Path 01 · 5 pieces · 54 min
Deciding whether to trust an agent
You are about to put an autonomous system somewhere it can do damage. Five pieces, in the order that builds the check.
Starts with How Reliable Is Your AI Agent?
Opening the index
Find out which parts of your work keep their value as AI gets cheaper.
The Durability Curve is a publication by Harry Floyd on how AI changes what work is worth: essays, free browser tools, and a public ledger that shows how the claims behind 33 pieces were checked.
01 · The author
Since April 2026
I’m Harry Floyd. I run a research system that turns AI, product, and market noise into instruments for seeing what survives when the surface changes.
I built that system around a library of thousands of notes and sources, with AI agents that gather the evidence, run the numbers and draft.
If a claim here is wrong, tell me; changes to published essays are logged at /corrections/.
02 · The doors
6 reading paths
You do not need to read everything. Pick the door that fits.
Start here by the problem you have: one thing to run on your own work, one piece to read first, and a ledger of checked claims on the same problem.
The 7 free browser tools run on your own stack, metric or decision.
Each path below is a short run of pieces in the order that builds the answer.
Path 01 · 5 pieces · 54 min
You are about to put an autonomous system somewhere it can do damage. Five pieces, in the order that builds the check.
Starts with How Reliable Is Your AI Agent?
Path 02 · 5 pieces · 47 min
Every number on your dashboard was produced by something. This is what each one is actually measuring.
Starts with Ten Lines of Code Scored 100%. One Agent Broke Eight Benchmarks.
Path 03 · 5 pieces · 47 min
The model is the part you cannot change. Five pieces on the parts you can.
Starts with Same Model, Different Product: The Case for Harness Engineering
Path 04 · 5 pieces · 58 min
Everyone can see the buildout. Far fewer can say which layer of it keeps the return.
Starts with How Long Until Your AI Edge Stops Paying?
Path 05 · 5 pieces · 58 min
The capability arrived. Five pieces on what it quietly took on the way in.
Starts with The Difficulty You're Escaping Was Making You
Path 06 · 5 pieces · 36 min
Three pieces that set out the terms this publication runs on, then two that put them to work.
Starts with The Lens Lexicon
03 · The record
Every analysis is written to be checked. The bar has three parts, and a piece that clears it shows the work on the page.
Declares
It names which of the laws below, or which principle derived from them, it is testing, up front, in the byline.
Falsifies
It states the evidence that would prove it wrong.
Compares
It compares two real things with real numbers, so you can check the claim yourself.
Not every piece clears it. Where one does not, tell me.
1311 claims from 33 of the 103 pieces are in the public ledger. 1060 were verified at the primary source, most with the exact words, where they sit and the date they were read. Each row is labelled with how far it was checked.
The ledger records
The AI group scored 4.15 points lower on a 27-point quiz, about two grade points
The source says
This row in the ledger for “Use AI to Learn Without Getting Worse at It”“There is a 4.15 point difference between the means ... For a 27-point quiz, this translates into a 17% score difference or 2 grade points.”
04 · The spine
Last amended 2 Sep 2026
Five claims do most of the work here. Each of the five has been amended since it was first stated: Laws II, III and V when tests found cases they did not fit, Law I when its first wording (upward only) ran against its own best applications, and Law IV when physics and mathematics showed where it stops. Each law’s page carries what would prove it wrong and every amendment. They were first set out on 5 April 2026, in I Read 3,000 Papers Across 12 Fields.
Value moves to the most stubborn adjacent layer. Usually that is upward, as the layer below commoditises. When the scarcity is physical or institutional (compute, power, fabs, regulatory access), it moves down instead.
The hard part is what produces the value, when it gives you a second, independent way to check whether the answer is right. Effort that only repeats the same route can go. This covers knowing whether you are right; the effort that builds capacity, like training or practice, sits outside it and is untested.
Where a system runs a process, the structure persists while the content turns over, so the structure is the moat. Where a system preserves something, it inverts: the content is what matters, and the structure can be rebuilt from it.
Hidden structure stays hidden until you build the instrument that measures it. That holds wherever we build things first and understand them later. In fundamental physics and pure maths, theory usually leads.
Misaimed capability always wastes the effort, but it only harms the system when the miss is hard to spot or correct. When a target looks wrong, treat that as a hypothesis and test it before you re-aim.
05 · The fine print
The 7 browser tools on the tools page are free and complete, and 89 of the 103 pieces are free in full. The other 14 continue on Substack for paid subscribers. The price is on Substack's subscribe page.
No. Each one runs in your browser, takes no login and reads only what you give it. A few save your work in that browser so you can come back to it. Nothing you enter is sent anywhere.
No. Everything here is research and education, not personalised investment advice.
The newsletter · Free
Several essays a week, plus Notes through the week.
Signup completes on Substack. Unsubscribe from any email.