TOPIC: DEEP LEARNING
When Operations and Machine Learning meet
5th February 2026
Here's a scenario you'll recognise: your SRE team drowns in 1,000 alerts daily. 95% are false positives. Meanwhile, your data scientists built five ML models last quarter, and none have reached production. These problems are colliding, and solving each other. Machine learning is moving out of research labs and into the operations that keep your systems running. At the same time, DevOps practices are being adapted to get ML models into production reliably. Since this convergence has created three new disciplines (AIOps, MLOps and LLM observability), here is what you need to know.
Why Traditional Operations Can't Keep Up
Modern systems generate unprecedented volumes of operational data. Logs, metrics, traces, events and user interaction signals create a continuous stream that's too large and too fast for manual analysis.
Your monitoring system might send thousands of alerts per day, but most are noise. A CPU spike in one microservice cascades into downstream latency warnings, database connection errors and end-user timeouts, generating dozens or hundreds of alerts from a single root cause. Without intelligent correlation, engineers waste hours manually connecting the dots.
Meanwhile, machine learning models that could solve real business problems sit in notebooks, never making it to production. The gap between data science and operations is costly. Data scientists lack the infrastructure to deploy models reliably. Operations teams lack the tooling to monitor models that do make it live.
The complexity of cloud-native architectures, microservices and distributed systems has outpaced traditional approaches. Manual processes that worked for simpler systems simply cannot scale.
Three Emerging Practices Changing the Game
Three distinct but related practices have emerged to address these challenges. Each solves a specific problem whilst contributing to a broader transformation in how organisations build and run digital services.
AIOps: Intelligence for Your Operations
AIOps (Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations) applies machine learning to the work of IT operations. Originally coined by Gartner, AIOps platforms collect data from across your environment, analyse it in real-time and surface patterns, anomalies or likely incidents.
The key capability is event correlation. Instead of presenting 1,000 raw alerts, AIOps systems analyse metadata, timing, topological dependencies and historical patterns to collapse related events into a single coherent incident. What was 1,000 alerts becomes one actionable event with a causal chain attached.
Beyond detection, AIOps platforms can trigger automated responses to common problems, reducing time to remediation. Because they learn from historical data, they can offer predictive insights that shift operations away from constant firefighting.
Teams implementing AIOps report measurable improvements: 60-80% reduction in alert volume, 50-70% faster incident response and significant reductions in operational toil. The technology is maturing rapidly, with Gartner predicting that 60% of large enterprises will have adopted AIOps platforms by 2026.
MLOps: Getting Models into Production
Whilst AIOps uses ML to improve operations, MLOps (Machine Learning Operations) is about operationalising machine learning itself. Building a model is only a small part of making it useful. Models change, data changes, and performance degrades over time if the system isn't maintained.
MLOps is an engineering culture and practice that unifies ML development and ML operations. It extends DevOps by treating machine learning models and data assets as first-class citizens within the delivery lifecycle.
In practice, this means continuous integration and continuous delivery for machine learning. Changes to models and pipelines are tested and deployed in a controlled way. Model versioning tracks not just the model artefact, but also the datasets and hyperparameters that produced it. Monitoring in production watches for performance drift and decides when to retrain or roll back.
The MLOps market was valued at $2.2 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $16.6 billion by 2030, reflecting rapid adoption across industries. Organisations that successfully implement MLOps report that up to 88% of ML initiatives that previously failed to reach production are now being deployed successfully.
A typical MLOps implementation looks like this: data scientists work in their preferred tools, but when they're ready to deploy, the model goes through automated testing, gets versioned alongside its training data and deploys with built-in monitoring for performance drift. If the model degrades, it can automatically retrain or roll back.
The SRE Automation Opportunity
Site Reliability Engineering, originally created at Google, applies software engineering principles to operations problems. It encompasses availability, latency, performance, efficiency, change management, monitoring, emergency response and capacity planning. Rather than replacing AIOps, the likely outcome is convergence. Analytics, automation and reliability engineering become mutually reinforcing, with organisations adopting integrated approaches that combine intelligent monitoring, automated operations and proactive reliability practices.
What This Looks Like in the Real World
The difference between traditional operations and ML-powered operations shows up in everyday scenarios.
Before: An application starts responding slowly. Monitoring systems fire hundreds of alerts across different tools. An engineer spends two hours correlating logs, metrics and traces to identify that a database connection pool is exhausted. They manually scale the service, update documentation and hope to remember the fix next time.
After: The same slowdown triggers anomaly detection. The AIOps platform correlates signals across the stack, identifies the connection pool issue and surfaces it as a single incident with context. Either an automated remediation kicks in (scaling the pool based on learned patterns) or the engineer receives a notification with diagnosis complete and remediation steps suggested. Resolution time drops from hours to minutes.
Before: A data science team builds a pricing optimisation model. After three months of development, they hand a trained model to engineering. Engineering spends another month building deployment infrastructure, writing monitoring code and figuring out how to version the model. By the time it reaches production, the model is stale and performs poorly.
After: The same team works within an MLOps platform. Development happens in standard environments with experiment tracking. When ready, the data scientist triggers deployment through a single interface. The platform handles testing, versioning, deployment and monitoring. The model reaches production in days instead of months, and automatic retraining keeps it current.
These patterns extend across industries. Financial services firms use MLOps for fraud detection models that need continuous updating. E-commerce platforms use AIOps to manage complex microservices architectures. Healthcare organisations use both to ensure critical systems remain available whilst deploying diagnostic models safely.
The Tech Behind the Transformation (Optional Deep Dive)
If you want to understand why this convergence is happening now, it helps to know about transformers and vector embeddings. If you're more interested in implementation, skip to the next section.
The breakthrough that enabled modern AI came in 2017 with a paper titled "Attention Is All You Need". Ashish Vaswani and colleagues at Google introduced the transformer architecture, a neural network design that processes sequential data (like sentences) by computing relationships across the entire sequence at once, rather than step by step.
The key innovation is self-attention. Earlier models struggled with long sequences because they processed data sequentially and lost context. Self-attention allows a model to examine all parts of an input simultaneously, computing relationships between each token and every other token. This parallel processing is a major reason transformers scale well and perform strongly on large datasets.
Transformers underpin models like GPT and BERT. They enable applications from chatbots to content generation, code assistance to semantic search. For operations teams, transformer-based models power the natural language interfaces that let engineers query complex systems in plain English and the embedding models that enable semantic search across logs and documentation.
Vector embeddings represent concepts as dense vectors in high-dimensional space. Similar concepts have embeddings that are close together, whilst unrelated concepts are far apart. This lets models quantify meaning in a way that supports both understanding and generation.
In operations contexts, embeddings enable semantic search. Instead of searching logs for exact keyword matches, you can search for concepts. Query "authentication failures" and retrieve related events like "login rejected", "invalid credentials" or "session timeout", even if they don't contain your exact search terms.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) combines these capabilities to make AI systems more accurate and current. A RAG system pairs a language model with a retrieval mechanism that fetches external information at query time. The model generates responses using both its internal knowledge and retrieved context.
This approach is particularly valuable for operations. A RAG-powered assistant can pull current runbook procedures, recent incident reports and configuration documentation to answer questions like "how do we handle database failover in the production environment?" with accurate, up-to-date information.
The technical stack supporting RAG implementations typically includes vector databases for similarity search. As of 2025, commonly deployed options include Pinecone, Milvus, Chroma, Faiss, Qdrant, Weaviate and several others, reflecting a fast-moving landscape that's becoming standard infrastructure for many AI implementations.
Where to Begin
Starting with ML-powered operations doesn't require a complete transformation. Begin with targeted improvements that address your most pressing problems.
If you're struggling with alert-fatigue...
Start with event correlation. Many AIOps platforms offer this as an entry point without requiring full platform adoption. Look for solutions that integrate with your existing monitoring tools and can demonstrate noise reduction in a proof of concept.
Focus on one high-volume service or team first. Success here provides both immediate relief and a template for broader rollout. Track metrics like alerts per day, time to acknowledge and time to resolution to demonstrate impact.
Tools worth considering include established platforms like Datadog, Dynatrace and ServiceNow, alongside newer entrants like PagerDuty AIOps and specialised incident response platforms like incident.io.
If you have ML models stuck in development...
Begin with MLOps fundamentals before investing in comprehensive platforms. Focus on model versioning first (track which code, data and hyperparameters produced each model). This single practice dramatically improves reproducibility and makes collaboration easier.
Next, automate deployment for one model. Choose a model that's already proven valuable but requires manual intervention to update. Build a pipeline that handles testing, deployment and basic monitoring. Use this as a template for other models.
Popular MLOps platforms include MLflow (open source), cloud provider offerings like AWS SageMaker, Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform and Azure Machine Learning, and specialised platforms like Databricks and Weights & Biases.
If you're building with LLMs...
Implement observability from day one. LLM applications are different from traditional software. They're probabilistic, can be expensive to run, and their behaviour varies with prompts and context. You need to monitor performance (response times, throughput), quality (output consistency, appropriateness), bias, cost (token usage) and explainability.
Common pitfalls include underestimating costs, failing to implement proper prompt versioning, neglecting to monitor for model drift and not planning for the debugging challenges that come with non-deterministic systems.
The LLM observability space is evolving rapidly, with platforms like LangSmith, Arize AI, Honeycomb and others offering specialised tooling for monitoring generative AI applications in production.
Why This Matters Beyond the Tech
The convergence of ML and operations isn't just a technical shift. It requires cultural change, new skills and rethinking of traditional roles.
Teams need to understand not only deployment automation and infrastructure as code, but also concepts like attention mechanisms, vector embeddings and retrieval systems because these directly influence how AI-enabled services behave in production. They also need operational practices that can handle both deterministic systems and probabilistic ones, whilst maintaining reliability, compliance and cost control.
Data scientists are increasingly expected to understand production concerns like latency budgets, deployment strategies and operational monitoring. Operations engineers are expected to understand model behaviour, data drift and the basics of ML pipelines. The gap between these roles is narrowing.
Security and governance cannot be afterthoughts. As AI becomes embedded in tooling and operations become more automated, organisations need to integrate security testing throughout the development cycle, implement proper access controls and audit trails, and ensure models and automated systems operate within appropriate guardrails.
The organisations succeeding with these practices treat them as both a technical programme and an organisational transformation. They invest in training, establish cross-functional teams, create clear ownership and accountability, and build platforms that reduce cognitive load whilst enabling self-service.
Moving Forward
The convergence of machine learning and operations isn't a future trend, it's happening now. AIOps platforms are reducing alert noise and accelerating incident response. MLOps practices are getting models into production faster and keeping them performing well. The economic case for SRE automation is driving investment and innovation.
The organisations treating this as transformation rather than tooling adoption are seeing results: fewer outages, faster deployments, models that actually deliver value. They're not waiting for perfect solutions. They're starting with focused improvements, learning from what works and scaling gradually.
The question isn't whether to adopt these practices. It's whether you'll shape the change or scramble to catch up. Start with the problem that hurts most (alert fatigue, models stuck in development, reliability concerns) and build from there. The convergence of ML and operations offers practical solutions to real problems. The hard part is committing to the cultural and organisational changes that make the technology work.
AI infrastructure under pressure: Outages, power demands and the race for resilience
1st November 2025
The past few weeks brought a clear message from across the AI landscape: adoption is racing ahead, while the underlying infrastructure is working hard to keep up. A pair of major cloud outages in October offered a stark stress test, exposing just how deeply AI has become woven into daily services.
At the same time, there were significant shifts in hardware strategy, a wave of new tools for developers and creators and a changing playbook for how information is found online. There is progress on resilience and efficiency, yet the system is still bending under demand. Understanding where it held, where it creaked and where it is being reinforced sets the scene for what comes next.
Infrastructure Stress and Outages
The outages dominated early discussion. An AWS incident that lasted around 15 hours and disrupted more than a thousand services was followed nine days later by a global Azure failure. Each cascaded across systems that depend on them, illustrating how AI now amplifies the consequences of platform problems.
This was less about a single point of failure and more about the growing blast radius when connected services falter. The effect on productivity was visible too: a separate 10-hour ChatGPT downtime showed how fast outages of core AI tools now translate into lost work time.
Power Demand and Grid Strain
Behind the headlines sits a larger story about electricity, grids and planning. Data centres accounted for roughly 4% of US electricity use in 2024, about 183 TWh and the International Energy Agency projects around 945 TWh by 2030, with AI as a principal driver.
The averages conceal stark local effects. Wholesale prices near dense clusters have spiked by as much as 267% at times, household bills are rising by about $16–$18 per month in affected areas and capacity prices in the PJM market jumped from $28.92 per megawatt to $329.17. The US grid faces an upgrade bill of about $720 billion by 2030, yet permitting and build timelines are long, creating a bottleneck just as demand accelerates.
Technical Grid Issues
Technical realities on the grid add another layer of challenge. Fast load swings from AI clusters, harmonic distortions and degraded power quality are no longer theoretical concerns. A Virginia incident in which 60 data centres disconnected simultaneously did not trigger a collapse but did reveal the fragility introduced by concentrated high-performance compute.
Security and New Failure Modes
Security risks are evolving in parallel. Agentic systems that can plan, reason and call tools open new failure modes. AI-enabled spear phishing appears to be 350% more effective than traditional attempts and could be 50 times more profitable, a worrying backdrop when outages already have a clear link to lost productivity.
Security considerations now reach into the tools people use to access AI as well. New AI browsers attract attention, and with that comes scrutiny. OpenAI's Atlas and Perplexity's Comet launched with promising features, yet researchers flagged critical issues.
Comet is vulnerable to "CometJacking", a malicious URL hijack that enables data theft, while Atlas suffered a cross-site request forgery weakness that allowed persistent code injection into ChatGPT memory. Both products have been noted for assertive data collection.
Caution and good hygiene are prudent until the fixes and policies settle. It is a reminder that the convenience of integrating models directly into browsing comes with a new attack surface.
Efficiency and Mitigation Strategies
Industry responses are gathering pace. Efficiency remains the first lever. Hyperscalers now report power usage effectiveness around 1.08 to 1.09, compared with more typical figures of 1.5 to 1.6. Direct chip cooling can cut energy needs by up to 40%.
Grid-interactive operations and more work at the edge offer ways to smooth demand and reduce concentration risk, while new power partnerships hint at longer-term change. Microsoft's agreement with Constellation on nuclear power is one example of how compute providers are thinking beyond incremental efficiency gains.
An emerging pattern is becoming visible through these efforts. Proactive regional planning and rapid efficiency improvements could allow computational output to grow by an order of magnitude, while power use merely doubles. More distributed architectures are being explored to reduce the hazard of over-concentration.
A realistic outlook sets data centres at around 3% of global electricity use by 2030, which is notable but still smaller than anticipated growth from electric vehicles or air conditioning. If the $720 billion in grid investment materialises, it could add around 120 GW of capacity by 2030, as much as half of which would be absorbed by data centres. The resilience gap is real, but it appears to be narrowing, provided the sector moves quickly to apply lessons from each failure.
Regional and Policy Responses
Regional policies are starting to encourage resilience too. Oregon's POWER Act asks operators to contribute to grid robustness, Singapore's tight focus on efficiency has delivered around a 30% power reduction even as capacity expands and a moratorium in Dublin has pushed growth into more distributed build-outs. On the U.S. federal government side, the Department of Homeland Security updated frameworks after a 2024 watchdog warning, with AI risk programmes now in place for 15 of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors.
Hardware Competition and Strategy
Competition is sharpening. Anthropic deepened its partnership with Google Cloud to train on TPUs, a move that challenges Nvidia's dominance and signals a broader rebalancing in AI hardware. Nvidia's chief executive has acknowledged TPUs as robust competition.
Another fresh entry came from Extropic, which unveiled thermodynamic sampling units, a probabilistic chip design that claims up to 10,000-fold lower energy use than GPUs for AI workloads. Development kits are shipping and a Z-1 chip is planned for next year, yet as with any radical architecture, proof at scale will take time.
Nvidia, meanwhile, presented an ambitious outlook, targeting $500 billion in chip revenue by 2026 through its Blackwell and Rubin lines. The US Department of Energy plans seven supercomputers comprising more than 100,000 Blackwell GPUs and the company announced partnerships spanning pharmaceuticals, industrials and consumer platforms.
A $1 billion investment in Nokia hints at the importance of AI-centric networks. New open-source models and datasets accompanied the announcements, and the company's share price surged to a record.
Corporate Restructuring
Corporate strategy and hardware choices also entered a new phase. OpenAI completed its restructuring into a public benefit corporation, with a rebranded OpenAI Foundation holding around $130 billion in equity and allocating $25 billion to health and AI resilience. Microsoft's stake now sits at about 27% and is worth roughly $135 billion, with technology rights retained through 2032. Both parties have scope to work with other partners. OpenAI committed around $250 billion to Azure yet retains the ability to use other compute providers. An independent panel will verify claims of artificial general intelligence, an unusual governance step that will be watched closely.
Search and Discovery Evolution
Away from infrastructure, the way audiences find and trust information is shifting. Search is moving from the old aim of ranking for clicks to answer engine optimisation, where the goal is to be quoted by systems such as ChatGPT, Claude or Perplexity.
The numbers explain why. Google handled more than five trillion queries in 2024, while generative platforms now process around 37.5 million prompt-like searches per day. Google's AI Overviews, which surface summary answers above organic results, have reshaped click behaviour.
Independent analyses report top-ranking pages seeing click-through rates fall by roughly a third where Overviews appear, with some keywords faring worse, and a Pew study finds overall clicks on such results dropping from 15% to 8%. Zero-click searches rose from around 56% to 69% between May 2024 and May 2025.
Chegg's non-subscriber traffic fell by 49% in this period, part of an ongoing dispute with Google. Google counters that total engagement in covered queries has risen by about 10%. Whichever way that one reads the data, the direction is clear: visibility is less about rank position and more about being cited by a summarising engine.
In practice, that means structuring content, so a model can parse, trust and attribute it. Clear Q&A-style sections with direct answers, followed by context and cited evidence, help models extract usable statements. Schema markup for FAQs and how-to content improves machine readability.
Measuring success also changes. Traditional analytics rarely show when an LLM quotes a source, so teams are turning to tools that track citations in AI outputs and tying those to conversion quality, branded search volume and more in-depth engagement with pricing or documentation. It is not a replacement for SEO so much as a layer that reinforces it in an AI-first environment.
Developer Tools and Agentic Workflows
On the tools front, developers saw an acceleration in agent-centred workflows. Cursor launched its first in-house coding model, Composer, which aims for near-frontier quality while generating code around four times faster, often in under 30 seconds.
The broader Cursor 2.0 update added multi-agent capabilities, with as many as eight assistants able to work in parallel, alongside browsing, a test browser and voice controls. The direction of travel is away from single-shot completions and towards orchestration and review. Tutorials are following suit, demonstrating how to scaffold tasks such as a Next.js to-do application using planning files, parallel agent tasks and quick integration, with voice prompts in the loop.
Open-source and enterprise ecosystems continue to expand. GitHub introduced Agent HQ for coordinating coding agents, Google released Pomelli to generate marketing campaigns and IBM's Granite 4.0 Nano models brought larger on-device options in the 350 million to 1.5 billion parameter range.
FlowithOS reported strong scores on agentic web tasks, while Mozilla announced an open speech dataset initiative, and Kilo Code, Hailuo 2.3 and other projects broadened choice across coding and video. Grammarly rebranded as Superhuman, adding "Superhuman Go" agents to speed up writing tasks.
Creative Tools and Partnerships
Creative workflows are evolving quickly, too. Adobe used its MAX event to add AI assistants to Photoshop and Express, previewed an agent called Project Moonlight, and upgraded Firefly with conversational "Prompt to Edit" controls, custom image models and new video features including soundtracks and voiceovers. Partnerships mean Gemini, Veo and Imagen will sit inside Adobe tools, and Premiere's editing capabilities now extend to YouTube Shorts.
Figma acquired Weavy and rebranded it as Figma Weave for richer creative collaboration, and Canva unveiled its own foundation "Design Model" alongside a Creative Operating System meant to produce fully editable, AI-generated designs. New Canva features take in a revised video suite, forms, data connectors, email design, a 3D generator and an ad creation and performance tool called Grow, while Affinity is relaunching as a free, integrated professional app. Other entrants are trying to blend model strengths: one agent was trailed with Sora 2 clip stitching, Veo 3.1 visuals and multimodel blending for faster design output.
Music rights and AI found a new footing. Universal Music Group settled a lawsuit with Udio, the AI music generator, and the two will form a joint venture to launch a licensed platform in 2026. Artists who opt in will be paid both for training models on their catalogues and for remixes. Udio disabled song downloads following the deal, which annoyed some users, and UMG also announced a "responsible AI" alliance with Stability AI to build tools for artists. These arrangements suggest a path towards sanctioned use of style and catalogue, with compensation built in from the start.
Research and Introspection
Research and science updates added depth. Anthropic reported that its Claude system shows limited introspection, detecting planted concepts only about 20% of the time, separating injected "thoughts" from text and modulating its internal focus. That highlights both the promise and limits of transparency techniques, and the potential for models to conceal or fail to surface certain internal states.
UC Berkeley researchers demonstrated an AI-driven load balancing algorithm with around 30% efficiency improvements, a result that could ripple through cloud performance. IBM ran quantum algorithms on AMD FPGAs, pointing to progress in hybrid quantum-classical systems.
OpenAI launched an AI-integrated web browser positioned as a challenger to incumbents, Perplexity released a natural-language patents search and OpenAI's Aardvark, a GPT-5-based security agent, entered private beta.
Anthropic opened a Tokyo office and signed a cooperation pact with Japan's AI Safety Institute. Tether released QVAC Genesis I, a large open STEM dataset of more than one million data points and a local workbench app aimed at making development more private and less dependent on big platforms.
Age Restrictions and Policy
Meanwhile, policy considerations are reaching consumer platforms. Character AI will restrict users under 18 from open-ended chatbot conversations from late November, replacing them with creative tools and adding behaviour-based age detection, a response to pressure and proposals such as the GUARD Act.
Takeaways
Put together, the picture is one of rapid interdependence and swift correction. The infrastructure is not breaking, but it is being stretched, and recent failures have usefully mapped the weak points. If the sector continues to learn quickly from its own missteps, the resilience gap will continue to narrow, and the next round of outages will be less disruptive than the last.
Investment is flowing into grids and cooling, policy is nudging towards resilience, and compute providers are hedging hardware bets by searching for efficiency and supply assurance. On the application layer, agents are becoming a primary interface for work, creative tools are converging around editability and control, and discovery is shifting towards being quoted by machines rather than clicked by humans.
Security lapses at the interface are a reminder that novelty often arrives before maturity. The most likely path from here is uneven but forward: data centre power may rise, yet efficiency and distribution can blunt the impact; answer engines may compress clicks, yet they can send higher intent visitors to clear, well-structured sources; hardware competition may fragment the stack, yet it can also reduce concentration risk.
An AI email newsletter roundup: Cutting through the noise
23rd August 2025
This time last year, I felt out of the loop on all things AI. That was put to rights during the autumn when I experimented a lot with GenAI while enhancing travel content on another portal. In addition, I subscribed to enough email newsletters that I feel the need to cull them at this point. Maybe I should use a service like Kill the Newsletter to consolidate things into an RSS feed instead; that sounds like an interesting option for dealing with any overload.
So much is happening in this area that it is too easy to feel overwhelmed by what is happening. That sense got me compiling the state of things in a previous post using some help from GenAI, though I was making the decisions about what was being consolidated and how it was being done. The whole process took a few hours, an effort clearly beyond a single button push.
This survey is somewhat eclectic in its scope; two of the newsletters are hefty items, while others include brevity as part of their offer. Regarding the latter, I found strident criticism of some of them (The Rundown and Superhuman are two that are mentioned) in an article published in the Financial Times, which is behind a paywall. Their content has been called slop, with the phrase slopaganda being coined and used to describe this. That cannot be applied everywhere, though. Any brevity cannot cloak differences in tone and content choices can help with developing a more rounded view of what is going on with AI.
This newsletter came to my notice because I attended SAS Innovate on Tour 2025 in London last June. Oliver Patel, who authors this and serves as Enterprise AI Governance Lead at AstraZeneca as well as contributing to various international organisations including the OECD Expert Group on AI Risk and Accountability, was a speaker with the theme of his talk naturally being AI governance as well as participating in an earlier panel on the day. Unsurprisingly, the newsletter also got a mention.
It provides in-depth practical guidance on artificial intelligence governance and risk management for professionals working in enterprise environments, though not without a focus on scaling governance frameworks across organisations. Actionable insights are emphasised in place of theoretical concepts, covering areas such as governance maturity models that progress from nascent stages through to transformative governance, implementation strategies and leadership approaches needed to drive effective AI governance within companies.
Patel brings experience from roles spanning policy work, academia and privacy sectors, including positions with the UK government and University College London, which informs his practical approach to helping organisations develop robust AI governance structures. The newsletter targets AI governance professionals, risk managers and executives who need clear, scalable solutions for real-world implementation challenges, and all content remains freely accessible to subscribers.
Unlike other newsletters featured here, this is a seven-day publication that delivers a five‑minute digest on AI industry happenings each day that combines news, productivity tips, polls and AI‑generated art. It was launched in June 2023 by Matt Village and Adam Biddlecombe, using of beehiiv’s content‑focused platform that was acquired by HubSpot in March 2025, placing it within the HubSpot Media Network.
Created by Zain Kahn and based in Toronto, weekday issues of this newsletter typically follow a structured format featuring three AI tools for productivity enhancement, two significant AI developments and one quick tutorial to develop practical skills. On Saturdays, there is a round-up on what is happening in robotics, while the Sunday issue centres on developments in science. Everything is crafted to be brief, possibly allowing a three-minute survey of latest developments.
The Artificially Intelligent Enterprise
My interest in the world of DevOps led me to find out about Mark Hinkle, the solopreneur behind Peripety Labs and his in-depth weekly newsletter published every Friday that features comprehensive deep dives into strategic trends and emerging technologies. This has been complemented by a shorter how-to version which focusses on concrete AI lessons and implementation tips and comes out every Tuesday, taking forward a newsletter acquired from elsewhere. The idea is that we should concentrate on concrete AI lessons and implementation tips in place of hype, particularly in business settings. These forms part of The AIE Network alongside complementary publications including AI Tangle, AI CIO and AI Marketing Advantage.
Found though my following the Artificially Intelligent Enterprise, this daily newsletter delivers artificial intelligence developments and insights within approximately five minutes of reading time per issue. Published by Rowan Cheung, it covers key AI developments, practical guides and tool recommendations, with some articles spanning technology and robotics categories. Beyond the core newsletter, the platform operates AI University, which provides certificate courses, implementation guides, expert-led workshops and community networking opportunities for early adopters.
Claude Projects: Reusing your favourite AI prompts
28th March 2025
Some things that I do with Anthropic Claude, I end up repeating. Generating titles for pieces of text or rewriting text to make it read better are activities that happen a lot. Others would include the generation of single word previews for a piece or creating a summary.
Python or R scripts come in handy for summarisation, either for a social media post or for introduction into other content. In fact, this is how I go much of the time. Nevertheless, I found another option: using Projects in the Claude web interface.
These allow you to store a prompt that you reuse a lot in the Project Knowledge panel. Otherwise, you need to supply a title and a description too. Once completed, you just add your text in there for the AI to do the rest. Title generation and text rewriting already are set up like this, and keywords could follow. It is a great way to reuse and refine prompts that you use a lot.
OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Model Applications
21st January 2024
OWASP stands for Open Web Application Security Project, and it is an online community dedicated to web application security. They are well known for their Top 10 Web Application Security Risks and late last year, they added a Top 10 for
Large Language Model (LLM) Applications.
Given that large language models made quite a splash last year, this was not before time. ChatGPT gained a lot of attention (OpenAI also has had DALL-E for generation of images for quite a while now), there are many others with Anthropic Claude and Perplexity also being mentioned more widely.
Figuring out what to do with any of these is not as easy as one might think. For someone more used to working with computer code, using natural language requests is quite a shift when you no longer have documentation that tells what can and what cannot be done. It is little wonder that prompt engineering has emerged as a way to deal with this.
Others have been plugging in LLM capability into chatbots and other applications, so security concerns have come to light, so far, I have not heard anything about a major security incident, but some are thinking already about how to deal with AI-suggested code that others already are using more and more.
Given all that, here is OWASP's summary of their Top 10 for LLM Applications. This is a subject that is sure to draw more and more interest with the increasing presence of artificial intelligence in our everyday working and no-working lives.
LLM01: Prompt Injection
This manipulates an LLM through crafty inputs, causing unintended actions by the LLM. Direct injections overwrite system prompts, while indirect ones manipulate inputs from external sources.
LLM02: Insecure Output Handling
This vulnerability occurs when an LLM output is accepted without scrutiny, exposing backend systems. Misuse may lead to severe consequences such as Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), privilege escalation, or remote code execution.
LLM03: Training Data Poisoning
This occurs when LLM training data are tampered, introducing vulnerabilities or biases that compromise security, effectiveness, or ethical behaviour. Sources include Common Crawl, WebText, OpenWebText and books.
LLM04: Model Denial of Service
Attackers cause resource-heavy operations on LLMs, leading to service degradation or high costs. The vulnerability is magnified due to the resource-intensive nature of LLMs and the unpredictability of user inputs.
LLM05: Supply Chain Vulnerabilities
LLM application lifecycle can be compromised by vulnerable components or services, leading to security attacks. Using third-party datasets, pre-trained models, and plugins can add vulnerabilities.
LLM06: Sensitive Information Disclosure
LLMs may inadvertently reveal confidential data in its responses, leading to unauthorized data access, privacy violations, and security breaches. It’s crucial to implement data sanitization and strict user policies to mitigate this.
LLM07: Insecure Plugin Design
LLM plugins can have insecure inputs and insufficient access control. This lack of application control makes them easier to exploit and can result in consequences such as remote code execution.
LLM08: Excessive Agency
LLM-based systems may undertake actions leading to unintended consequences. The issue arises from excessive functionality, permissions, or autonomy granted to the LLM-based systems.
LLM09: Overreliance
Systems or people overly depending on LLMs without oversight may face misinformation, miscommunication, legal issues, and security vulnerabilities due to incorrect or inappropriate content generated by LLMs.
LLM10: Model Theft
This involves unauthorized access, copying, or exfiltration of proprietary LLM models. The impact includes economic losses, compromised competitive advantage, and potential access to sensitive information.