THE THREAD REGISTER — the contract this deck inherits from Wave 13. Wave 13's pages are one continuous 13,720px canvas: the golden thread leaves each page at exactly the y the next page enters. That is what let the film be a camera travelling the thread rather than a sequence of cuts. See videos/smart-safety-thread/METHOD.md §0. V1.2 keeps the contract. Every page below declares `enter -> exit`, and each page's enter MUST equal the previous page's exit. Break a join and the deck still renders — and the film can never be cut from it again. The running band is 404–414: below the body (which ends at 400) and above the gain panel (which starts at 420), so the thread is visible on every page rather than buried behind a card. Re-derived on 2026-08-19 when the deck went from 27 pages to 31 — two pages added at the front (the site visit and what came back off it) and a seventh module at the back (what was asked for on site). The joins below chain exactly; the pages that actually DRAW the thread are the cover, "known, guided and protected", and the close, and none of those moved. 01 cover ->300 17 V sources 407->407 02 where we are 300->412 18 V declines 407->406 03 on site 412->412 19 V job pack 406->406 04 what came back 412->411 20 V drawing 406->405 05 M1 card 411->411 21 M5 card 405->405 06 group briefing 411->411 22 job-aware 405->405 07 known/guided 411->410 23 V powa 405->404 08 M2 card 410->410 24 V vision 404->404 09 V safety CV 410->409 25 M6 card 404->397 10 V mini module 409->409 26 V queue 397->389 11 M3 card 409->409 27 V roster 389->382 12 worker fix 409->408 28 V boundary 382->375 13 V finding 408->408 29 M7 card 375->367 14 the chain 408->408 30 the asks 367->360 15 M4 card 408->407 31 close 360-> 16 V colin ask 407->407 Wave 13's cover, continued: the thread lays itself down and the worker ignites at its origin — the first cause in the film. No audience named and no client logo. A bespoke cover reads as a sales artefact to an innovation team, and the product is already sold.
On ALS gangs now, on real jobs. Almost everything in this deck.
In daily use, and being measured.
The bar is to scale: this is mostly a live product, and the proportion is the point. Say the three words out loud — after this, nothing later has to hedge. The direct answer to the health and safety manager who read Wave 13 and could not see the safety. The rail now carries a third segment, because the deck now ends on four things that are asked for and not built. The segment is small on purpose and it is the honest proportion — say it out loud rather than letting anyone find it.
The grounding page, and the reason the rest of the deck can be read straight. Say the twenty-three-photograph number the way it happened: a real submission, first attempt, mid-morning. It is on this page BECAUSE it is unremarkable — that is the claim. Do not oversell the day. Two live faults were hit and fixed the same morning; if anyone asks how it went, say that plainly. A pilot with no incidents in it is a pilot nobody used.
From the recorded debrief after the visit. These are the workforce’s words, tightened — do not read them as a testimonial and do not attribute them to a named person in the room. The reason this page sits at the front: each of the three is an argument the rest of the deck then has to earn. Point back to it when you reach the finding page, the chain page and the mini-module page.
Wave 13 opened here and so does this one — the room saw this figure in July. TONE, and it matters: this is NOT a criticism of the toolbox talk. Say out loud that the group briefing works, that it is the floor, and that we sit above it. The argument is additive. A room that hears "your current method is failing" stops listening, and they would be right to.
Wave 13's second page, kept. The three nodes sit ON the thread because they are the three things it carries. Glass-half-full: group safety got us here. We are not saying it failed; we are saying the next gain is somewhere else.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-safety-cv — 26s. One record, three readers: what the worker sees, what the supervisor sees, what the regulator sees. The line to land is that the lowest band tells a supervisor "read the evidence below before you speak to them" — a prompt to go and talk, not a verdict to deliver.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-mini-module — 26s. Three phones: it arrives, it runs, the points come back. +6 recovered, and the flat statement that a mini module can only give points back, never take them away. The words are "mini module" throughout, including the status bar. Never assessment, test or quiz. Claim boundary held on screen: "A change in the job's status sends it, on a cadence — no one has to remember to." That is automatic issuance and nothing more. Nothing implies the module was chosen from the worker's own record.
Say "mini module" and never assessment, test or quiz. A surface that reads as a test is the same product with the opposite effect.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-finding-fix — 26s. Amber, blue, green: the check flags before submit, the crew answer in their own words, the supervisor approves. "Cautious machine. Human decision. Both on the record." This is the deck's real thesis in one screen — the machine is correctly refusing to assume something it was never told, and the human who knows decides. Do not narrate over it.
The finding is right. The crew corrects the work, or the sheet.
The finding is wrong, and obviously so. It closes, and clears the deduction.
Contested, not obvious. It closes nothing and a director rules on it.
Say the backed-the-gang beat out loud: when a supervisor backs their gang, the product shows they tried — whatever the outcome, and no score moves. It is the answer to the surveillance objection, before it is asked. The gang's performance feeding the supervisor's own score is NOT built. Do not claim it. If it comes up, it is direction.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-colin-ask — 22s, 1920x1080. The render carries its own title: "A question in your own words, answered from the approved source." It is a finished slide. Do not add a headline over it and do not narrate it — the words for this beat are on the next page. HOLD on the cited source opening: UKPN DSR 01 014 · V9.0 — §8.10 Mechanical Excavators. That is the beat nobody expects.
The provenance beat. It answers the question the room asks after the hero slide — "yes, but where does it get that from?" — before anyone has to. The screen carries the figures and the date it was verified. READ THEM OFF THE SCREEN; do not quote a count from memory. This slide's numbers have already moved once inside a week — the previous figure came off a pipeline that was retired on 21 July — and this is the one slide where being wrong about a number costs the whole argument. The point to make out loud is not the size of the corpus. It is that one answer opened: the verbatim clause, the version, the page, and held in the UK.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-colin-declines — 26s. The credibility beat, and the one the room least expects. The refusal lands at 8s and the three fallback rows get nine seconds — each on its own beat, then a highlight stepping down them so they read as live controls rather than a static list. Let it play. Do not narrate. The half that matters is the second half: it does not just decline, it hands the worker the questions it CAN answer.
FULL BLEED. ui-job-pack-sorted, 24s, 1920x1080. Real job: JOB-4471, 220 documents. The render names the CRM type-id defect on screen — type 1177 filed 195 as drawings, type 933 the same documents one letter apart put 25 in Other.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-drawing-read — 26s. The sheet is drawn from scratch in SVG and its title block reads SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE SHEET / NOT A REAL SITE. No real as-laid was opened or cropped, which is the only safe way to show this. The argument builds in order: all the text is in the title block, then the 2 lands, then the cable run lights up as read from the drawing. The answer is badged "Read from the drawing, not quoted", carries a stated confidence, and the CAT-and-verify line sits INSIDE the answer at answer size. It closes on the boundary: a drawing can describe a route, never a depth or a position — those are refused outright however clear the sheet looks.
This module answers the objection every crew and every supervisor raises first, and it was missing from the first draft entirely.
The checks fire on WHAT THE CREW DECLARED. PPE is read every time; the rest only when it applies. Two things arm a check, and the order matters. The sheet's own answers arm it — that is live for every gang and it is the left-hand column. The job pack then modulates the ladder check where a VERIFIED depth card exists for that job: past 1.2 m the depth is stated beside the verdict, below it the check quietens with its reason. That read is per tenant and OFF by default, and off means today's behaviour byte for byte — no card, no change. The sentence on this page is the check's own, from its first firing. Read it off the slide; do not paraphrase a depth from memory.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-point-of-works — 26s. The sheet asks six questions and arms four checks. Excavation Access answered No, so the ladder check reads "not needed" — the job-aware point shown rather than claimed. "Five checks, and a sheet only runs the ones its own answers arm. No extra photographs, no extra steps."
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-vision-test — 19s. The only slide in the deck that shows the AI being MEASURED rather than described. Everything on it is structural and real; there are deliberately no accuracy figures, because the ones we hold were scored against a model that is no longer the primary and a stale number on a slide about measurement is the own goal that undoes the slide. The beat to land is the asymmetry, and the gate's rule is stronger than "weighted differently": claiming a control is there when the photograph shows it is not is TOLERATED: NONE, EVER — and a dangerous verdict is re-run three times in isolation before a release may proceed. The cheap error costs somebody thirty seconds and sits inside a measured band. Also worth saying: four cases exist where the same subject has opposite known answers. A ladder IN the excavation is Present; the same ladder lying on the grass beside it is Absent. A lazy reader says Present to both. To add figures later: run `als powa vision-eval --execute` against the current primary and quote the number WITH its measurement date.
The module Brad asked about by name. It is the one he expects them to like.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-agent-queue — 26s. Two panes, two windows, and the difference is the point. What is owed is the last seven days and says so. What is still open has no age gate — a five-week- old action sits there unmoved. The absence gets its own card: "There is no 'show everyone' control on this page. Anywhere." For a room weighing a rollout across contractors, that is the beat that matters.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-gang-roster — 26s. The last of the twelve. One continuous movement, no cut: the row you pick is still the row at the top when the record opens beneath it. That is the argument made structurally — it is the SAME record, read one level up, not a second screen that could disagree. The line to land is on screen: "Every line here is a line the worker can already open on their own phone, with the same evidence behind it. There is no figure on this screen they cannot see." Hierarchy is correct here: the roster shows Operatives and Labourers, and the labourers' readiness reads "builds a record from observations and training, not sheets" — a labourer carries a record without filing a Point of Works. PII: demonstration data, and the card header says so in frame.
FULL BLEED. videos/ui-boundary — 24s. What leaves and what never does, side by side — and the rule that makes it safe: below a minimum number of workers the figure is not released at all, because in a small crew a count is a name.
The one module in the deck that promises rather than shows, so it is marked as such on its own card and again on the page after it. If a fifth ask comes up in the room, write it down and do not design it at the table.
The job is in a grid site, or the dig is deep, and the worker holds no such ticket — so the app says so. Same flag family as the depth-aware check.
Where not to park, who to expect: what the next crew needs, left by the crew going home and opened with their job. It rides the observations they already file.
The walkthrough, the services marked up, the end of the day — as set photographs with comments, read the way the sheet’s already are. Exploratory.
The pack read out on the way to site, so the crew arrive having heard it. Colin sorts and answers from that pack already; the voice is not wired.
Their words, for the room, one per row — use these rather than the slide's
wording if the ask is challenged:
competencies "if that job today, like, it's within a grid site, the app would
then point out: you haven't got competencies for substation
entry. Or you're gonna do a deep excavation."
handover "when you get here, don't park outside number 67 ... a note that
becomes visible to the next team who's coming in."
photo-first the ask was three narrated videos per team per day. The answer on
this page is the same data by a cheaper and more reliable route,
and it is a PROPOSAL — say so, and say that the video option is
being costed honestly beside it.
van brief built and tested as far as the script; there is no caller and no
voice wired. Do not name a voice vendor and do not demonstrate it.
Do not turn any row into a commitment. "In design" is the whole claim, and the
commercial conversation is not on a slide.The thread completes the run it began on the cover, and rests on a single lit node. Wave 13's close, word for word: the room heard it in July, and it should end the same way having now been SHOWN that each clause is true. No commercial ask. The product is sold — this was an explanation, not a pitch.