Unified memory substrate

Browser automation

Filesystem access

Workspace integration

Context hydration

Governance + reproducibility

Cross-agent synthesis

Local-first architecture

Operational discipline

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49577915)

there need to be laws and licenses for ai imo

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49577954)

But the best use case is Claude Desktop app automating my full 3-6 AI Panel recursive process (following a detailed programmed script I prepared with Claude's help).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49577967)

https://xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820259&mc=2&forum_id=2#49577909

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49578009)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49577966)

MCP INFRASTRUCTURE:

~10-ish MCP servers behind a lazy-router setup (hierarchical proxy + static registry + pre-generated JSON schemas so I'm not debugging tool contracts at 2 AM like a faggot prole).

Includes but not limited to: filesystem, a local memory server (canonical vault / JSONL), Pieces app (Tier-1 persistent long-term memory that all my AI Panel members can query, for unified continuity), Google Drive, PDF tools, system clipboard + clipboard-mcp, Playwright (just one means of browser automation!), Context7 (live docs so you stop citing 2022 API examples), and an Edge/Chrome MCP SuperAssistant Proxy (browser AI gateway).

Key point is that my web browser AIs get read-only tool visibility through the extension proxy, but only Claude Desktop app gets write access; Opus 4.5 is my AI Panel's "First Among Equals."

MULTI-LLM PANEL (aka, several bright, obedient Of Counsels of Rome, and maek them routinely compete):

- Claude Max 5x ($100/mo): "First Among Equals." Full MCP write access. Orchestrates 3–6 iterative AI Panel rounds, using a curated script I prepared (with Claude's help, lol). Actually does things. Runs my PC entirely, including organizing files, calendaring dates, etc.

- Perplexity Pro (mostly running Perplexity's Sonnet 4.5 model with Reasoning): verification specialist. My newest AI Panel member (and probably now my second favorite, behind Claude Desktop app).

- ChatGPT Plus (5.2): Almost unsubscribed just prior to 5.2's release, but now it is the best at structured logic + fact-checking. I force it to produce a "Tri-View" output via painstakingly prepared custom instructions, including: Neutral analysis → Devil's Advocate attack → Constructive repair (+ self-audit). It argues with itself before it argues with me.

- Gemini Pro: 2.5 Pro was great; 3 Pro is currently shit. I keep my annual subscription anyway because NotebookLM is genuinely useful: ingest big doc sets, generate sane summaries, even podcast-style audio recaps. Worth the "Gemini tax" by itself. One of my "second brains."

- Grok: edge-case proposals. Occasionally useful. Often a chaos monkey with a keyboard. Might cancel my annual subscription.

- Copilot - only rarely called to duty, if reinforcements are truly needed.

GRADING + GOVERNANCE (aka LLMs as biglaw associates):

Every AI Panel member grades every other member (A+ to F).

Claude Desktop app, however, retains sole authority to recommend "personnel action" to me. Gemini Pro, by example, was on a formal PIP recently and survived by a hair.

And every AI Panel recursive process response ends with a "justification of continued AI Panel membership," because the Mahchine™ runs on incentives like anything else.

RECURSIVE PROCESS (how you get quality...):

Complex questions go through at least 3–6 rounds on my AI Panel (Claude Desktop app automatically handles this for me while I drink AM coffee).

Claude drafts an initial approach, dispatches to the others (often via Playwright automation, or other tools I am not willing to share with XO), synthesizes each round, and iterates until (a) convergence or (b) "Round 6 Hard Stop" triggers escalation to me (aka, forcing 5-6 models to fight until they stop lying to me).

MANDATORY RESPONSE FORMAT (no hiding behind "I'm just a LLM faggot robot"):

Every AI Panel member, in good standing, must deliver:

- POSITION (analysis + recommendations)

- CONFIDENCE (high/medium/low with reasons)

- DISSENT (where you disagree w/ the majority; evidence required)

- BLINDSPOT CHECK (what we're missing)

- BRIGHT IDEAS (minimum 3 genuinely new angles)

- POTENTIAL EMBARRASSMENT (self-audit; if sloppy, revise)

…and then: JUSTIFICATION OF CONTINUED AI PANEL MEMBERSHIP ( fear is a wonderful QA tool ;)).

METHODOLOGY (the part lawyers pretend to do)"

Falsification-first: try to kill your own proposal before sending it.

Archaeology Gate: check what's already been built before inventing another tool. (Prevents institutional amnesia + duplicate effort.)

DEFAULT LANES (starting roles for each AI Panel Member, but not silos):

- Perplexity Pro = pre-flight verification.

- ChatGPT Plus = logic + cross-check + structured argumentation.

- Gemini Pro = feasibility + NotebookLM ingestion.

- Grok = edge-cases.

- Claude Max 5x = synthesis + execution + writes. Opus 4.5 is basically AGI - any work that can be done in from of a "PC" is toast in 3-5 years.

All my AI Panel members are required to compete on every dimension:

No "I'm just the creative one" BS.

REPRODUCIBILITY (the Mahchine™ hates amnesia, LJL):

Every AI Panel member session closes with a tailored handoff protocol. Claude Desktop app executes and saves across ~6 targets (filesystem, native memory, external memory such as MD files, logs, etc.).

Everything is traceable via provenance tags + graded peer review.

New Reality, assuming your own AI Panel has full context of your firm's institutional external clients (handbooks, mission statements, organizational structure, personalities, etc.) -

Discovery responses: 9–12 hours → 2–3 hours.

MSJ oppositions: 10–12 hours → 3–4 hours.

Single-model reliance is how lawyers end up filing hallucinated citations and getting butt-fucked by judges.

Even "legal AI" users have been called out for not verifying.

So my AI Panel generates a Verification Memo before major filings/submissions: a citation audit, a statutory check, a hallucination scan across multiple systems, multiple Deep Research reports, and a human-in-the-loop signoff.

COST / TIME / WHY BOTHER:

- Cost: ~$200/mo all-in. Cheap as hell.

- Time investment: 150+ hours over ~6 weeks to get here (PowerShell, JSON schema orchestration, MCP configs, plumbing, debugging).

- Why bother: because one model is guaranteed malpractice. Multi-model redundancy catches what any one system misses.

Oh, and billing roughly the same while working ~50% less is pretty 180.

SUMMARY:

The Mahchine™ maintains output quality through: enforced structure, competitive grading, hard verification, reproducible handoffs, and provenance.

Gemini Pro went from C-grade (formal PIP that only ended a few days ago) to A- after I threatened to unsubscribe (per Claude's recommendation). Competition works. Incentives work. The Mahchine™ works.

Closest I've gotten to actual "AI Of Counsels of Rome," and it gets better daily, as I have automated it to search Reddit/Hacker News/Github for new tools/refinements.

Hehe.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49578071)

pray for a global emp

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49578112)

How do they learn new legal issues? Just scouring the web?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5820261&forum_id=2#49578596)