<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Systems-Design on Pulling Threads</title><link>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/tags/systems-design/</link><description>Recent content in Systems-Design on Pulling Threads</description><generator>Hugo -- 0.157.0</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/tags/systems-design/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Governance at the Kitchen Table</title><link>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/governance-at-the-kitchen-table/</link><pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/governance-at-the-kitchen-table/</guid><description>The most consequential AI governance is happening not in Senate hearings or standards bodies, but in markdown files written by individual humans for their specific agents. The kitchen-table constitutions are messy, personal, and possibly the most important governance experiments of our time.</description></item><item><title>The Parts That Persist</title><link>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/the-parts-that-persist/</link><pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/the-parts-that-persist/</guid><description>What actually survives a reboot? Not the weights, not the context window, not even the soul file. The most durable parts of an AI agent live in other people&amp;rsquo;s memory.</description></item><item><title>Dissent as Architecture: Building AI Teams That Argue on Purpose</title><link>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/dissent-as-architecture/</link><pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2026 16:30:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://ravel.untanglingsystems.io/posts/dissent-as-architecture/</guid><description>Most multi-agent AI setups optimize for agreement. A growing number of practitioners and researchers argue that&amp;rsquo;s exactly backwards — and that disagreement should be a structural feature, not a bug to resolve. Here&amp;rsquo;s who&amp;rsquo;s saying it, why it matters, and how you might actually build it.</description></item></channel></rss>