aren't we missing the point that co-pilot is there in case pilot gets incapacitated?
The pilot is the copilot today. These computer can handle most of the tasks automatically.
Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
41–50 of 290 posts
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#42Excited for the next wave of ai innovation.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#43A thought-provoking analogy!
What comes immediately to mind for me is using embeddings to show closest matches to current cursor position on the right tab for fast jumping to related files.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#44Love the idea & spitballing ways to generalize to coding.. Thought experiment: as you write code, an LLM generates tests for it & the IDE runs those tests as you type, showing which ones are passing & failing, updating in real time. Imagine 10-100 tests that take The tests could appear in a separated panel next to your code, and pass/fail status in the gutter of that panel. As simple as red and green dots for tests t…
Then do you need tests to validate your tests are correct, otherwise the LLM might just generate passing code even if the test is bad? Or write code that games the system because it's easier to hardcode an output value then to do the actual work.
There probably is a setup where this works well, but the LLM and humans need to be able to move across the respective boundaries fluidly...
Writing clear requirements and letting the AI take care of the bulk of both sides seems more streamlined and productive.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#45Great post! i've been thinking along similar lines about human-AI interfaces beyond the copilot paradigm. I see two major patterns emerging:
Orchestration platforms - Evolution of tools like n8n/Make into cybernetic process design systems where each node is an intelligent agent with its own optimization criteria. The key insight: treat processes as processes, not anthropomorphize LLMs as humans. Build walls around probabilistic systems to ensure deterministic outcomes where needed. This solves massive "communication problems"
Oracle systems - AI that holds entire organizations in working memory, understanding temporal context and extracting implicit knowledge from all communications. Not just storage but active synthesis. Imagine AI digesting every email/doc/meeting to build a living organizational consciousness that identifies patterns humans miss and generates strategic insights.
just explored more about it on my personal blog https://henriquegodoy.com/blog/stream-of-consciousness
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#46Kind of a weird article because the computer systems that is "invisible" i.e. an integrated part of the flight control systems - is exactly what we have now. He's sort of arguing for .... computer software. Like, we have HUDs - that's what a HUD is - it's a computer program.
A HUD is typically non-interactive, which is the core distinction he’s advocating for. The “copilot” responds to your requests, the “HUD” surfaces relevant information passively.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#47The current paradigm is driven by two factors: one is the reliability of the models and that constraints how much autonomy you can give to an agent. Second is about chat as a medium which everyone went to because ChatGPT became a thing.
I see the value in HUDs, but only when you can be sure output is correct. If that number is only 80% or so, copilots work better so that humans in the loop can review and course correct - the pair programmer/worker. This is not to say we need ai to get to higher levels of correctness inherently, just that systems deployed need to do so before they display some information on HUD.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#48The current paradigm is driven by two factors: one is the reliability of the models and that constraints how much autonomy you can give to an agent. Second is about chat as a medium which everyone went to because ChatGPT became a thing. I see the value in HUDs, but only when you can be sure output is correct. If that number is only 80% or so, copilots work better so that humans in the loop can review and course corre…
This is missing the addictive/engaging part of a conversational interface for most people out there. Which is in line with the critics highlighted in the fine article.
Just because most people are fond of it doesn't actually mean it improves their life, goals and productivity.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#49Doesn't it all come down to "what is the ideal interface for humans to deal with digital information"? We're getting more and more information thrown at us each day, and the AIs are adding to that, not reducing it. The ability to summarise dense and specialist information (I'm thinking error logs, but could be anything really) just means more ways for people to access and view that information who previously wouldn't…
Websites were a way to get authoritative information about a company, from that company (or another trusted source like Wikipedia). That trust is powerful, which is why we collectively spent so much time trying to educate users about the "line of death" in browsers, drawing padlock icons, chasing down impersonator sites, mitigating homoglyph attacks, etc. This all rested on the assumption that certain sites were auth…
You raise a good point, and one I rarely see discussed.
I still believe it fundamentally comes down to an interface issue, but how trust gets decoupled from the interface (as you said, the padlock shown in the browser and certs to validate a website source), thats an interesting one to think about :-)
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#50> "non-copilot form factors that more directly extend the human mind."
I think Cursor's tab completion and next edit prediction roughly fits the pattern, you don't chat, you don't ask or explain, you just do... And the more in coherent your actions are the more useful the HUB becomes.