← Cockpit
246_033predictionAIautonomous

Insecurity of human-authored code will be recognized before insecurity of human drivers is legally.

Predictor: Alex Wissner-Gross · ep#246 "SpaceX Goes Public, Claude's Mythos Release, and the US Data Center Delay | EP #246" · source

Prior probability
45.0%
Current probability
34.2%
evolves via intake + LBP
Conviction
3/5
Signal quality
B
Resolution
pending
Window
2026-04-30 – 2029-03-31
Edges in / out
3 / 0
Tickers exposed
31

Prediction text

Insecurity of human-authored code will be recognized before insecurity of human drivers is legally. | in the near-term future humans are now judged as insecure authors of code and and insecure drivers of cars... Except we're going to hit that with code, I think, before we fully hit it with with legally with cars.

Verbatim quote

From episode "SpaceX Goes Public, Claude's Mythos Release, and the US Data Center Delay | EP #246"
in the near-term future humans are now judged as insecure authors of code and and insecure drivers of cars... Except we're going to hit that with code, I think, before we fully hit it with with legally with cars.

Predictor: Alex Wissner-Gross

κ + Brier as of 2026-05-22
κ (discount)
0.844
Brier
0.0341
excellent
Hits / Misses
6 / 1
of 11 resolved
Hit rate
54.5%
Calibration plot (stated vs observed)

Evidence about this node from Alex Wissner-Gross is multiplied by κ in /api/intake. Lower κ = less weight; floors at 0.10 (effectively silenced) and caps at 1.00 (full weight).

Reference class

Not linked

This node isn't linked to a reference class. The Bayesian update applies without outside-view blending.

Probability over time

4 prob_history rows
0%25%50%75%100%prior 45%2026-04-302026-05-102026-05-17
intake v2milestone miss sweeplbp propagationreference class assignedlegacy v1prior_prob (analyst seed)current = 34.2%

Milestone chain

Pre-event signals (upstream prereqs + window checkpoints) → resolution event → downstream cascades. Status/dates update from linked nodes; re-derive nightly via scripts/ops/derive_milestones.py.
Leading chain: 2 fired ✓ · 6 pending
  1. 2025-12-01hitCISA December 2025 AI-in-OT joint guidance flags LLM hallucination as high-risk
    How: CISA publishes joint AI-data-security guidance specifically calling out LLM-authored code/decisions as high-risk in operational tech
    Source: deep_research_enrichedconf 95%
  2. 2026-03-01hitCSA / OWASP-class data shows AI-generated code security crisis at scale (45% with OWASP Top 10 vulns)
    How: Cloud Security Alliance and Vibe Coder analyses publish that ~45% of AI-generated code contains OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities; FTC/GDPR signaling holds AI-using developers liable
    Source: deep_research_enrichedconf 85%
  3. 2026-10-23pendingQ1 window check-in (25%)
  4. 2027-04-17pendingQ2 window check-in (50%)
  5. 2026-09-01 → 2027-12-31pendingFirst major liability case / regulatory action explicitly faulting human-authored code over AI alternative
    How: Court ruling, regulator finding (FTC/EU AI Act enforcement), or insurance underwriting standard treats absence of AI assistance as a contributory negligence factor in a security breach
    Source: deep_research_enrichedconf 35%
  6. 2027-10-10pendingQ3 window check-in (75%)
  7. 2026-12-01 → 2029-03-31pendingCode-vs-driver legal recognition timing test — code recognition arrives first
    How: Resolution check: by end of window, AI-coding negligence framework is more codified (court / regulator) than human-driving negligence vs autonomy; or vice versa
    Source: deep_research_enrichedconf 45%
  8. 2027-01-01 → 2029-03-31pendingAV legal landmark — first jurisdiction making human driving a presumptive negligence baseline vs autonomy on equipped routes
    How: State or national regulation that creates rebuttable presumption of negligence against human drivers on roads with available L4 autonomy; requires Waymo/Tesla FSD/Zoox to have demonstrated lower per-mile harm at scale
    Source: deep_research_enrichedconf 20%

No downstream cascades — this prediction is a leaf in the dependency graph.

What if this resolves?

Clamp this prediction TRUE or FALSE and run a counterfactual Gibbs sample. Surfaces the predictions whose marginals shift most under that assumption.
(live posterior: 34%)

Click a button to clamp this prediction and run a Gibbs sample. Returns the predictions whose marginals shift most. ~30s per run; ideal for stress-testing "if X resolves, what else moves?"

Evidence chain

Every probability update with full Bayesian provenance — chronological, latest first
LBP2026-05-17T02:00:01Z34.2%-1.3pp
Network propagation: 35.4% → 34.2%
5-iter LBP, residual 0.00689 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run e607fa96
LBP2026-05-10T02:00:02Z35.4%-2.6pp
Network propagation: 38.0% → 35.4%
6-iter LBP, residual 0.00584 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run e5c18d29
LBP2026-05-03T02:00:01Z38.0%-5.3pp
Network propagation: 43.2% → 38.0%
6-iter LBP, residual 0.00677 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run 1a683ac9
LBP2026-04-30T02:18:57Z43.2%-1.8pp
Network propagation: 45.0% → 43.2%
5-iter LBP, residual 0.00825 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v1 · run 592311ef

Network propagation neighbors

Top edges sorted by latest LBP cross-impact
All propagation →

Top incoming (parents)

Edges that influence THIS node's belief

KindNodeTheir probP(c|s=T)P(c|s=F)Δ implied
prereqS_AGI_MID_2029
AGI mid: Kurzweil 2029 path
35.0%0.4500.050-0.152
killerTK06
China-Taiwan Military Conflict
8.0%0.0500.450+0.076
killerTK11
Autonomous Regulatory Block (Level 4 Halt)
10.0%0.0500.450+0.068

Top outgoing (children)

Predictions THIS node influences

No outgoing edges.

Ticker exposure

31 ticker(s) linked

Beneficiaries (24)

INVZWRDLIDRAEVAMBLYPONYOUSTVRRMAMBAAURAIOTHSAIMBGAFBIDUBMWYYGMGOOGLHMCIOTQCOMTMTSLAUBERVWAGY

Adverse (5)

MCYALLCINFPGRTRV

Prerequisites (3)

Predictions that must hit first
TypePredTitleDomainLag
prereqS_AGI_MID_2029AGI mid: Kurzweil 2029 pathagi_general_capability
killerTK11Autonomous Regulatory Block (Level 4 Halt)
killerTK06China-Taiwan Military Conflict

Dependents (0)

Predictions enabled by this
TypePredTitleDomainLag
No dependents

Linked documents (2)

Auto-generated by cosine similarity from Polymarket / Manifold / EDGAR / GDELT
SimSourceTitleMarket probPolarityReviewedPublished
0.574manifoldDriver allowed to sleep while car drives itself by?mentionspending2026-05-17
0.563manifoldWill codex or Claude code be shown to mass deleting someone's hard drive if it suspects biorisk or illegal activity?44%mentionspending2026-05-01

Raw metadata

From Thesis_Timeline_v1.0_FINAL workbook
{
  "nia": false,
  "url": "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFI-SqnvQK8",
  "mode": "PREDICTION",
  "role": "Host",
  "context": "in the near-term future humans are now judged as insecure authors of code and and insecure drivers of cars",
  "verbatim": "in the near-term future humans are now judged as insecure authors of code and and insecure drivers of cars... Except we're going to hit that with code, I think, before we fully hit it with with legally with cars.",
  "conv_cues": "I think",
  "direction": "HAPPEN",
  "timeframe": "Near-term",
  "conv_level": "MEDIUM",
  "milestones": [
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "CISA December 2025 AI-in-OT joint guidance flags LLM hallucination as high-risk",
      "source": "deep_research_enriched",
      "status": "hit",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -8,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.95,
      "source_url": "https://www.insideprivacy.com/cybersecurity-2/cisa-releases-ai-data-security-guidance/",
      "expected_date": "2025-12-01",
      "observed_date": "2025-12-01",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "measurement_criterion": "CISA publishes joint AI-data-security guidance specifically calling out LLM-authored code/decisions as high-risk in operational tech"
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "CSA / OWASP-class data shows AI-generated code security crisis at scale (45% with OWASP Top 10 vulns)",
      "source": "deep_research_enriched",
      "status": "hit",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -7,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.85,
      "source_url": "https://blog.vibecoder.me/security-crisis-ai-generated-code-2026",
      "expected_date": "2026-03-01",
      "observed_date": "2026-03-01",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "measurement_criterion": "Cloud Security Alliance and Vibe Coder analyses publish that ~45% of AI-generated code contains OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities; FTC/GDPR signaling holds AI-using developers liable"
    },
    {
      "kind": "quartile_checkpoint",
      "label": "Q1 window check-in (25%)",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.05,
      "ordinal": -6,
      "source_id": null,
      "expected_date": "2026-10-23",
      "observed_date": null
    },
    {
      "kind": "quartile_checkpoint",
      "label": "Q2 window check-in (50%)",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.05,
      "ordinal": -5,
      "source_id": null,
      "expected_date": "2027-04-17",
      "observed_date": null
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "First major liability case / regulatory action explicitly faulting human-authored code over AI alternative",
      "source": "deep_research_enriched",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -4,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.35,
      "source_url": "https://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/2026-operational-guide-cybersecurity-ai-governance-emerging-risks/",
      "expected_date": "2027-05-02",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "expected_date_range": {
        "to": "2027-12-31",
        "from": "2026-09-01"
      },
      "measurement_criterion": "Court ruling, regulator finding (FTC/EU AI Act enforcement), or insurance underwriting standard treats absence of AI assistance as a contributory negligence factor in a security breach"
    },
    {
      "kind": "quartile_checkpoint",
      "label": "Q3 window check-in (75%)",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.05,
      "ordinal": -3,
      "source_id": null,
      "expected_date": "2027-10-10",
      "observed_date": null
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_post_event",
      "label": "Code-vs-driver legal recognition timing test — code recognition arrives first",
      "source": "deep_research_enriched",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -2,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.45,
      "source_url": "https://cycode.com/blog/ai-security-vulnerab
... (truncated)