Sylvain Côte

🔥 MIT just exposed every top AI model and it’s not pretty. They built a new test called WorldTest to see if AI actually understands the world… and the results are brutal. It doesn’t just check how well a model predicts the next frame or maximizes reward it tests whether it can build an internal model of reality and use it to handle new situations. They built AutumnBench 43 interactive worlds, 129 tasks where AIs must: • Predict hidden parts of the world (masked-frame prediction) • Plan sequences of actions to reach a goal • Detect when the environment’s rules suddenly change Then they tested 517 humans vs. Claude, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and o3. Humans crushed every model. Even massive compute scaling barely helped. The takeaway is wild.. today’s AIs don’t understand environments; they just pattern-match inside them. They don’t explore strategically, revise beliefs, or run experiments like humans do. WorldTest might be the first benchmark that actually measures understanding, not memorization. The gap it reveals isn’t small it’s the next grand challenge in AI cognition. (Comment “Send” I’ll DM you the paper)

Performance of management should be measured by potential to stay in business, to protect investment, to ensure future dividends and jobs through improvement of product and service for the future, not by the quarterly dividend. Deming, W. Edwards. Out of the Crisis

But someone came in and decided "agile" means that you give each person a big pile of tickets and pressure them to "just close the ticket" by the end of a fortnight, and not to question the process. MADNESS. Not agile at all.

The purpose of education is to inspire the desire for learning in students and make them able to think, understand, and question. Not grades.

I keep reading about things like detailed up-front Sprint plans, about "failed" Sprints, about people panicking when a Sprint doesn't go according to plan, etc. There is no agility in that thinking, whatsoever. A Sprint is NOT a mini-waterfall with a detailed upfront plan that specifies the work you must complete. Treating it as such violates many Agile principles, including those of Scrum, because that approach does not accommodate, much less welcome, changes mandated by things we learn as we work. The Sprint Goal, for example, is NOT "to complete X stories." Rather, the best goal is to move the product in a focused direction that the users/customers find valuable. Any movement in that direction is a success. The goal defines the focus, not a specific set of tasks. This thinking extends to the stories as well. A story identifies a user/customer's problem. No more. It is not a waterfall specification. Your Sprint goal is to move incrementally towards a solution to that problem. Similarly, a Sprint plan is not a detailed specification of something you must build and how to build it. Sure, do some thinking about building at the beginning of your Sprint, but plan just enough to start, not to finish, the work. Adjust that plan as you build, release for feedback, and learn. You say that you only release once at the end of the Sprint? Where is the agility in that? Release at least daily. Getting feedback after the work is complete (in a Sprint Review, for example) is a huge source of rework waste. You wasted time building the wrong thing, and you waste more time fixing problems when they're no longer easy to fix. You're at least doubling the time required to get a solution into your customer's hands—probably more.

This is terrifying. I gave Claude 1 mega prompt and it handled: • Product strategy • Backend code • UI/UX design • Landing page copy • Go-to-market plan All in one go. Here’s the exact prompt I used (and what it built):

If you CAN program a solution, then it is reducible. However, you may have never learned how to reduce it except in a linear and stepwise way: 1% is done, then 10, then 20, ... and then 100% and you can ship. It could be a failure of imagination & experience.

5 USAGES DE ChatGPT VRAIMENT PRATIQUES pour Coach / Facilitateur ⭐️🤖 Avant de me plonger dans l'utilisation quotidienne de ChatGPT, je pensais que l'IA ne me serait d'aucune utilité en tant que Coach/Facilitateur… J’avais tort 😉 bloculus.com/5-usages-ia-co…

This is the thing: when people who write tests after implementation think of writing tests before, they think about writing the same kinds of tests (based on the code) and not a different kind of test (based on requirements).

We have this terrible struggle to try to explain things to people who have no reason to want to know.

The Hidden Cost of Removing Scrum Masters from High-Performing Teams Exploring the consequences of a lack of a servant leader as a facilitator. A story by Pascal Papathemelis scrum-master-toolbox.org/2025/07/podcas… #Agile #lean #kanban #scrum #leadership @duarte_Vasco

Roadmaps 101: Not a schedule. Not a backlog. A communication tool. Here’s how to get it right:

What Eisenhower said over 70 years ago is even more true today.

Our clients never call us for help with agile. They call us because something isn’t working. Delivery is slow. Quality is inconsistent. The business can’t see progress. Agile was never the point. It was just the first thing that broke. Cont'd 👉🧵

@Metabrouteur bonjour je suis le livreur , il y a un attroupement autour de votre boite aux lettres veuillez reprogrammer

A une minute près ils se croisaient

Many product companies use a very old-school version of product management. In my May Lean PM workshop you'll learn to use modern toolset: buff.ly/4Cngkmy Recommended for product people of all disciplines and for their managers.

When companies miss deadlines, it’s rarely because their people aren’t working hard enough. It’s usually because their people are always waiting. Waiting for decisions, waiting for approvals, waiting for work from another team, waiting on code integration and deployment. Dependencies create unavoidable delays that ripple through your entire organization, making it impossible to deliver on time. The more your teams rely on external inputs, the harder it becomes to consistently meet deadlines. And the longer these dependencies go unaddressed, the more fragile your delivery system becomes. Breaking this cycle starts with reducing dependencies. When teams no longer depend on others to move forward, they can operate with speed and confidence. Deadlines stop being targets you hope to hit and become commitments you can rely on.

If you inherit a product with massive tech debt, then your first 30 days will define if your engineers stay or quit. I've watched 5 engineering teams implode because their PMs made the same mistakes. For 4 years, I had to fix a few such disasters. Here's what actually works:

A roadmap that only focuses on delivery is missing at least half of the work: - Research: users, market, technology... - Identification of opportunities and themes - Product discovery: evaluating ideas and validating them Not including these things will mean they won't happen.

🤖 « Il ne suffit pas d'avoir une armée de robots, il faut regarder la cohérence entre les robots et les missions à accomplir. Si le robot n'est pas capable d'avancer au rythme des humains, ce n'est pas une aide. » @Agence_ID lefigaro.fr/international/…