An agent's memory is everything it can reach, not just its context window. A preprint, Reading More, Finding Less, tests that idea with pre-registered experiments and finds the failure is routing: a hand-curated memory index sent the agent to the wrong files, plain file search beat it, and saved memories almost never got read again. The full corpus and harness ship with the paper for re-running.
Many teams use one AI model to grade another one's answers, and then let that grade decide what ships. Almost nobody checks whether the grader itself can be trusted. This is what it took, on a real production system, to make the grader reliable enough that a failing score is allowed to stop a release.
AI agents are built to remember, and that breaks their tests. When test cases share one user, each case inherits leftover memory from the one before it, so the pass rate measures the order the tests ran in, not the agent. Giving every test its own clean user and its own sealed world fixed that, and let the whole suite run in parallel for free.
An ancient Sage valued himself upon knowing how to make a great City of a little one. Franklin, that modern Simpleton, showed how to reduce an Empire by alienating its provinces. I, a contemporary observer, shall demonstrate how the same may be accomplished not through distance but through division—not by severing remote territories but by fracturing the very heart of society itself.
We stand at the threshold of humanity's most profound partnership. Artificial intelligence promises to be our collaborator in solving civilization's greatest challenges—from climate change to disease, from loneliness to…
Here's a question that's about to matter a lot: when an AI helps you discover something, who gets the credit? This isn't hypothetical anymore. AI systems are writing code, finding patterns in data, even proposing new scientific hypotheses. The old frameworks for attribution—built when tools were dumb—are breaking down.