All courses / AI Purple / Module 6 / Chapter 24
Learning objectives
After the lesson the participant can:
- Explain the difference between the red craft and routine, and where the framework gives the adversary's mind an address.
- Classify loop competences into the six areas and state why each is evidenced in two forms.
- Design an apprenticeship route with stages, gates, rotation and unassisted practice per usage mode.
- Review the debate on erosion of the craft and state the verdict and what an organisation controls.
Key concepts
- Red craft
- In the book's own definition, the capacity to start from an adversary's objective and constraints, choose a path and adapt when a step fails. Routine is running a known technique in a known form and writing the record.
- Six competence areas
- SD Scenario design, EE Emulation engineering, DE Detection engineering, OA Observation and analysis, XC Exercise control and EV Evidence, with eighteen identifiers in Hansa Mutual's LOOP-CF. The adversary's mind is evidenced in SD-03 and EE-03.
- Assisted and unassisted form
- A competence is shown both with and without AI assistance, and the lower level counts; DE-03 and OA-03, the review of AI output, are assessed in the assisted form alone. The competence record is used for development, not for ranking, pay setting or discipline.
- Attempt first
- For the first six months an apprentice drafts every scenario, variant and detection test before opening any assistant's proposal. The chapter's reading of the studies is that the effect of AI on skill depends on whether it replaces the attempt.
- Craft register
- A team-level count of the people who have shown each loop competence unaided in the last twelve months. Hansa Mutual ties the runner's Level 3 for S1 scenarios to at least two operators who have shown EE-02 unaided.
Interactive exercises
Do them here and get feedback at once. Choose a card and then where it belongs, or drag it.
Interactive exercise 1 · Sort
Competences of the loop by area
Sort each competence into the area of the loop's competence framework that it belongs to.
Interactive exercise 2 · Match
Unassisted practice per usage mode
Each usage mode removes a different kind of practice. Match each mode with the unassisted practice the chapter sets against it.
Teaching plan
| 15 min | The teacher defines the craft and presents the six areas, then the table of what junior work taught and where AI now does that work. |
| 15 min | Reading of the evidence: what the studies of colonoscopy, school mathematics and a programming library measured, and the labels observable, expected and speculation the chapter attaches. |
| 30 min | Exercise: design an apprenticeship route, or for a buyer of the loop, the contract annex that buys novelty, pairing days and a handover. |
| 20 min | Structured debate in four steps on whether automated emulation erodes the craft of the adversary's mind. |
| 10 min | The teacher gives the verdict: the question of erosion is open, and the response is within the organisation's control. |
Discussion
- The case for calm says routine was never the craft. The chapter replies that the routine did teach. What exactly did it teach, and where can that now be learned?
- Hansa Mutual measured 26 per cent human-led hours against a protected 30 and reported it as a finding, not a failing. What does that way of reporting make possible?
- Nordvik Region buys the red competences and keeps the ability to read them. What is the minimum a buyer must be able to do itself?
Written exercise
Exercise · 30 minutes
An apprenticeship route that survives automation
Following the practical guide, design an apprenticeship route for your own team or for Hansa Mutual. List the competences the route must produce by identifier, for example EE-02, SD-01, SD-03, DE-01 and XC-02, and write for each where a junior practises it now that a pipeline runs the routine. Define the stages from shadowing to co-authoring to authoring a held-out scenario to leading a stop drill, with a gate for each. Add the attempt-first rule, manual-form practice on the range under supervision, and a rotation between detection engineering and the red team. Say who decides that a stage is complete and what is reported each quarter at team level. Participants whose organisation buys the loop write the tester annex instead: named testers, declared AI, an open-ended part, pairing days and a handover.
Deliverable: A learning path with competences, stages, gates and quarterly team-level counts, or a contract annex with the seven terms.
Self-test
Choose an answer to see whether it is right, or open the answer below each question.
Where does the competence framework give the adversary's mind an address?
Show the answer
C. In SD-03 and EE-03, writing a novel scenario and adapting when a step fails.
The framework's first design decision is that the adversary's mind has an address: SD-03, writing a novel held-out scenario from an objective and constraints, and EE-03, adapting when a step fails and deciding what to leave out.What does the chapter's verdict say about whether automated emulation erodes the red craft?
Show the answer
A. The evidence shows neither that it does nor that it does not; the response is the organisation's.
None of the measurements concerns red teaming. They show that unaided performance can fall in other fields depending on use. The verdict leaves erosion open and points to what can be designed: a protected share, an apprenticeship route, a craft register and teaching contracts.To what does Hansa Mutual tie the emulation runner's Level 3 for S1 scenarios in AIDR-0885?
Show the answer
D. To at least two operators who have shown EE-02 unaided within twelve months.
The decision ties autonomy to the craft register: the runner keeps Level 3 for S1 only while at least two operators have shown they can run a scenario by hand, EE-02, unaided in twelve months. Four of the five had at the date of the decision.