I don't understand this. Many small errors distributed across a large deployment sounds a lot like normal mode of error prone humans / cogs / whatevers distributed over a wide deployment.
With the advent of LLMs, a new deployment now takes 3 days. Consequently, errors requiring human attention crop up several times a day.
"Many small errors" makes a presumption about LLM confabulation/hallucination that seems unwarranted. Pre-LLM humans (and our computers) have managed vast nuclear arsenals, bioweapons research, and ubiquitous global transport - as a few examples - without any catastrophic mistakes, so far. What can we reasonably expect as a likely worst case scenario if LLMs replacing all the relevant expertise and execution?
I am watching people trust LLM-based analysis and actions 100% of the time without checking.