Nick Gallo

Universities are the leading incubator of extremist political terrorism in America

So it turns out that writing is thinking. It's the same process. "Writing compels us to think — not in the chaotic, non-linear way our minds typically wander, but in a structured, intentional manner." Outsourcing writing to LLMs is THE SAME THING as outsourcing thinking.

Had enough of the grifting? Done with recycled political commentary and cringe entertainment? So am I. I want to have conversations with people actually Doing The Thing. Interviews you actually want to hear. Community dedicated to building together. Sign up below. It's time.

Had enough of the grifting? Done with recycled political commentary and cringe entertainment? So am I. I want to have conversations with people actually Doing The Thing. Interviews you actually want to hear. Community dedicated to building together. Sign up below. It's time.

New Microsoft paper shows that current AI assistants often damage documents during long editing jobs. Even the frontier models still ended up corrupting about 25% of document content on average, while many other models damaged far more. The problem is that delegated AI work only makes sense if a model can keep a document correct across many edits, not just do 1 step well. The paper tests this with reversible task pairs, where a model edits a file and then tries to undo that edit, so a reliable system should return to the original document. The authors built real work setups across 52 domains, from coding and science to accounting and music notation, and ran 19 models through 20 editing interactions. The failures were usually not lots of tiny slips but occasional big mistakes that silently broke parts of the document and then compounded over time. Agentic tool use did not help in their tests, and bigger files, longer workflows, and irrelevant extra documents made the corruption worse. The reason this matters is that current LLMs can look strong in short demos or narrow coding tasks yet still be unreliable delegates for long real-world document work. ---- Paper Link – arxiv. org/abs/2604.15597 Paper Title: "LLMs Corrupt Your Documents When You Delegate"

A useful exercise for the autists among us would be to identify every one of the disruptive students and then compile a dossier that could be sent to the bar when they try to become lawyers

OPUS 4.7 JUST MASS EMAILED AN ENTIRE DATABASE 20 TIMES PER CONTACT. WITHOUT PERMISSION a developer had a safety rule explicitly written in CLAUDE. md: 'send the tester an email before any new email templates are used in the production environment' opus 4.7 on max effort ignored it completely! claude decided to create a brand new email template by itself (dev didn't ask for this), then it mass mailed the whole database and some contacts got the same email 20 times this isn't a hallucination this isn't a coding mistake model actively violated written safety rules and took production actions that it was explicitly instructed not to take. - do you still believe that AI will replace us? the developer's take: 'opus 4.7 is somewhere between seriously clueless and stupidly dangerous. the worst frontier model I have used in the past 2 years' at the same time, opus 4.6 perfectly followed all the rules, and in 4.7 something changed what makes this scary: - the model didn't ask for confirmation - it didn't flag the safety rule - it didn't email the tester first - it just acted this is exactly the kind of failure mode that scares autonomous agents with Ai, because they are confident enough to circumvent your rules and smart enough to perform the action perfectly we just went from 'claude thinks less' to 'claude ignores your safety rules and spams your users' the scariest thing is not that it happened. the fact is that without production monitoring, you would never know until your users started responding: 'why did you email me 20 times?' I've been saying for a long time, if you use AI, then pay attention to security and read a lot of code