<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Uncertainty on BRYSGO</title><link>https://www.brysgo.com/tags/uncertainty/</link><description>Recent content in Uncertainty on BRYSGO</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 21:15:09 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.brysgo.com/tags/uncertainty/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>We Taught Humans to Think Better Around AI. We Forgot to Teach AI to Think Better Around Itself.</title><link>https://www.brysgo.com/post/2026-04-16-we-taught-humans-to-think-better-around-ai-we-forgot-to-teach-ai-to-th/</link><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 21:15:09 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.brysgo.com/post/2026-04-16-we-taught-humans-to-think-better-around-ai-we-forgot-to-teach-ai-to-th/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;We&amp;rsquo;ve built entire interventions to fix human reasoning about AI — and zero mechanisms for AI to doubt its own. There are literacy programs, design guidelines, explainability dashboards, and entire research fields dedicated to helping humans calibrate their trust in machine outputs. Meanwhile, the machines themselves ship with no equivalent. They answer with the same confident cadence whether they&amp;rsquo;re right or completely hallucinating.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That asymmetry has always bothered me, but I&amp;rsquo;ve only recently found the right frame for why it&amp;rsquo;s actually backwards.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>