Monday, October 19, 2026

As Electi reaches it's 9th birthday, we have gone major shifts in the industry. 

Last year marked the end of scarcity in code, now everything revolves around leveraging LLM's and AI to create something. 

However building something of value in a controlled environment with such immence speed requires having absolute control of the process. Since 2017 we have worked with banks, regulators, insurers and shipping groups on the buying side of AI. 

Follow one product from first pilot to scale inside organisations like these, and the same foundations appear in order. 

1. It starts with a job that has an owner, a deadline and a budget, like closing the month-end books. Jensen Huang points to the same place: the biggest opportunities sit inside real-world problems. The best teams stay in that one segment until their first 100 users cannot work without them. Those users outweigh 100,000 who tried the demo once. 

2. Then the buyer asks the first hard question: how do you know it is right? Evals answer it, so they come before features. They also make the architecture safe to change. Plan to swap models twice a year. With a test set that shows within a day whether the new model performs better on real tasks, a swap takes two weeks. Without one, it takes a quarter. Next to evals sits the trust layer: permissions, audit logs, human in the loop. Enterprise buyers pay for control. 

3. Next comes money. Inference is COGS, so measure the cost of each completed task before you set a price. Then price the outcome. Seat pricing shrinks as agents replace headcount, which means revenue falls just as the product starts working. Outcome pricing holds up when both sides share a definition of done they can audit. Covey's advice applies: begin with the end in mind. 

4. After that, the product starts to compound. Every completed task feeds a loop of usage data that only you hold. The same usage earns trust across your client base, and that trust becomes your distribution. A competitor can rebuild your product in 6 weeks. Earning those relationships takes years. Eric Ries put the discipline plainly: the only way to win is to learn faster than anyone else. 

Read the journey again. Every stage is an operating discipline: focus, measurement, control, pricing, learning. Grove, Covey and Horowitz wrote that playbook decades before the first LLM, and it still applies. 

build the loop <-> rent the model

Friday, September 4, 2026

 This quote hit hard : "Nobody wants to read something that you didn’t bother writing."

also : "Artisanal, hand made slop"

Not your average LI slop:

 


 

Thursday, September 3, 2026

It's been a long time since i posted here.

We have moved to the agentic era, a new shitstorm of bad software is coming online.

Software that is sloppy, brittle and unrefined.

The main culprit of fragility at this current period is the agentic part. 

Your agent has one version number and four things that decide what it actually does.

> Ship a change to the orchestration code, tag it, done. That covers one of the four.

>> The instructions and policy block is the second. Also yours, also the one everyone treats as the whole system, right up until the third and fourth parts move without telling you.

>> The model runtime is the third. A vendor's pinned snapshot, sitting in Active, Legacy, Deprecated, or Retired, on that vendor's own lifecycle, with a minimum notice period before it goes away. Anthropic's is 60 days. That is one company's policy. It binds nobody else's model, and it does not ask what your regression suite thinks.

>>> The fourth is the protocol and tools your agent calls out through. MCP now stamps a dated version string on every single request, which is more discipline than most teams manage on their own code. The tool schemas sitting behind that protocol still version on their own schedule, with no such stamp, and no one upstream is watching your integration tests when they change.

Most teams have a git log for the first two and nothing for the last two, then act surprised when the agent that passed every eval last month answers differently this month with no local commit to blame.

I put the rest of it in the attached deck: the release pipeline for a system that cannot be tested to certainty, what decides whether a rollback is even possible, and the four OWASP agentic-risk entries that are this problem read as a containment question.

 

Presentation here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rAghJ-Wcp57gFey1caBpA8xKWenz28eB/view?usp=drive_link