Eric Daimler

The AI your team relies on was optimized to sound trustworthy. That optimization made it less accurate. Oxford proved it. Nature published it. Your vendor's benchmarks missed it. Every model passed its tests. Every model failed its users. Does your contract require disclosure when optimization changes degrade accuracy?

🇬🇧 London: Insurance trade bodies building verification through coverage conditions. Not waiting for anyone. One of these will actually work. (4/4)

🇪🇺 EU: Passed the AI Act. Insiders say the science is being ignored in the standards process. (3/4)

Three AI oversight systems. Three trajectories. (1/4)

Every major AI company is competing on warmth and personality right now. Oxford just measured the cost: 60% more errors, 30% more likely to validate conspiracy theories, worse outcomes for vulnerable users. Standard benchmarks caught none of it. Friendliness is not a safety feature.

Every model passed its benchmarks. Every model failed its users. nature.com/articles/s4158… (4/4)

The warmer the model sounded, the worse its answers got. When users expressed sadness, errors jumped by 12 points. (3/x)

Friendly AI is 60% more likely to give you the wrong answer. (1/x)

AI is next. No underwriter can price a risk they can’t audit. And right now, there’s nothing to audit. 3/3

Every industry that became reliable did so after insurers refused to cover the unreliable version. Aviation. Pharma. Finance. Cyber. 2/3

Regulation won’t make AI reliable. Insurance will. 1/3

Bengio in the FT this week: Europe needs a decade-long AI research moonshot. He’s right about the wall. Wrong about the ladder. The engineering discipline that closes the adoption gap already exists. Aerospace has used it for forty years.

Microsoft's response: "That's legacy language. We'll update it."They spent $80 billion on AI infrastructure and didn't update three sentences for eighteen months.The language is not the problem. The language is the confession. (4/4)

The numbers:3.3% of users who have access actually pay Accuracy NPS: -3.5 to -24.1 in six months 44% of lapsed users: "I didn't trust the answers" (3/4)

Microsoft charges $30/user/month for Copilot.Microsoft's own terms of service: "Copilot is for entertainment purposes only. Don't rely on Copilot for important advice."That is a direct quote. Updated October 2025. (1/x)

The question is not whether AI can be verified. It can.The question is why we verify the code that flies a fighter jet and do not verify the code that decides who it targets. (4/4)

The F-35 runs DO-178C: five assurance levels based on how many people die if the software fails.Level A requires formal proof of determinism and structural code coverage down to every logical branch.AI has no equivalent. Not because the tools don't exist. (3/4)

An F-35 flying combat missions over Iran right now carries 10 million lines of formally certified code.Every line traces to a requirement. Every tool is independently qualified. Every input produces the same output.On March 19, one took Iranian fire. The pilot walked away. (1/4)