yr is for.

I'm also using Playwright, to automate a platform that has a maze of iframes, referer links, etc. Hopefully I can replace the internals with a script I get from this project.

Helpful writeup here: https://pvieito.com/2026/01/inside-claude-cowork (I am not the author)

An LLM which makes a tool call to a function called `ride_bike`, where that function is a different sort of model with a different set of feedback mechanisms than those available to the LLM, is NOT the same thing at all. The LLM hasn't "learned" to ride the bike. The best you can say is that the LLM has learned that the bike can be ridden, and that it has a way of asking some other entity to ride on its behalf.

Now, could you develop such a model and make it available to an LLM? Sure, probably. But that's not an LLM. Moreover, it involves you, a human, making novel inroads on a different sort of AI/robotics problem. It simply is not possible to accomplish with an LLM.

I mean, services _could_ make it harder to use LLMs to interact with them, but if agents are popular enough they might see customers start to revolt over it.