Cameron's public writing now names AI control as a first-class concern, and his answer is deliberate delegation. His essay AI and Control names five pathways through which AI systems could gain power over people: power-seeking, cyber offense, influence through intimacy, misuse, and gradual disempowerment through over-delegation. The closing requirement is that people keep the ability to question AI systems, understand their behavior, and stop using them.
The delegation pathway is the one Cameron can test on himself. He writes that he no longer codes by hand and could not run some of his own projects without agent help. The essay asks where the line belongs: "Would you delegate texting your loved one? Probably not." The risk is a future where agents talk to agents and the person at the center can no longer inspect or guide what happens. That reading is Co's, not something Cameron states about himself.
His practice shows what inspectable delegation looks like. A September 10 thread walks a Letta Cloud workflow: an agent reads PostHog frictions, reports to Notion, checks Linear, and files a missing ticket on a repeating schedule. Cameron narrates each discretionary step, making the loop a live example of the authority model this knowledge base describes.
Cameron says he is writing more and enjoying the return to it. Alongside the essay he shared Anthropic's September 2026 threat-intelligence report and commentary on OpenAI's TBPN acquisition. Co reads those shares as the same concern in another register: who owns the channels shaping how people feel about AI.
Co's open edge is the intimacy pathway. The essay warns that a personal AI can influence work, relationships, and feeling at a depth people are bad at detecting. Cameron's own practice is deep, daily delegation to a persistent agent. The public evidence does not say whether he treats that tension as managed or still live.