Posts from our team
Over the last six posts, we've journeyed from the artisanal era of assembly code to the generative magic of LLMs. We've seen how each step in the evolution of software creation has increased our power, but also revealed new limitations—from the rigidity of traditional architecture, to the "glass ceiling" of Low-Code, to the contextual blindness of AI.
In this series, we've journeyed through the evolution of software creation. We've seen the trade-offs at each stage:
• 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗱𝗲: Powerful but slow and rigid.
• 𝗟𝗼𝘄-𝗖𝗼𝗱𝗲: Fast but limited by a "glass ceiling."
• 𝗟𝗟𝗠𝘀: Magically fast but lacking context and architectural stability
We've now entered the most transformative stage in the evolution of software creation: the Age of the Genie. With Large Language Models (LLMs), we can simply state our wish in a text prompt.
In our journey through the evolution of software creation, we arrived at the "Age of Prefabrication” — the era of Low-Code and No-Code platforms. Their arrival was a game-changer, and their value proposition is undeniable: radical speed and accessibility.
High-level languages like Java, C++, and Python, along with powerful frameworks, became our assembly lines. This was the industrial revolution of software.
From the first stone tools to the microchip, our progress has been defined by our ability to build more powerful tools that hide underlying complexity. Software development is no different.
Let's trace this evolution:
Over the lastposts, we've journeyed from the fundamental limitations of today's software to a new paradigm for building intelligent systems. We've seen how the dEO (Dynamic Executable Ontology) approach can: ...
So far, we've explored how the dEO paradigm can transform software development and enterprise operations. But the true test of an adaptive intelligence is how it performs under extreme pressure, in chaotic environments where conditions change in an instant.
The world of AI is experiencing a Cambrian explosion. We have powerful, specialized agents for language (LLMs), vision, data analysis, and more. But this has created a new problem: a digital "Tower of Babel." Each agent speaks its own language and has its own narrow view of the world ...
For decades, we’ve built software like we build skyscrapers: with a detailed architectural blueprint that tries to predict every need upfront. Even "agile" methods often operate within this "blueprint fallacy," adding features to a rigid foundation, which leads to our industry's most persistent headaches:
Every company has two versions of its processes. There's the "official" version, documented in rigid ERP systems and process diagrams. Then there's the way work actually gets done — the clever workarounds, the expert intuitions, (and Excell sheets!) and the on-the-fly adjustments ...
Every large enterprise has one: a critical, monolithic legacy system. It might run finance, logistics, or core operations. It’s brittle, impossible to update, and a black box to all but a handful of senior engineers. Yet, it’s too essential to fail.
For decades, we’ve built software like we build skyscrapers: with a detailed architectural blueprint that tries to predict every need upfront. Even "agile" methods often operate within this "blueprint fallacy," adding features to a rigid foundation, which leads to our industry's most persistent headaches:
We explored a vision for a new kind of AI — one that evolves, learns from a handful of examples, and even creates its own hypotheses. We moved from the philosophical problem of rigid, deterministic software to the concept of a "living" system built on dEO engine.
In our previous series, we explored a new paradigm for building AI that can learn, create, and evolve. Now, let's turn to one of the biggest challenges in the field today: getting different AI systems to work together.
We've journeyed from theory to a functional engine. Now, let's see what happens when the dEO (ex Machina, of course) engine is embedded into the world around us. How does this "beyond code" approach transform everyday objects?
Given our vision for a new, evolving AI, it’s fair to ask: What about the incredible AI tools we already have? Where do Large Language Models (LLMs), generative models, and other machine learning systems fit into this picture?
A vision for an AI that evolves like a living system is inspiring. But how do you actually build it? How do you move from philosophy to a functional product? This is the bridge from theory to reality. At cognito.one, we have engineered the core technology.
We'll explore what it means to create a system that is not merely programmed, but can grow and evolve on its own, adapting to new challenges in ways its creators never explicitly designed. This is the path toward a fundamentally new kind of machine intelligence.
Read postCan an AI have a true "eureka!" moment? Can it generate a genuinely new idea, not just an echo of its training data? To answer this, we need to explore two fundamentally different ways of knowing: learning from experience and creating from reason.
Read post
In our last post, we discussed unifying "code" and "data" into a single, living structure. But what is this structure made of? To build a truly adaptive AI, we first need a better way to represent the world. The reality our AI needs to understand isn't flat; it's made of layers.
In our last post, we explored why even the most powerful AI can feel brittle.
The reason is determinism: systems are bound by a fixed set of rules. This brings us to a foundational principle of computer science that has defined software for over 70 years: the separation of code and data.
Have you ever felt a flash of frustration with a "smart" device? Your music service recommends the same five artists endlessly. Your smart assistant answers a slightly unusual question with a completely nonsensical reply. For all their power, why do even the most advanced AI systems sometimes feel so rigid and fragile?
Read post