Manifesto · October 2026
A Wider Channel
When AI writes code faster than we can read it, understanding becomes the slow part. A short history of the channel between people and computers.
AI can now write code faster than any person can read it. An agent can work for twenty minutes on its own and change a hundred files. The work is no longer the slow part.
So what is? Watch someone work with three agents at once. They type a request into one window and switch to another to check on a second agent. They scroll back through a long reply to find the one line that matters. When an agent finishes, they read a wall of text to learn what it did, then type a follow-up that repeats half of what they already said. The person spends most of the day moving information by hand.
This raises a question that everyone who works with AI will have to answer. When the machine writes code at the speed of light, is understanding the bottleneck? Do we need to understand what the AI executes?
Our answer is yes. You can’t steer work you don’t understand. You can’t check it, and you can’t trust it. Suppose an agent changes a hundred files and you understand three of them. You have handed over the decision along with the labor. This essay is for the people who want to shape the work: say what they want, see what the agents did, push back, and decide. For them, fast agents only help if understanding keeps up.
Bysicle exists to make understanding as fast as the work, by moving information between a person and their agents, in both directions, at the highest bandwidth we can reach.
Every era had a channel and a bottleneck
The history of computing is in large part a history of that channel. Each era gave people a new way to tell the machine what they wanted and to see what it did. Each also had a narrowest point, where a person waited, guessed, or did work by hand.
1890Punched cards
- Channel
- Holes in cards, prepared in advance.
- Bottleneck
- Once the work began, you had no say in it.
In 1890 the United States Census used Herman Hollerith’s tabulating machines.1 Clerks punched holes in cards, and the machines counted the holes. Once the work began, the person had almost no say. You handed over your input and waited. The punched card carried that model, batch processing, well into the computer age. If you had made a mistake, you found out hours later.
1961The terminal
- Channel
- Typed commands, and lines of text in reply.
- Bottleneck
- You had to know the exact command.
In November 1961 a group at MIT led by Fernando Corbató demonstrated the Compatible Time-Sharing System.2 Several people could use one computer at once from typewriter terminals, and a typed command got a reply in seconds. The channel became a conversation, though a narrow one. You had to remember the exact words the machine accepted, and it answered in lines of text.
1962–1968Engelbart
- Channel
- A mouse, links, windows, and a screen shared between two people.
- Bottleneck
- It ran on one research system, and ordinary users waited decades.
In 1962 Douglas Engelbart wrote a report called “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework.”3 His aim was to make people more effective at thinking, with the computer as their main tool. On December 9, 1968, in San Francisco, he showed what he meant. In about ninety minutes he demonstrated the mouse, hypertext links, windows, and two people editing the same document while they saw and talked to each other on screen.4 People now call it the Mother of All Demos.
In 1945 Vannevar Bush wrote “As We May Think.” It described the memex, a desk that would store a person’s records and let them follow links between them.5 In 1960 J. C. R. Licklider published “Man-Computer Symbiosis.” He wrote:
“The hope is that, in not too many years, human brains and computing machines will be coupled together very tightly.”6
All three wanted a wider, faster connection between a mind and a machine. Most of what Engelbart showed took decades to reach ordinary users.
1973–1984The graphical interface
- Channel
- A screen you can see and point at.
- Bottleneck
- One person, at one desk, with one machine.
The Xerox Alto, built at Xerox PARC in 1973, had a bitmap screen, a mouse, and windows.7 On January 24, 1984, Apple introduced the Macintosh and brought these ideas to a mass market.8 You no longer had to remember commands. You could see your files, point at them, and move them with your hand. The machine became easy to use. It still knew only what was stored on it.
1991–1993The web
- Channel
- Pages of linked text and images.
- Bottleneck
- You had to find and read everything yourself.
Tim Berners-Lee announced the World Wide Web in August 1991.9 NCSA Mosaic, released in 1993, put text and images on the same page.10 Your computer could reach every other computer, and it gave you more to read than any person could. Finding and reading became the slow part.
2007The iPhone
- Channel
- Fingers on glass, all day.
- Bottleneck
- A small screen, used in the gaps between other things.
On January 9, 2007, Apple announced the iPhone.11 The computer moved into your pocket, and your fingers replaced the mouse. The channel was open all day, and it was small. You could check something in a few seconds, and long, careful work still waited for a desk.
2022Chat
- Channel
- Plain language, one turn at a time.
- Bottleneck
- Everything goes through a text box.
On November 30, 2022, ChatGPT made plain language the interface.12 You could ask a computer for something in your own words and get a useful answer. This was a huge widening of what you could say, and a step back in how you said it. You typed, you waited, you read. In some ways it was the terminal again, with a much smarter machine on the other side.
NowAgents
- Channel
- Still the chat box.
- Bottleneck
- Understanding what the agents did.
Today the machine on the other side acts. The channel to it is still the chat box, designed for one question and one answer. A person supervising several agents has to read everything they produce to know what happened. The agents write faster than the person can read. The slow end of the channel is now the person’s understanding.
The largest AI company now says the interface has to change. On October 7, 2026, OpenAI released GPT‑6 with what it calls Intelligent UI, and closed the announcement with this line: “Instead of people adapting to software, software will adapt to people.”13 That release covers answers in a chat. It does not cover long-running work by several agents, which is where the person falls behind.
Why understanding is the bottleneck
Start with engineering. An agent can build a feature and open a pull request. Before you merge it, you need to know how it fits into the rest of the system and how you checked that it does what you asked. When something breaks a week later, you need enough understanding to find the cause. Without it, you can’t tell an agent what is wrong, and you can’t judge its guess.
The same is true outside code. In marketing, AI can make a product animation. A person still has to judge whether anyone will want to watch it. That takes a feel for pacing, music and what holds a viewer’s attention.
In sales, AI can send outreach to thousands of people. A large enterprise client needs a personal approach that shows the problem your product solves for them. To automate outreach well, you first need to know what great outreach looks like.
Three things depend on understanding. To steer, you need to know where the work is, so you can redirect it before it goes too far. To check, you need to see the assumption, so you can notice when it is wrong. To trust, you need a record of past work you understood, so you can hand over more next time.
Steering also needs a stable picture of what the agents actually did. It has to be the same picture each time you look, tied to the real files and results, so you can check it and come back to it. A picture generated afresh on every view can’t give you that, because it can change between two looks and nothing in it points back to the work.
So the job is to make understanding faster. AI can help you build that understanding too, and how you get it matters less than having it. Bysicle is one way to get it fast. Talk the work through, see it laid out, and point at the part you don’t follow. Each of these widens the channel from the machine back to the person.
Why we named it Bysicle
Steve Jobs called the computer a bicycle for the mind. That is the short form people quote, and his recorded words were close to it. In the 1990 film Memory & Imagination he described a study of how efficiently different animals move.14 A human on foot did poorly. A human on a bicycle beat every animal on the list. The computer, he said, is “the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.” In an interview the same year for the WGBH series The Machine That Changed the World, he said, “for me, a computer has always been a bicycle of the mind.”15 The bicycle let a person’s own muscle carry them much further.
Agents add a great deal of power, and today the steering is clumsy. We named our product Bysicle, after that bicycle. It takes a rider further on their own effort, and the rider still decides where it goes. We want Bysicle to do that for a person working with agents.
The computer you already own
Bysicle is software that turns the devices you already own into an AI computer. Think of it as an operating system for language models and agents, an LLM OS. Ideally, a Mac or a DGX Spark, a pair of headphones, and connectivity for your wearables should be enough. You should not need a special device to buy and carry.
Other companies are building their own hardware and the software to run on it. We build only the software, because the devices people already have are good enough. A Mac can run speech on its own chips. A DGX Spark is built to run large models at your desk. Headphones and wearables are already on your body. What is missing is the layer that connects them to your agents and to each other, and keeps one shared context across all of them.
That layer has to be fast. We judge every design choice against one rule first: low latency, with as much of the session’s context as we can carry. A three-second pause breaks a conversation, and forgetting the last hour makes help impossible. This is why we built a native app instead of a plugin. Running speech on the Mac’s own hardware cut the time to first speech from about 700 milliseconds to about 185.
What we are building today
Bysicle today is a native Mac app. You talk to it hands-free, the way you would to a coworker at the next desk. A voice model answers in a sentence or two. When the answer is long, such as a plan or the explanation of a bug, Bysicle puts it on an infinite whiteboard as an island: a panel with tables, diagrams, code, and text. You hear the short version and see the full one.
The board works in both directions. You can point at a line in an island and ask about it, and Bysicle changes that island in place. You can draw on the board or paste an image, and it becomes part of the context. When a request needs real work, Bysicle hands it to a coding or computer agent on your machine. The agent works while you keep talking, then reports back to the same board, and you can ask what it did and why. Bysicle also keeps a knowledge base of your project and connects to your tools through MCP.
Much of this is new and some of it is rough. It runs on one platform, and it is built first for people who write software. That is where we are starting.
The plan
- Now
A native Mac app. Talk with your agents hands-free, see long answers as islands on a shared whiteboard, point at anything to ask, and hand off work that reports back to the same board.
- Next
The same boards and knowledge base on more of the devices you own. Headphones become a full way in, so you can ask your agents something and hear back from them away from the screen. A DGX Spark can run the models on your own desk. Your wearables connect as new ways to capture and ask.
- Later
An operating system for working with AI that runs across the devices you already have. One shared context connects what you want, what your agents do, and what gets made, wherever you are.
Sources
- US Census Bureau, “The Hollerith Machine.” census.gov ↩
- IEEE Computer Society, “Compatible Time-Sharing System (1961–1973).” history.computer.org ↩
- Douglas Engelbart, “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework,” 1962. dougengelbart.org ↩
- Doug Engelbart Institute, “Firsts: The Demo.” dougengelbart.org ↩
- Vannevar Bush, “As We May Think,” The Atlantic, July 1945. theatlantic.com ↩
- J. C. R. Licklider, “Man-Computer Symbiosis,” IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, March 1960. csail.mit.edu ↩
- “Xerox Alto.” wikipedia.org ↩
- “Macintosh 128K.” wikipedia.org ↩
- CERN, “Sir Berners-Lee announces the WWW software on the Internet.” timeline.web.cern.ch ↩
- “NCSA Mosaic.” wikipedia.org ↩
- Apple, “Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone,” January 9, 2007. apple.com ↩
- “Introducing ChatGPT,” November 30, 2022. openai.com ↩
- OpenAI, “GPT‑6 and Intelligent UI for everyone,” October 7, 2026. openai.com ↩
- Maria Popova, “Steve Jobs on Why Computers Are Like a Bicycle for the Mind (1990),” The Marginalian. themarginalian.org ↩
- WGBH, The Machine That Changed the World, “The Paperback Computer,” raw interview with Steve Jobs, May 14, 1990. Transcript at the American Archive of Public Broadcasting. americanarchive.org ↩
- Clip: Michael Lawrence Films, Memory & Imagination: New Pathways to the Library of Congress (1990), “Steve Jobs, ‘Computers are like a bicycle for our minds.’” Official upload on the filmmaker’s YouTube channel, embedded, not re-hosted. youtube.com ↩
- Clip: Marvel Entertainment, “JARVIS - Marvel’s Iron Man 3 Second Screen Experience - Trailer.” Official upload on Marvel’s YouTube channel, embedded, not re-hosted. youtube.com ↩
- Clip: Marvel Entertainment, “Tony Stark’s Best Iron Man Suit Ups | MCU Compilation (4K).” Official upload on Marvel’s YouTube channel, embedded, not re-hosted. youtube.com ↩
- Clip: Marvel Entertainment, “Tony Stark, our favorite DIY king.” Official upload on Marvel’s YouTube channel, embedded, not re-hosted. youtube.com ↩
- Clip: Marvel Entertainment, “Iron Man Suits Save Tony and Rhodey | Iron Man 3 | Official Clip.” Official upload on Marvel’s YouTube channel, embedded, not re-hosted. youtube.com ↩