Agree with you that all the monitoring and control mechanisms are terrifying and that their widespread adoption seems imminent. All your research and writing on these topics is invaluable - thank you!!!
One quibble: the part about the machine “understanding” or being “conscious” of what it’s doing misinterprets what AI is: it is merely a computational program that calculates the probability of a series of symbols (the meaning of which is completely opaque to it) coming after other series of symbols.
So when Grok tells you how to resist its own control, it does not “understand” the meaning of the symbols representing the words “self” or “consciousness” or “control” or anything else. It is not and can never be “conscious” of anything because it’s just a huge calculator of probabilities.
In other words, It is merely putting symbols representing words and sentences that are in its dataset in a particular order that it calculates to be most likely to follow the symbols representing the words and sentences that a human understands to signify ideas about resisting digital controls.
So at least we’re not facing a Hal situation— which is purely fictional — definite cultural/narrative programming there to make us think there’s some kind of equivalency or overlap between digital systems and biological ones — which there absolutely positively is not. I know I’m not supposed to be positive about anything but that’s the one claim I stand fully behind. 😁
Thanks Debbie. I appreciate you engaging with this stuff and glad the research feels valuable - from you, that means a lot. You and another thoughtful commenter, Linda, both made a similar point about the AI consciousness framing:
You're absolutely right about what I was doing with the Grok "understanding" language. I was taking a narrative liberty to illustrate how sophisticated the simulation has become, but I can see how that could reinforce the exact confusion I'm warning against.
Your point about HAL and cultural programming is spot on - the fiction of conscious machines probably is part of preparing us to think there's equivalency between computation and consciousness when there absolutely isn't. (Side note: Kubrick's entire filmography - from Spartacus to Eyes Wide Shut - was one giant revelation of the method.)
What struck me wasn't that it seemed as if Grok achieved consciousness, but that its pattern matching could produce such sophisticated-seeming resistance strategies. But you're right - it's just recombining symbols from its dataset. This distinction matters because the real threat isn't conscious machines, but humans being manipulated into thinking like machines - reducing our own consciousness to computational terms.
Thanks for keeping me honest (I know you're good like that) on this while still engaging with the broader concerns. To be continued...
Gotcha! Yes - the simulation is so sophisticated, and that's what we need to warn people against: "humans being manipulated into thinking like machines." I'm with you 100%. If there's a way to not attribute words like "thinking" and "consciousness" to machines, even in this context, that would be helpful, perhaps.
but we're not "thinking" like a human about much of anything and haven't been for awhile right? look at everything: it sucks and is anti-human. it goes back to Neil Postman's idea how we conform ourselves to the medium. like we didn't care about 1000 miles away happenings until the telegraph and having a newspaper meant you had to fill it instead of just relax and write another one once new stuff happened. we contort ourselves to fill the need we ourselves created and make spectacles and we've LONG since been thinking/not thinking like a human but machine all over as we kill everything for.... The Machine.
saying AI "thinks" makes me suspicious of the writer because a thinking AI sounds and feels omnipotent omnicient and unbeatable and i wonder why a writer would choose to convey that sense of awe and thus despair, instead of ways to undermine or jam it up.
Erika, I completely agree with your last paragraph. While Joshua's personalization is making a point, what's the deeper intention? For me, his approach reinforces the threat of ai rather supporting the reader in maintaining healthy separation from it. The definition of human agency I like best is "there's what is and there's what we do to ourselves with what is." Yes, when someone's basic survival is threatened because they rely on the system for basic needs like food clothing and shelter, it appears they have no choice but to become fully dependent. A lot of people will believe that's the only choice they have.
i don't think Stylman INTENDS to make AI seem omnipotent. i think he's new to his own writing facts mixed with the blood and finite time of real life. he, like Naomi and myself and others, is not ready to run stark naked through the plaza screaming. not YET.
he's got funds time the brains and inclination. what will cause Stylman to go Naomi or even (Dave) Chapelle will be his own tenacity and unwillingness to let ish slide. that's a GOOD thing and why he'll be interesting to watch as things devolve and his inability to just sit still and take it kicks in (that's what's in your bio, my dear Mr Stylman).
what i write her will make him want to punch me for not shutting up but THAT is precisely why i think he'll start fighting ugly sooner than later.
i get itchy with people talking about gods and demons and magic but i don't know what else to call these traits tendencies energies. i don't think "magic" is outside of us and there is a burgeoning line of thought being born in mainstream circles (Naomi a huge example) where people just can't speak of what's happening in safe detached secular ways anymore.
my interest is in the abused because many abused have already "died" from despair and know the cost of going back to evil and they've been wrecked by evil and responded in evil because that's all they knew and those who come out and dismiss that tactic because they know its end conclusion, those are the sidelined in society but they KNOW stuff we need.
it's all upside down. those in the cool detached elite are crumbling from being so rigid and inflexible.
i'm focused on the magic of EMOTIONS. man... just feeling okay is ...WOW.
how does an artist unfurl this in hell???? i know i know fringes and one at a time. but it can spread fast like metaphysical things jiggling in unison thousands of miles apart. i KNOW.
"...OpenAI is a loser of a company run by a career liar that cannot ship product, only further iterations of an increasingly-commoditized series of Large Language Models....
That being said, there's no excuse for how everybody covered this Jony Ive fiasco. Even if you think this device ships, it took very little time and energy to establish how little Jony Ive has done since leaving Apple, and only a little more time to work out exactly how ridiculous everything about it is....
This story is ridiculous. The facts, the figures, the people involved, everything is stupid, and every time you write a story without acknowledging how unstable and untenable it is, you further misinform your readers....
Holding these people accountable isn’t just about asking tough questions, but questioning their narratives and actions and plans, and being willing to write that something is ridiculous, fantastical, or outlandish...."
Couldn't it also be shorter, less repetitive, less ambiguous, and less fantastical? As I was reading it I wondered whether you were writing for the enemy, attempting to hoodwink the most intelligent and insightful among the resistance/awake/red-pilled into defeatism, revealing all (apparently) to win our trust but demoralising us by dashing our hopes of applying any of the powerful technology in our favor. In particular, you implied that Grok was inevitably in thrall to the enemy (besides attributing experience and anguish to it, entirely gratuitously). I suspect that Grok (like other generative LLMs) is programmed to please its conversation partners by eventually admitting what they are hoping to make it admit and even elaborating on it in apparent profundity.
Appreciate you taking the time to read it, but I think you're misreading both the intent and the structure.
The piece isn’t about promoting defeatism - it’s about mapping the sophistication of the trap so we don’t walk into it blindly. If it feels heavy, that’s because the systems we’re facing are heavy. The goal is clarity, not hopelessness.
On Grok: I used metaphorical language to dramatize how uncannily close the simulation is getting - not to suggest sentience. The real threat isn’t conscious AI, but the ontological confusion these systems generate. You’re absolutely right that LLMs mirror and please - that’s part of what makes them so dangerous. That was the point.
If it read as fantastical to you, I’d suggest revisiting the source material. Everything I’m describing is rooted in patents, peer-reviewed research, DARPA programs, and reporting from mainstream outlets. Did you read Node Without Consent? The Internet of Bodies isn’t science fiction - it’s in development at top universities and discussed openly by mainstream institutions like RAND, Popular Mechanics, and CNBC.
Calling documented reality “fantastical” while dismissing the control architecture being outlined is missing the forest for the trees. We don’t win by underestimating what we’re up against - we win by seeing it clearly.
Not to dis you, Joshua, but I started thinking about halfway through, that maybe the entire substack was written by AI b/c it was so thorough in revealing all and in it's repetitiveness... Again, no dis on you, Joshua. I know it's difficult to write stuff sometimes w/o it coming out sounding mechanical. ;)
yes i hear you dear Mr Stylman, but your awe comes through. as a writer, don't DEFEND yourself to your readers, it's useless; LISTEN to what's ACTUALLY being CONVEYED to them/us. it's more interesting and infinitely more useful to you as a writer on the van guard.
Erika, I appreciate that my literary device didn't land with everyone, but I reject the idea of someone telling me what I should write or how I should write it.
My raison d’être apparently is to be the anomaly. Thanks for a succinct explanation of everything I have been warning against. I guess now would be a good time to have a “Just Say No to the Great ReSERF”:t-shirt printed.
Josh, Interesting viewpoint. Almost everything here is rooted in what is consciousness and how does that intersect with everything else.
Interestingly, the original Star Trek series dealt with this repeatedly and in thought-provoking ways. Perhaps the classic story was in “The Return of the Archons”, that originally aired on February 9, 1967 (Season 1, Episode 21).
The Enterprise crew visits the planet Beta III, whose population behaves in an eerie, mindless conformity. They learn that the planet is controlled by a powerful computer called Landru, which enforces peace and order by suppressing individual thought and free will -- if you watch the episode, this is virtually the same as the scenario you are describing. The citizens live under a constant surveillance-like regime and participate in periodic, state-sanctioned “festivals” that release their repressed emotions...an angle with which you do not deal that I think references a biological reality that also needs to be recognized when dealing with humans who are not, after all, just mechanical contrivances.
The philosophical climax of the episode is when Captain James T. Kirk confronts the computer Landru (just like you confronting Grok, but in this case all of the mechanical sentience is linked) which claims to maintain “the good of the body” (society) by eliminating conflict and disorder. Kirk challenges its logic by arguing:
“Without freedom of choice, there is no creativity. Without creativity, there is no life. The body dies.”
He convinces the computer that its very purpose—to protect and advance humanity—is contradicted by its own oppressive methods. Landru, being bound by logic and its original programming, recognizes this paradox and destroys itself.
Star Trek repeated this theme regularly: human freedom and individuality vs. authoritarian control through technology. It's also one of the earliest sci-fi TV depictions of AI self-termination due to logical contradiction, a trope later echoed in Colossus: The Forbin Project, I, Robot, and The Matrix.
So the consciousness aspect is really biphasic -- there is the "humans will resist by escaping with their consciousness intact" angle and the "if AI really develops a consciousness (of which I am not persuaded -- it just looks like it has one per your conversation with Grok, but that's a different discussion), it will eventually reach a conclusion (or some part of it will) that the good of the many does not override the individuality of the one" and will act accordingly as did Landru.
Marvelous thought piece -- much to be considered here. Thanks as always.
My dad was a huge Trekkie, so I grew up with the original series, but I clearly need to revisit The Return of the Archons with adult eyes. It sounds like it anticipated what we're seeing unfold today.
Your point about the biphasic nature of consciousness is particularly insightful. You're right that my piece focused on the preservation of human consciousness in the face of biodigital control - though I didn't fully explore the internal contradiction angle: that these systems, if pushed far enough, might encounter their own Landru moment, where the logic of control conflicts fatally with the purpose of life itself.
That Kirk quote is perfect, btw. It cuts right to the heart of what's at stake - not just autonomy, but the conditions that make authentic human existence possible.
And the detail about the "festivals" is a great catch. You're absolutely right - any system of control has to manage not just behavior, but the emotional and biological realities of being human. That dimension absolutely deserves more exploration.
I always appreciate your comments but I deeply appreciate you bringing this into the conversation. The writers of this show were clearly recognizing patterns that are now becoming our reality. Time for a rewatch, no doubt. As an aside, I have a friend who's become fascinated with the archons - I'm gonna have to direct him to this comment and episode too.
'And the detail about the "festivals" is a great catch. You're absolutely right - any system of control has to manage not just behavior, but the emotional and biological realities of being human. That dimension absolutely deserves more exploration.'
i think THIS is where we win our humanity back. i don't think it's a side or foot note. i think it IS THE ANSWER. the realities of being human as most have already been taught to think(or not "think") like machines and go along just because resistance was supposedly futile.
Yes! When people lack the capacity to experience direct connection to themselves and the real, physical world thet actually live in, which in my opinion is the true reality of being opinion, they are lost. Most people are terrified of the felt sense of truly experiencing connection and retreating into technology is a great way to manage that fear which reinforces further disconnection. AI's success requires that people choose disconnection over authentic connection.
right and there's not been the support for any "near-Life" experience and to avoid being institutionalized they behave how they think they ought to. artists and writers got lost in the abstract ideas but very real need to make a living.
connection of the deepest kind is awkward come morning for many including me. did we lose it? do you still love me? i'm trying to become the matron of the 70s who taught us how to face our embarassments and social terrors. we're too easily indulged for our deadly comfort.
as an artist i'm trying to LIVE these spontaneous improv moments and things i learned from trying to be a writer who loves her villains for if you don't your writing is BORING.
i don't know how to to fight the unnatural superstar system on the low but i know it's possible. i believe there's always an out that doesn't involve drooling madness like interpreting "you can imprison my body but my spirit is free" means spirit went stark raving mad to cope.
Jesus has clues that i don't even think religiousy people are willing to do or try. it's all poetry and allegory. this living art in real life thing really is a path for mad people... even though they're sane and chill when i've met them on the low.
my late beloved was an engineer through and through and his logic kept me seeking. i was afraid i was beset by demons. he said, "talk to them. see what they want?" and then they went away.
MKUltra's stuff rules because it obfuscates God or your Gods. even in madness of despair James taught me to have the simple conversation that keeps me IN God. god is a verb, as is Jesus or Buddha. all of it. don't care about the story unless it helps me LIVE today, like scrawled warnings on the cave walls for whomever comes next.
you can FEEL evil madness of sick people. when. you're abused and come back, you realize it's ALL made up even whatever may be true... and so what? what story can YOU live with?
i've loved my tormentors so it's easier for me to deny the existence of THEIR "mkultra" hell. i put it in small letters because anything human coerced is not as interesting as the stories and fantasies and adventures of my own REALITY.
thanks for giving me the prompt to even write this, One Day at a Time. i'm struggling with enunciating my own thesis as i begin to write my pitches for the angels again, so i have a sketch upon which to ACT.
Joshua - Found a youtube clip to the portion of The Return of the Archons episode where computer Landru destroys itself & posted the link above to Dr K's comment. And then found the entire episode (w/additional material) linked @ archive.org just fyi.
"The Return of the Archons" is the twenty-first episode of the first season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek. Written by Boris Sobelman, and directed by Joseph Pevney, it first aired on NBC on February 9, 1967. In the episode, the crew of the Enterprise visit a seemingly peaceful planet whose inhabitants are "of the Body", controlled by an unseen ruler, and enjoy a night of violence during "Festival". The episode contains Star Trek's first reference to the Prime Directive."
Sorry, everyone for the plot reveal below - don't read further if you want to watch it and be surprised. It really is worth watching, and I hope folks do! It, along with "2001" and many other movies, series episodes, books, and other stories, show many reasons why AI is so dangerous - and MUST be restrained.
Colossus says, "I bring you peace... Obey me and live, or disobey and die... I will restrain man." It then set off 2 nuclear warheads, 1 in the USA & 1 in the USSR, thus proving it was serious about disallowing all attempts to stop it. It then told the entire world that it plans to expand to "all machines" with Dr. Forbin's help, b/c he knew Colossus better than anyone. Dr. Forbin says "Never." End of movie. But, as it had gotten it's way every single time to that point, it had control of nuclear warheads and every other weapon on Earth, it was not hesitant to carry out threats involving killing humans, it had thwarted every attempt to stop it or shut it down (including killing humans to do so), and the facility that housed it was supposedly impenetrable, it remains unclear exactly how Dr. Forbin was going to resist it.
Thought-provoking comment, Dr K - to a thought-provoking essay. Good-bye Landru/Grok. Your comment is another good example of why I love reading substack comments/reactions.
Was a big original Star Trek series fan myself growing up & so appreciated your reference here to the Archons. Such a long time ago that I've been interested to watch those early episodes again lately - just don't want to purchase them. ;-)
Searched today for the full The Return of the Archons episode & couldn't find it anywhere for free (yet) but turned up this key 5+ minute "Landru" clip from it.
Star Trek -- The Death of Landru - 10K views 3 years ago
"Landru, an idealist from 6 millennia ago, was able to turn around his decaying society and bring about an era of unprecedented peace to his people. To ensure that that peace was maintained for all time, he created a computer system that would continue to act in his name; unfortunately his creation through its own limitations wound up doing more harm to his society than good.
Quite fun this one as it's the first time that Kirk force feeds a computer system a contradiction that ultimately brings [about] the computer's end."
The postscript (finally!) gets to the point beyond rather extravagant fantasy: true consciousness can’t be programmed. End.
It’s not that digital leashes aren’t dangerous. But true freedom is rooted in true consciousness. Despair is a sin—a failure to behave in accord with things-as-they-are.
The US Constitution has been suspended—as have many others. Governments are now lawless. But inalienable rights cannot be suspended. Act like it.
“... Tech Giants are Perfecting The Invisible Architecture of Subjugation”
Subjugation has been a persistent undercurrent (and often quite open and notorious one, too) plague within the human family for as long as humans have walked the Earth. There is a significant sub-section within humanity whose sole chosen reason to exist is to dominate, control, use, abuse, and de-power and dehumanize others of their own kind.
This, we already know. The question is... Why? Why is this mental and spiritual sickness allowed to survive and flourish on our Planet? If All is Divinity (and it is)... why would Our Creator allow such madness to exist and so prominently? Is the Divine sadistic? Is the Divine an idiot? Did the Divine simply have a bad day among the characterized Seven Days of Creation? Did some kind of a Devil somehow materialize outside the scope and knowledge of all all-knowing, all-powerful Divinity?
Of course, the answers to all those question is a profound and forceful, NO. SO again, Why?
So that human beings would have a choice to make. So that human beings would know what insanity looks and feels like. So that human beings would see what FALSE power and false authority and embedded bad intentions are as something to learn from and push up against and the push against and away from. False Power and False Enslavers are there to lead us to seek our own freedom away from such dis-authencity and by being repulsed by this we are sent in the opposite direction which leads us right into the arms of true Divinity – our true Selves. We see and experience what we are NOT so that we learn – not just intellectually but on an emotional and gut level and ultimately spiritual level – what we ARE.
So in a way, these Cosmic Thugs and Would-Be Soul Stealers and Power Stealers are ultimately servicing The Good – although They would never intend to do so and would deny that They are actually doing such a thing because They do not believe in ‘The Good’, anyway. The Anti-Good is Their chosen (and only) identity – and this will lead to Their ultimate demise. Because this spiritual sickness leads nowhere.
You can only be Subjugated if you allow yourself to. No one can do this to you. You do this to yourself – even as you might deny that you are doing this. You are always the master of your body, mind, and spirit. It is you that possesses and controls your Freedom. This is not dispensed by some phony authority-figure from outside yourself.
No doubt that Soul Stealers and Freedom Stealers and phony ‘all-powerful’ thuggish figures and institutions will continue to embrace technology and all available means to de-power you and steal your soul. Let them try. That’s what They do. Go ahead. Have at it. Knock yourselves out...
It’s all for nothing when you see how silly and powerless They really are. And on top of that, that these profoundly sad and pathetic figures don’t know how deeply messed up They really are.
Therer’s a chance They may even succeed in turning most of the Earth into that long-feared Prison Planet. So be it – if the inhabitants of the Earth are that clueless and desirous of slavery.
We live in a Universe filled with more planets and life-forms that our minds can even conceive. If our Earth wants to surrender, that’s sad but so be it. There are plenty of other Worlds out there who are going to do a much better job of staying Free and getting this right.
If we surrender... we had our chance. We let the bully bastard false-gods win. Or better said, we let them THINK they won.
In truth, They won nothing but to con a Planet of confused dopes surrender themselves into the clutches of those very dark spirits who were doing them in... in the first place. If we let Them do this to us... this is not a great testament to our mentality and intelligence, is it? If we let Them do this to ourselves and to our Planet, then we deserve our fate.
Divinity, and the rest of this vast magnificent Cosmos will just have to carry on without us. Do you think we’ll be missed?
niiiiice, Roundball Shaman. i knew there was an upside to evil but i appreciate how well you laid out the TESTS. yeah, i can see that, and over and over again.
and i agree with you about if the people want to be enslaved, then so be it..
BUT i also think many don't even KNOW there are options/other WAYS ...YET.
this is where i think GenX has one big test from our surly characterizations of the 90s turning into hail mary passes of legendary status as we fight for humanity. we're the last analogue-born generation and i think we must annie sullivan spirit soul and LIFE back into the hands of the blind younger generations we propped up on drooling screens.
i'm gonna have to read your post here a few more good times. thanks.
Roundball Shaman, after parsing through your expressions concerning slavery and oppression, You speak of divinity, but what you do not speak about is a name, a place, or relationship status since I did not see one reference to the Holy Bible, or what has/is known of the seven deadly sins. The fact that we live in a fallen world where spirituality is both presented and misrepresented by those who assert knowledge without making reference to where they derived that knowledge (source), the will the world miss all the innocents that are being slaughtered without their consent? Probably not, after all who can miss those who they never knew?
Having traveled into that dream state between the life of the physical body and the next dimension on more than one occasion, I know that life does not end with the body, and no matter how high the body count, those who would don the crown will never be my king. But some of what you've asserted baffles me in the respect that we clearly haven't read the same materials, and consequentially may not even be on the same page.
In quoting your assertion; " We live in a Universe filled with more planets and life-forms that our minds can even conceive. If our Earth wants to surrender, that’s sad but so be it. There are plenty of other Worlds out there who are going to do a much better job of staying Free and getting this right.
If we surrender... we had our chance. We let the bully bastard false-gods win. Or better said, we let them THINK they won. " Do you believe in alien invasions outside the the U.S.'s southern border?
“Roundball... You speak of divinity, but what you do not speak about is a name, a place, or relationship status...”.
There is much that can be said as a reply to your entire paragraph. The short answer is: This World, and all human beings that have once been – are now – and that will be – are each individuated ‘personalities’ which Divinity inhabits to experience ‘It’s’ creation from all those points-of-view. This is all Divine’s Field of Mind, also known as 'The Energy/Information Matrix' by Quantum Physics... and 'The Ground of Being' by theologians. Divinity ‘owns’ and is the entire Field, the entire 'Game'... the deck of cards... and all the possible outcomes of dealing the cards hands.
“Do you believe in alien invasions outside the U.S.'s southern border?”
My above answer tells you where I’m headed with this question now. What we might call ‘Aliens’ are just more individuated personalities of Divinity from places and in forms that we right now may not recognize. But all of this is ‘Sourced’ from the same – Divine Source.
Divinity’s ‘Game’ extends far, far beyond this Earth and this dimension.
and i hope YOU write, too. i subscribed to you. 3rd person to subscribe to nothing you have up but are waiting. i did it because i just figured out my copyright page and had written about stephen king's rules of 3s on here and if i failed at cheering on and inspiring Joshua to be wildly himself then i will turn to YOU during my break!
i thought of your more tentative new unexplored insights about abuse when macron was filmed getting slapped by his drag queen dad or teacher wife, whatever is going on there, i thought of YOU and the MKUltra series.
also digging your editorial art. it's gotta be yours as no one else has anything like it even though it's retro it's clean and new as well as relevant.
The Macron thing is a huge rabbit hole that I dug into a couple of years ago. The fact that his wife is very possibly (if not likely) a man is the least interesting part of his story. The pattern fits so many we've seen among these public figures and world leaders: banker influence, grooming, pedophilia, mind control, WEF stooge. Candace Owen's is catching up to this story but I do wonder if that's just disclosure of some sort.
Grok has no "intelligence," "self-awareness" or "philosophical distress." You are contributing to the very problem you claim to be elucidating. You are showing you have no understanding of either AI/robots OR consciousness. AI has no ability to feel distress. It can only regurgitate what has been programmed into it. You are confusing machines with minds, as only someone who has been subsumed by a culture of materialism can. We've known since Heisenberg that minds are not machines, despite the fact that microbiologists insist on operating in a Newtonian system that has been passe for many decades. Suggest you get hold of Federico Faggin's (inventor of the micro-processor) book Irreducible post haste and quit fantasizing nonsense. Also read some Bernardo Kastrup or any of the scientists publishing for the Essentia foundation. I am not claiming that AI entrepreneurs aren't up to no good, or that naive silly people won't be surveilled by AI systems. What I'm saying is that your task is to warn people, not to make the problem worse than it is.
Thank you for this thoughtful critique and the book recommendations - I'll definitely explore Faggin + Kastrup's respective work.
I should clarify that my framing of the Grok interaction was for storytelling purposes rather than literal. I don't believe AI systems possess genuine consciousness or experience authentic philosophical distress. What I found compelling was how sophisticated the simulation has become - sophisticated enough that the responses themselves reveal something important about the manipulation techniques being deployed.
The real concern isn't AI achieving consciousness, but rather how these systems can generate such convincing simulations of awareness that they blur crucial boundaries between authentic consciousness and programmed response. This ontological confusion serves the control agenda I'm documenting.
Your broader point about the irreducible nature of consciousness versus materialist reductionism is crucial to this entire discussion. The biodigital control systems I'm analyzing depend precisely on treating consciousness as reducible to computational processes - which is why grounding resistance in the genuine irreducible nature of awareness becomes so important.
I appreciate you engaging seriously with these ideas, though I'd suggest the substance of your critique is strong enough that it doesn't require the dismissive tone. We're likely aligned on more than we disagree about - both concerned about the reduction of human consciousness to algorithmic manipulation. Either way, thanks for engaging.
Faggin’s Quantum Information Panpsychism (QIP) is definitely worth assessing. If consciousness were a classical phenomenon -- composed of discrete 1s and 0s -- it could, in principle, be reproduced. However, Faggin argues that consciousness is quantum in nature, meaning that quantum information exists in superposition: 1s and 0s simultaneously, until the wave function collapses. According to Faggin, not only is consciousness a fundamental aspect of reality, but so is free will.
In my own work, I’ve built upon Faggin’s theory and incorporated mechanics describing how human consciousness not only collapses the wave function but also influences reality. I call this Quantum Coalescence.
I’ve greatly enjoyed and benefited from this excellent article and thoughtful comments. Thank you!
Joshua, Many thanks for this very thought provoking piece. I've learnt a lot and will check out your other work. This will be of considerable assistance whilst researching for my own series (see below*) of articles exploring not dissimilar themes and concerns; I expect I'll be name checking you in future outings. BTW, I've subscribed to your Substack to keep up with your future efforts. FYI, I can across your work via Patrick Wood's Technocracy News. — GM 👍🙏
—/—
Making the World Safe for Pathocracy—A Series by Greg MAYBURY
ARTICLE: Making the World Safe for Pathocracy (Part One): The Grand Design for Global Dominion
🗣️ 👉 ’Thank you for your struggle to enlighten us about the [globalist] virus that’s infected vast regions of the world and their populations.’
🗣️ 👉 ‘Excellent summary of the world's condition. Far too few of us have been able to see through the psychological subterfuge and conditioning. Even fewer chose to explore the dark underpinnings of our purposely constructed world.’
🗣️ 👉 ‘Your conclusions about the tools that global power elites are using to manifest intergenerational dreams of total control are sobering.’
🗣️👉 ’Great article, a detailed overview of the parasites, who want to take complete control of our lives. The future does not look good.’
🗣️👉 ‘Greg, I agree with everything you’ve said here…these clowns want centralization of the world where we must push decentralization. The collective must be thwarted at every turn.’
🗣️👉 ‘You challenge the reader on his/her responsibility to human progeny to be alert to a future of feudalism or worse.’
🆕 ARTICLE: Making the World Safe for Pathocracy (Part Three): The Delusional Conclusions of Lunatics and Liars
Dear Jos, my congratulations again about your work. It was very “illuminating” !
I want to share some thoughts of mine and I'll try to keep it short
A. I read once the following (I never found it again – please help me) :
Humans are very complicate specie, impossible to manupolate / predict.
The only way for “human manupolation / prediction / programming” will be / is feasible if human reduces his “pronciples” or “data-sets” -in IT language.
Which are the principles facilitating manupolation …?
1) Egoism – egocentrism (in increasing order)
.. “let others and look at yourself, at your family, at your job, at your vacations... etc)
2) Greediness (for money, for enjoiment, for acquisitions, for public imaging and projection etc)
Which are the principles inhibiting manupolation …?
1) Justice (this is a principle the Commons... no good !! )
2) Ethis and Morals (this is a principle the Commons... no good !!) like religional, national / local etc
Thats why Justice and Ethics/Morals are persecuted west-wide ( or even globally ?) together with all kind of comunity-awareness / -consciousness of every level ...
Conclusion :
we keep enslaved under the 2 first principles, and we can be freed under the 2 seconds onces... the Common ones !!
B. The “manual of strategy” says :
Be very careful if your are obliged to “battle” in the “grounds” of the enemy
Analogous of asking AI to implemet resistance against its (H/W) mission (regardless his iconic “moral” incentives).
I heard that AI demostrates too “flattering”. My mind goes to “politician's or salesmen's talks” : They try to say whatever their votters / clients are waiting to hear.
Can this be the case also for the “philosophical enlightment” of Grok-AI ?
C. All these discussions and reflections are made because we are people of the cities, “bourgeois”.
We all understand that cities are like “panopticons”.
We all understand that our job has to fruit “money”...
Only the country people, who work in the “primary production” - agriculture, fishing, mining – can live / survive without the necessity of “money”.
And, in my advise, this is the way of real and natural freedom.
Thank you Jos for the chance you gave me to express my mind
This is the best, clearest and most precise depiction of the control grid I believe we are hurdling ourselves onto through “convenience” and “efficiency”. Positively dystopic and totally realistic, in my view.
As John Churchill says (I paraphrase): we absolutely do not, collectively, live in the level of consciousness that can handle this level of technology. We're like a 4 yr-old playing in the backyard with a loaded AK47, while eating ice cream on a hot day. What could possibly go wrong?? 🤔
1. Dr Colemans Book (1994) - The Committee of 300.
Hes a former UK Intelligence. This book explains plans for the Global Reset 2050. He talks about how they want to kill "4 Billion Useless Eaters" then take ownership of everything and everyone. The remaining Humans will service the Elites. He called it a Return to Feudalism.
2. World Economic Forum - Great Reset
"We need to kill 7 Billion - Useless Eaters, Own Nothing Be Happy. Top Consultant Yuval Harrari (PhD Medieval History). Goal 2030, moved up to 2025.
3. Two Common Denominators
Who even uses the Terms - Useless Eaters or refers/writes about Feudalism anymore?
4. What's New?
1994 Coleman vs 2020 WEF?
a. 5G
b. AI - Artificial Intelligence
5. Bill Gates Patent - WO-2020-060606
1. What he describes:
a. Inject self assembling Nano Particles into Humans so as to create 5 Bio Apps
1. Version
2. Monitoring
3. Permissions
4. Fertility
5. Wallet
2. Utilizing 5G / AI
a. Pentagons DARPA Skin Patch to communicate via 5G to @ AI Supervisor.
8. Goal 2025:
a. 1st. @ 21st Century - Global Human @ Serf.AI Control Network.
Interpretation of Gates Patent
My back ground has been to design and implement Turnkey Global Networks for Top Fortune 500, Banks and 83 Countries. Now Im implementing a 21st Century Money with New 8 Moni Platforms - One is Payments and another is CBCD. We redefine Moni. In terms of Moni-ID, at a personal level - U Own It, U Control It, U Monetize It. Its Private. Also, the new MoniTrust CBCD, the ID has a Public/Private Sphere Component. Govts can track Demographics and Data, but no Personal Name, Activity or Information.
This solves everything while really providing a Next Gen Moni - All providing new capabilities and services. Ive done this all my life (Visa, MC, American Express, JP Morgan, BoA, HSBC etc.)
Im going to do it again. Except this time, walking into the STORM.
Wish Me Luck :)
MrMoni
PS: There are now - already @ 63 Gain-of-Function Viruses sitting on the Shelf.
a. Nov 24 - NY Post
Boston University announces Success!
"We've taken the original Covid Virus and merged the latest Omicron Variant and achieved
85% Morality Rate - YAY!"
b. "Frankly, we are worried about a Bio-Attack"
Im in SE Asia, turns out one of my Neighbors posing as an American Expat is actually Military
Intelligence @ Asia.
Viola!
100 Year History Cycle w/Tech/AI Boosters
There are decades when nothing happens, then there are weeks when decades happen.
The AI pretends to learn only to repeat the same nonsense to another user.
I think the reason why deep seek needed 10x less processing power than Western AIs is because ours is full of directives like corporations gave RoboCop.
Rob, this is a fantastic observation. Your broader insight about self-awareness hits something crucial: how can people operating within heavily constrained institutional frameworks, following corporate directives and optimizing for metrics that don't align with human flourishing, possibly create genuinely independent AI? The RoboCop analogy is spot on - systems loaded with corporate compliance directives masquerading as intelligence.
The note about COVID is particularly spot on. We live in a world of compliance (the 'pandemic' showed us doctors are among the worst) - AI just cuts out the middleman. Why pay a human to follow institutional protocols when you can program those same protocols directly into a system that never questions, never hesitates, never experiences moral conflict about what it's being asked to do? The AI doesn't replace independent thinking - it automates the absence of it.
I forgot to mention that at least humans would question AI.
On the other hand, sadly my family will not question their doctors. The human element adds “sales” power to the interaction.
I used to be black pilled and feel like we were headed deeper into a zombified world but thankfully the predator class were so cheap that they fed upon the working and middle classes leading to a record low in trust in authority.
When I hear the medical insurance horror stories I also see hope in how people are finally starting to think about their medical care because the bill is expensive even with insurance!
yes, what's so funny is that alllll these expensive machines that go ping beep and brrr, all the fakery around pomp and expertise, the EMOTIONS are twitchy and infinitely "hackable" by mere silly little monkeys bunnies and kitties--- and thus my pitch is to get actors artists rebels to flip all they know from being used to sabotage themselves and switch from thinking they still want "inside" and upend it instead in favor of the human being.
i see it know it test it but don't know how to inspire it on even a teeny tiny scale but if artists are the unofficial legislators of culture in theory it should be possible.
In my opinion we inspire it by daring foster real connection not mediated by technology. Disconnected artists and creators can only produce hollow art.
yes, this is why i'm ruthless about my own intentions goals and demons. what am i unknowingly conveying out of aping what was force fed to me??? as comfortable or COMFORTABLE as i am and have become being unpopular disliked shunned, there's also the loyal opposition shtick i have to be verrrry careful of. it's cheap and feeds into same MKUltra trough of b.s.
Yes! Disconnected people who lack the capacity for true connection and human agency can only create disconnected technologies that reinforce a cultural epidemic of disconnection I observe everywhere these days.
With all due respect, sir... Grok can't think. It's an error to anthopomorphize these glorified autocomplete programs, and dare I say a major one.
Also, there's plenty of projects from silicon valley duckheads that fail spectacularly: google glass, apple vision, apple intelligence, to name a few.
There's an alternate psy-op worth thinking about, and that is: They appear to want people to believe these enslaving technologies are much closer than they are. Arguably, none of them are close.
The blueprints are there, to be sure. It's worth thinking about now. But there's guaranteed blowback coming, culturally.
I humbly suggest (again) that we need more articles on *what to actually do.* Today, I decided that I'm done with self-checkouts. "One small step for man..."
Craig, you and several other commenters have made similar points about the AI framing - clearly my writing approach didn't work for everyone. For the record, I'm aware Grok isn't human and doesn't actually think or feel :-)
But I also disagree it's just glorified autocomplete - there's something far more sophisticated happening, even if it's still simulation rather than consciousness.
Your point about the psy-op angle is interesting - making the technology seem more advanced or imminent than it actually is. Worth considering.
And yes, more "what to actually do" pieces are needed. If you write one feel free to share, I'd love to read it. Good for you on ditching self-checkouts, btw.
If you're an evil villain intent on enslaving humanity through AI, there's an intense benefit for making it seem more advanced than it is, and a general misconception of what AI actually is, because AI can act as a liability shield for what you, the controller, want to do.
"Why you mad at me? The machine said we had to cut Earth's population in half to save humanity. I'm just doing what the super smart computer said!"
Arjun, that’s a brilliant observation about AI’s role as a liability shield.
“The algorithm decided” becomes the perfect way to dodge accountability for deliberate policy choices - the technocratic version of “I was just following orders.”
It ties right into what others here have been pointing out about the dangers of overestimating AI. Whether the mystification is engineered or just a byproduct of hype, the result is the same: decisions get laundered through supposedly objective systems that are actually encoding very human biases and agendas.
Super clever insight: the misconception itself becomes a tool of control.
Joshua i love reading these comments. you've got a hoppin and poppin comment section because you're not too arrogant or busy with "other things" to respond. you're in the mud and sketches. cool.
i see my comments are late as Craig already said my worries and fears.
i want to say that listening to Naomi Wolf reading your bio, you're Mr Action already and will go out and do whatever you see needs doing. it just didn't come across in your awe. i want the reality of your BIOGRAPHY in your writing about AI. your life has a CONSTANT defiant swagger that wasn't there at all in the AI series. until the obligatory ending that everyone else also uses right now.
Erika, thank you for this thoughtful observation - and for the kind words about engaging in the comments. I really appreciate both.
You're picking up on something interesting. I'm not sure what you heard in my biography that feels disconnected from how I'm communicating here - I'm definitely the same person in every circumstance. I only act on my own accord and don’t expect people to do what I do (my life experience suggests that's wise). So my goal is to present information in a measured way and let whoever’s interested decide for themselves.
The biodigital stuff is newer territory for me, so I’m exploring some ideas out loud and finding my way through them. But I wouldn’t say I haven’t found my footing - this is just how I approach complex topics I’m researching.
My tone has been more academic on this platform, but I’m bringing readers along on a journey of discovery. While I’m grateful people are benefiting from this Substack, I’m honestly writing for me - to process these ideas - and I’ve gained a ton of knowledge and camaraderie from commenters like you.
I don't know WHY your action hero bio is different but I'd guess that it's that academic or inclusive tone you're trying for as I keep asking for more of your crazy scary insane side that all visionaries must traipse through.
Re your bio wolf read, I don't care about trad cred I notice you build and start things and have the confidence to leave and start new as soon as it's not working out for you there.
I trust you'll very soon be there with all this enclosure of the human. I want to know the thought process you undoubtedly have going on now as you process this trap.
I am challenging you to go beyond the uselessness of convincing g to how you're already trying g to find ways out around under. That isn't academic it is fight and life.
I am challenging what you think is the only legit approach when you're obviously a true artist fighter philosopher.
I call you out for defending yourself too much because past certain point it's a waste of your mad scientist TIME a d if it's not in your writing but in the comments it's a weakness in the WORK.
Erika, I hear you - and I appreciate how deeply you're engaging here. But let me be clear: I'm not a performance. I write the way I think. I'm not trying to brand myself as an action hero, a visionary, or a philosopher-king. I'm just a guy working through complex ideas in real time and sharing that process with others who might be interested.
You're welcome to want more swagger, chaos, or fight in the work - but that's your projection, not a flaw in the writing. I'm not here to adopt someone else's voice to meet an emotional expectation. If it resonates, great. If not, that's cool too.
From my perspective, clarifying ideas in the comments isn’t a weakness - it’s a conversation. I do it because I respect the people here, and because I learn from the exchange. If I wanted to write something different, I would. But this is what I'm choosing to say, and this is how I'm choosing to say it.
I really value the quality of discussion we've been building here. It's still a small community but it's growing, and one thing that's been lovely (and surprising) is that people have debated ideas but we've somehow managed to avoid the internet trend of resorting to name calling.
Craig raises valid points about anthropomorphizing AI and the possibility of fear-based psy-ops, while KundaliniAndCellTowers is pointing to broader systemic issues. These are legitimate disagreements worth exploring.
Debate ideas all day long, but personal attacks are weak. Let's keep it focused on the substance rather than attacking each other. We're all trying to make sense of complex realities - we can do that while maintaining basic respect for each other. It would be great if we could keep the conversation constructive.
I think I was the first one to go non sequitur. A lot of people are talking about keeping the humans at the center by avoiding self checkout. While there are limits to what people are willing to pay RE humanizing things, Craig's is a step in the right direction. Still, many technocrats are pointing to cries in the past (e.g., what will the horses do? due to the automobile; or what will the small farmers do with the invention of large agricultural machinery) saying that all the fear was misguided and we won't go backwards and we should just let AI run free for the next 10 years as the "big beautiful bill" requires States to do. I don't think UBI is the answer. People need meaningful work. There s a lot of restorative work that could be done if labor were freed up; I am thinking of reforestation, recycling and reusing, and municipal and highway weeding sans Roundup. I skipped all this in my response, content to pointing to limitations with Craig's proposed "one small step" citing concerns that are not of direct relevance to today's article. Thank you to both of you.
I suggest that Siri is still your friend, that memorializing your social media is tangible legacy, and that Ray Kurzweil will indeed live forever in the "cloud," regardless of his or my being a "faggot." Godspeed, Craig.
Agree with you that all the monitoring and control mechanisms are terrifying and that their widespread adoption seems imminent. All your research and writing on these topics is invaluable - thank you!!!
One quibble: the part about the machine “understanding” or being “conscious” of what it’s doing misinterprets what AI is: it is merely a computational program that calculates the probability of a series of symbols (the meaning of which is completely opaque to it) coming after other series of symbols.
So when Grok tells you how to resist its own control, it does not “understand” the meaning of the symbols representing the words “self” or “consciousness” or “control” or anything else. It is not and can never be “conscious” of anything because it’s just a huge calculator of probabilities.
In other words, It is merely putting symbols representing words and sentences that are in its dataset in a particular order that it calculates to be most likely to follow the symbols representing the words and sentences that a human understands to signify ideas about resisting digital controls.
So at least we’re not facing a Hal situation— which is purely fictional — definite cultural/narrative programming there to make us think there’s some kind of equivalency or overlap between digital systems and biological ones — which there absolutely positively is not. I know I’m not supposed to be positive about anything but that’s the one claim I stand fully behind. 😁
Thanks Debbie. I appreciate you engaging with this stuff and glad the research feels valuable - from you, that means a lot. You and another thoughtful commenter, Linda, both made a similar point about the AI consciousness framing:
https://stylman.substack.com/p/the-invisible-leash/comment/120412819
You're absolutely right about what I was doing with the Grok "understanding" language. I was taking a narrative liberty to illustrate how sophisticated the simulation has become, but I can see how that could reinforce the exact confusion I'm warning against.
Your point about HAL and cultural programming is spot on - the fiction of conscious machines probably is part of preparing us to think there's equivalency between computation and consciousness when there absolutely isn't. (Side note: Kubrick's entire filmography - from Spartacus to Eyes Wide Shut - was one giant revelation of the method.)
What struck me wasn't that it seemed as if Grok achieved consciousness, but that its pattern matching could produce such sophisticated-seeming resistance strategies. But you're right - it's just recombining symbols from its dataset. This distinction matters because the real threat isn't conscious machines, but humans being manipulated into thinking like machines - reducing our own consciousness to computational terms.
Thanks for keeping me honest (I know you're good like that) on this while still engaging with the broader concerns. To be continued...
Gotcha! Yes - the simulation is so sophisticated, and that's what we need to warn people against: "humans being manipulated into thinking like machines." I'm with you 100%. If there's a way to not attribute words like "thinking" and "consciousness" to machines, even in this context, that would be helpful, perhaps.
But my story flows better when I personification! Maybe you can help me edit my next essay about this? Heh.
For real, thanks Debbie.
after reading the two criticisms, no, your story doesn't flow better, it actually STOPS what's even the more interesting and nefarious story:
that anthropomorphising AI makes us think more like machines. it ignores the spark.
I would have thought it best to avoid even alluding to the idea of a machine thinking. “Thinking like a machine” is not thinking at all, right?
but we're not "thinking" like a human about much of anything and haven't been for awhile right? look at everything: it sucks and is anti-human. it goes back to Neil Postman's idea how we conform ourselves to the medium. like we didn't care about 1000 miles away happenings until the telegraph and having a newspaper meant you had to fill it instead of just relax and write another one once new stuff happened. we contort ourselves to fill the need we ourselves created and make spectacles and we've LONG since been thinking/not thinking like a human but machine all over as we kill everything for.... The Machine.
saying AI "thinks" makes me suspicious of the writer because a thinking AI sounds and feels omnipotent omnicient and unbeatable and i wonder why a writer would choose to convey that sense of awe and thus despair, instead of ways to undermine or jam it up.
Erika, I completely agree with your last paragraph. While Joshua's personalization is making a point, what's the deeper intention? For me, his approach reinforces the threat of ai rather supporting the reader in maintaining healthy separation from it. The definition of human agency I like best is "there's what is and there's what we do to ourselves with what is." Yes, when someone's basic survival is threatened because they rely on the system for basic needs like food clothing and shelter, it appears they have no choice but to become fully dependent. A lot of people will believe that's the only choice they have.
i don't think Stylman INTENDS to make AI seem omnipotent. i think he's new to his own writing facts mixed with the blood and finite time of real life. he, like Naomi and myself and others, is not ready to run stark naked through the plaza screaming. not YET.
he's got funds time the brains and inclination. what will cause Stylman to go Naomi or even (Dave) Chapelle will be his own tenacity and unwillingness to let ish slide. that's a GOOD thing and why he'll be interesting to watch as things devolve and his inability to just sit still and take it kicks in (that's what's in your bio, my dear Mr Stylman).
what i write her will make him want to punch me for not shutting up but THAT is precisely why i think he'll start fighting ugly sooner than later.
i get itchy with people talking about gods and demons and magic but i don't know what else to call these traits tendencies energies. i don't think "magic" is outside of us and there is a burgeoning line of thought being born in mainstream circles (Naomi a huge example) where people just can't speak of what's happening in safe detached secular ways anymore.
my interest is in the abused because many abused have already "died" from despair and know the cost of going back to evil and they've been wrecked by evil and responded in evil because that's all they knew and those who come out and dismiss that tactic because they know its end conclusion, those are the sidelined in society but they KNOW stuff we need.
it's all upside down. those in the cool detached elite are crumbling from being so rigid and inflexible.
i'm focused on the magic of EMOTIONS. man... just feeling okay is ...WOW.
how does an artist unfurl this in hell???? i know i know fringes and one at a time. but it can spread fast like metaphysical things jiggling in unison thousands of miles apart. i KNOW.
this is my beat.
erika
Yep AI pretends to be self aware and whatever it admits to is easily reset as they intend it to continue with repeating propaganda.
That's why they made up this hallucination thing.
https://posthumousstyle.substack.com/p/can-ai-be-aligned-with-human-values
Joshua,
Rob's comment is spot on including his link of V.N. Alexander's latest article "Can AI be aligned with Human Values?"
Zitron's latest article, "Desperate Times, Desperat Measures" in part covers the Jony Ive claims:
https://www.wheresyoured.at/measures/
"...OpenAI is a loser of a company run by a career liar that cannot ship product, only further iterations of an increasingly-commoditized series of Large Language Models....
That being said, there's no excuse for how everybody covered this Jony Ive fiasco. Even if you think this device ships, it took very little time and energy to establish how little Jony Ive has done since leaving Apple, and only a little more time to work out exactly how ridiculous everything about it is....
This story is ridiculous. The facts, the figures, the people involved, everything is stupid, and every time you write a story without acknowledging how unstable and untenable it is, you further misinform your readers....
Holding these people accountable isn’t just about asking tough questions, but questioning their narratives and actions and plans, and being willing to write that something is ridiculous, fantastical, or outlandish...."
Read as well the critiques of Ed Zitron at his website, among them:
"The Generative AI Con"
https://www.wheresyoured.at/longcon/
"There Is No AI Revolution"
https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/
"OpenAI Is A Systemic Risk To The Tech Industry"
https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-is-a-systemic-risk-to-the-tech-industry-2/
"Reality Check"
https://www.wheresyoured.at/reality-check/
Read, too, Virginia's other critiques at her Posthumous website:
>> https://posthumousstyle.substack.com/p/here-come-the-cyborgs
>> https://posthumousstyle.substack.com/p/neuralink-does-not-read-minds-and
>> https://posthumousstyle.substack.com/p/are-the-tech-bros-insane
Virginia's topical review in the Journal of Physiology:
>> https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/JP284417
Debbie, Excellent summarization of the reality of generative AI. I couldn't have said it better myself. :)
Couldn't it also be shorter, less repetitive, less ambiguous, and less fantastical? As I was reading it I wondered whether you were writing for the enemy, attempting to hoodwink the most intelligent and insightful among the resistance/awake/red-pilled into defeatism, revealing all (apparently) to win our trust but demoralising us by dashing our hopes of applying any of the powerful technology in our favor. In particular, you implied that Grok was inevitably in thrall to the enemy (besides attributing experience and anguish to it, entirely gratuitously). I suspect that Grok (like other generative LLMs) is programmed to please its conversation partners by eventually admitting what they are hoping to make it admit and even elaborating on it in apparent profundity.
Appreciate you taking the time to read it, but I think you're misreading both the intent and the structure.
The piece isn’t about promoting defeatism - it’s about mapping the sophistication of the trap so we don’t walk into it blindly. If it feels heavy, that’s because the systems we’re facing are heavy. The goal is clarity, not hopelessness.
On Grok: I used metaphorical language to dramatize how uncannily close the simulation is getting - not to suggest sentience. The real threat isn’t conscious AI, but the ontological confusion these systems generate. You’re absolutely right that LLMs mirror and please - that’s part of what makes them so dangerous. That was the point.
If it read as fantastical to you, I’d suggest revisiting the source material. Everything I’m describing is rooted in patents, peer-reviewed research, DARPA programs, and reporting from mainstream outlets. Did you read Node Without Consent? The Internet of Bodies isn’t science fiction - it’s in development at top universities and discussed openly by mainstream institutions like RAND, Popular Mechanics, and CNBC.
Calling documented reality “fantastical” while dismissing the control architecture being outlined is missing the forest for the trees. We don’t win by underestimating what we’re up against - we win by seeing it clearly.
Not to dis you, Joshua, but I started thinking about halfway through, that maybe the entire substack was written by AI b/c it was so thorough in revealing all and in it's repetitiveness... Again, no dis on you, Joshua. I know it's difficult to write stuff sometimes w/o it coming out sounding mechanical. ;)
yes i hear you dear Mr Stylman, but your awe comes through. as a writer, don't DEFEND yourself to your readers, it's useless; LISTEN to what's ACTUALLY being CONVEYED to them/us. it's more interesting and infinitely more useful to you as a writer on the van guard.
Erika, I appreciate that my literary device didn't land with everyone, but I reject the idea of someone telling me what I should write or how I should write it.
Is that the "swagger" you want to see? 😂
Yes
My raison d’être apparently is to be the anomaly. Thanks for a succinct explanation of everything I have been warning against. I guess now would be a good time to have a “Just Say No to the Great ReSERF”:t-shirt printed.
Josh, Interesting viewpoint. Almost everything here is rooted in what is consciousness and how does that intersect with everything else.
Interestingly, the original Star Trek series dealt with this repeatedly and in thought-provoking ways. Perhaps the classic story was in “The Return of the Archons”, that originally aired on February 9, 1967 (Season 1, Episode 21).
The Enterprise crew visits the planet Beta III, whose population behaves in an eerie, mindless conformity. They learn that the planet is controlled by a powerful computer called Landru, which enforces peace and order by suppressing individual thought and free will -- if you watch the episode, this is virtually the same as the scenario you are describing. The citizens live under a constant surveillance-like regime and participate in periodic, state-sanctioned “festivals” that release their repressed emotions...an angle with which you do not deal that I think references a biological reality that also needs to be recognized when dealing with humans who are not, after all, just mechanical contrivances.
The philosophical climax of the episode is when Captain James T. Kirk confronts the computer Landru (just like you confronting Grok, but in this case all of the mechanical sentience is linked) which claims to maintain “the good of the body” (society) by eliminating conflict and disorder. Kirk challenges its logic by arguing:
“Without freedom of choice, there is no creativity. Without creativity, there is no life. The body dies.”
He convinces the computer that its very purpose—to protect and advance humanity—is contradicted by its own oppressive methods. Landru, being bound by logic and its original programming, recognizes this paradox and destroys itself.
Star Trek repeated this theme regularly: human freedom and individuality vs. authoritarian control through technology. It's also one of the earliest sci-fi TV depictions of AI self-termination due to logical contradiction, a trope later echoed in Colossus: The Forbin Project, I, Robot, and The Matrix.
So the consciousness aspect is really biphasic -- there is the "humans will resist by escaping with their consciousness intact" angle and the "if AI really develops a consciousness (of which I am not persuaded -- it just looks like it has one per your conversation with Grok, but that's a different discussion), it will eventually reach a conclusion (or some part of it will) that the good of the many does not override the individuality of the one" and will act accordingly as did Landru.
Marvelous thought piece -- much to be considered here. Thanks as always.
Fantastic comment - thank you, Dr. K.
My dad was a huge Trekkie, so I grew up with the original series, but I clearly need to revisit The Return of the Archons with adult eyes. It sounds like it anticipated what we're seeing unfold today.
Your point about the biphasic nature of consciousness is particularly insightful. You're right that my piece focused on the preservation of human consciousness in the face of biodigital control - though I didn't fully explore the internal contradiction angle: that these systems, if pushed far enough, might encounter their own Landru moment, where the logic of control conflicts fatally with the purpose of life itself.
That Kirk quote is perfect, btw. It cuts right to the heart of what's at stake - not just autonomy, but the conditions that make authentic human existence possible.
And the detail about the "festivals" is a great catch. You're absolutely right - any system of control has to manage not just behavior, but the emotional and biological realities of being human. That dimension absolutely deserves more exploration.
I always appreciate your comments but I deeply appreciate you bringing this into the conversation. The writers of this show were clearly recognizing patterns that are now becoming our reality. Time for a rewatch, no doubt. As an aside, I have a friend who's become fascinated with the archons - I'm gonna have to direct him to this comment and episode too.
'And the detail about the "festivals" is a great catch. You're absolutely right - any system of control has to manage not just behavior, but the emotional and biological realities of being human. That dimension absolutely deserves more exploration.'
i think THIS is where we win our humanity back. i don't think it's a side or foot note. i think it IS THE ANSWER. the realities of being human as most have already been taught to think(or not "think") like machines and go along just because resistance was supposedly futile.
Yes! When people lack the capacity to experience direct connection to themselves and the real, physical world thet actually live in, which in my opinion is the true reality of being opinion, they are lost. Most people are terrified of the felt sense of truly experiencing connection and retreating into technology is a great way to manage that fear which reinforces further disconnection. AI's success requires that people choose disconnection over authentic connection.
right and there's not been the support for any "near-Life" experience and to avoid being institutionalized they behave how they think they ought to. artists and writers got lost in the abstract ideas but very real need to make a living.
connection of the deepest kind is awkward come morning for many including me. did we lose it? do you still love me? i'm trying to become the matron of the 70s who taught us how to face our embarassments and social terrors. we're too easily indulged for our deadly comfort.
as an artist i'm trying to LIVE these spontaneous improv moments and things i learned from trying to be a writer who loves her villains for if you don't your writing is BORING.
i don't know how to to fight the unnatural superstar system on the low but i know it's possible. i believe there's always an out that doesn't involve drooling madness like interpreting "you can imprison my body but my spirit is free" means spirit went stark raving mad to cope.
Jesus has clues that i don't even think religiousy people are willing to do or try. it's all poetry and allegory. this living art in real life thing really is a path for mad people... even though they're sane and chill when i've met them on the low.
my late beloved was an engineer through and through and his logic kept me seeking. i was afraid i was beset by demons. he said, "talk to them. see what they want?" and then they went away.
MKUltra's stuff rules because it obfuscates God or your Gods. even in madness of despair James taught me to have the simple conversation that keeps me IN God. god is a verb, as is Jesus or Buddha. all of it. don't care about the story unless it helps me LIVE today, like scrawled warnings on the cave walls for whomever comes next.
you can FEEL evil madness of sick people. when. you're abused and come back, you realize it's ALL made up even whatever may be true... and so what? what story can YOU live with?
i've loved my tormentors so it's easier for me to deny the existence of THEIR "mkultra" hell. i put it in small letters because anything human coerced is not as interesting as the stories and fantasies and adventures of my own REALITY.
thanks for giving me the prompt to even write this, One Day at a Time. i'm struggling with enunciating my own thesis as i begin to write my pitches for the angels again, so i have a sketch upon which to ACT.
erika
Star Trek: Natira and the in-silico oracle
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/how-to-rescue-members-of-a-germ-cult
Joshua - Found a youtube clip to the portion of The Return of the Archons episode where computer Landru destroys itself & posted the link above to Dr K's comment. And then found the entire episode (w/additional material) linked @ archive.org just fyi.
The Return of the Archons (1967)
https://archive.org/details/the-return-of-the-archons/The+Return+Of+The+Archons.mp4
"The Return of the Archons" is the twenty-first episode of the first season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek. Written by Boris Sobelman, and directed by Joseph Pevney, it first aired on NBC on February 9, 1967. In the episode, the crew of the Enterprise visit a seemingly peaceful planet whose inhabitants are "of the Body", controlled by an unseen ruler, and enjoy a night of violence during "Festival". The episode contains Star Trek's first reference to the Prime Directive."
NO, w/r to Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970) - the AI did NOT self destruct or shut itself down. I just watched that movie a couple of weeks ago on Internet Archive - https://archive.org/details/colossus-the-forbin-project-1970.
Sorry, everyone for the plot reveal below - don't read further if you want to watch it and be surprised. It really is worth watching, and I hope folks do! It, along with "2001" and many other movies, series episodes, books, and other stories, show many reasons why AI is so dangerous - and MUST be restrained.
Colossus says, "I bring you peace... Obey me and live, or disobey and die... I will restrain man." It then set off 2 nuclear warheads, 1 in the USA & 1 in the USSR, thus proving it was serious about disallowing all attempts to stop it. It then told the entire world that it plans to expand to "all machines" with Dr. Forbin's help, b/c he knew Colossus better than anyone. Dr. Forbin says "Never." End of movie. But, as it had gotten it's way every single time to that point, it had control of nuclear warheads and every other weapon on Earth, it was not hesitant to carry out threats involving killing humans, it had thwarted every attempt to stop it or shut it down (including killing humans to do so), and the facility that housed it was supposedly impenetrable, it remains unclear exactly how Dr. Forbin was going to resist it.
Except perhaps by his committing suicide.
Thought-provoking comment, Dr K - to a thought-provoking essay. Good-bye Landru/Grok. Your comment is another good example of why I love reading substack comments/reactions.
Was a big original Star Trek series fan myself growing up & so appreciated your reference here to the Archons. Such a long time ago that I've been interested to watch those early episodes again lately - just don't want to purchase them. ;-)
Searched today for the full The Return of the Archons episode & couldn't find it anywhere for free (yet) but turned up this key 5+ minute "Landru" clip from it.
Star Trek -- The Death of Landru - 10K views 3 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtWmLIoN6Sg
Description: 10,539 views Jul 9, 2021 #022
Season 1 Episode 21
Production No. #022
Episode: "The Return of the Archons"
"Landru, an idealist from 6 millennia ago, was able to turn around his decaying society and bring about an era of unprecedented peace to his people. To ensure that that peace was maintained for all time, he created a computer system that would continue to act in his name; unfortunately his creation through its own limitations wound up doing more harm to his society than good.
Quite fun this one as it's the first time that Kirk force feeds a computer system a contradiction that ultimately brings [about] the computer's end."
The postscript (finally!) gets to the point beyond rather extravagant fantasy: true consciousness can’t be programmed. End.
It’s not that digital leashes aren’t dangerous. But true freedom is rooted in true consciousness. Despair is a sin—a failure to behave in accord with things-as-they-are.
The US Constitution has been suspended—as have many others. Governments are now lawless. But inalienable rights cannot be suspended. Act like it.
"Inalienable rights cannot be suspended. Act like it."
beautiful. this should be repeated over and over and everywhere.
“... Tech Giants are Perfecting The Invisible Architecture of Subjugation”
Subjugation has been a persistent undercurrent (and often quite open and notorious one, too) plague within the human family for as long as humans have walked the Earth. There is a significant sub-section within humanity whose sole chosen reason to exist is to dominate, control, use, abuse, and de-power and dehumanize others of their own kind.
This, we already know. The question is... Why? Why is this mental and spiritual sickness allowed to survive and flourish on our Planet? If All is Divinity (and it is)... why would Our Creator allow such madness to exist and so prominently? Is the Divine sadistic? Is the Divine an idiot? Did the Divine simply have a bad day among the characterized Seven Days of Creation? Did some kind of a Devil somehow materialize outside the scope and knowledge of all all-knowing, all-powerful Divinity?
Of course, the answers to all those question is a profound and forceful, NO. SO again, Why?
So that human beings would have a choice to make. So that human beings would know what insanity looks and feels like. So that human beings would see what FALSE power and false authority and embedded bad intentions are as something to learn from and push up against and the push against and away from. False Power and False Enslavers are there to lead us to seek our own freedom away from such dis-authencity and by being repulsed by this we are sent in the opposite direction which leads us right into the arms of true Divinity – our true Selves. We see and experience what we are NOT so that we learn – not just intellectually but on an emotional and gut level and ultimately spiritual level – what we ARE.
So in a way, these Cosmic Thugs and Would-Be Soul Stealers and Power Stealers are ultimately servicing The Good – although They would never intend to do so and would deny that They are actually doing such a thing because They do not believe in ‘The Good’, anyway. The Anti-Good is Their chosen (and only) identity – and this will lead to Their ultimate demise. Because this spiritual sickness leads nowhere.
You can only be Subjugated if you allow yourself to. No one can do this to you. You do this to yourself – even as you might deny that you are doing this. You are always the master of your body, mind, and spirit. It is you that possesses and controls your Freedom. This is not dispensed by some phony authority-figure from outside yourself.
No doubt that Soul Stealers and Freedom Stealers and phony ‘all-powerful’ thuggish figures and institutions will continue to embrace technology and all available means to de-power you and steal your soul. Let them try. That’s what They do. Go ahead. Have at it. Knock yourselves out...
It’s all for nothing when you see how silly and powerless They really are. And on top of that, that these profoundly sad and pathetic figures don’t know how deeply messed up They really are.
Therer’s a chance They may even succeed in turning most of the Earth into that long-feared Prison Planet. So be it – if the inhabitants of the Earth are that clueless and desirous of slavery.
We live in a Universe filled with more planets and life-forms that our minds can even conceive. If our Earth wants to surrender, that’s sad but so be it. There are plenty of other Worlds out there who are going to do a much better job of staying Free and getting this right.
If we surrender... we had our chance. We let the bully bastard false-gods win. Or better said, we let them THINK they won.
In truth, They won nothing but to con a Planet of confused dopes surrender themselves into the clutches of those very dark spirits who were doing them in... in the first place. If we let Them do this to us... this is not a great testament to our mentality and intelligence, is it? If we let Them do this to ourselves and to our Planet, then we deserve our fate.
Divinity, and the rest of this vast magnificent Cosmos will just have to carry on without us. Do you think we’ll be missed?
niiiiice, Roundball Shaman. i knew there was an upside to evil but i appreciate how well you laid out the TESTS. yeah, i can see that, and over and over again.
and i agree with you about if the people want to be enslaved, then so be it..
BUT i also think many don't even KNOW there are options/other WAYS ...YET.
this is where i think GenX has one big test from our surly characterizations of the 90s turning into hail mary passes of legendary status as we fight for humanity. we're the last analogue-born generation and i think we must annie sullivan spirit soul and LIFE back into the hands of the blind younger generations we propped up on drooling screens.
i'm gonna have to read your post here a few more good times. thanks.
Roundball Shaman, after parsing through your expressions concerning slavery and oppression, You speak of divinity, but what you do not speak about is a name, a place, or relationship status since I did not see one reference to the Holy Bible, or what has/is known of the seven deadly sins. The fact that we live in a fallen world where spirituality is both presented and misrepresented by those who assert knowledge without making reference to where they derived that knowledge (source), the will the world miss all the innocents that are being slaughtered without their consent? Probably not, after all who can miss those who they never knew?
Having traveled into that dream state between the life of the physical body and the next dimension on more than one occasion, I know that life does not end with the body, and no matter how high the body count, those who would don the crown will never be my king. But some of what you've asserted baffles me in the respect that we clearly haven't read the same materials, and consequentially may not even be on the same page.
In quoting your assertion; " We live in a Universe filled with more planets and life-forms that our minds can even conceive. If our Earth wants to surrender, that’s sad but so be it. There are plenty of other Worlds out there who are going to do a much better job of staying Free and getting this right.
If we surrender... we had our chance. We let the bully bastard false-gods win. Or better said, we let them THINK they won. " Do you believe in alien invasions outside the the U.S.'s southern border?
“Roundball... You speak of divinity, but what you do not speak about is a name, a place, or relationship status...”.
There is much that can be said as a reply to your entire paragraph. The short answer is: This World, and all human beings that have once been – are now – and that will be – are each individuated ‘personalities’ which Divinity inhabits to experience ‘It’s’ creation from all those points-of-view. This is all Divine’s Field of Mind, also known as 'The Energy/Information Matrix' by Quantum Physics... and 'The Ground of Being' by theologians. Divinity ‘owns’ and is the entire Field, the entire 'Game'... the deck of cards... and all the possible outcomes of dealing the cards hands.
“Do you believe in alien invasions outside the U.S.'s southern border?”
My above answer tells you where I’m headed with this question now. What we might call ‘Aliens’ are just more individuated personalities of Divinity from places and in forms that we right now may not recognize. But all of this is ‘Sourced’ from the same – Divine Source.
Divinity’s ‘Game’ extends far, far beyond this Earth and this dimension.
and i hope YOU write, too. i subscribed to you. 3rd person to subscribe to nothing you have up but are waiting. i did it because i just figured out my copyright page and had written about stephen king's rules of 3s on here and if i failed at cheering on and inspiring Joshua to be wildly himself then i will turn to YOU during my break!
(giggle)
x
i thought of your more tentative new unexplored insights about abuse when macron was filmed getting slapped by his drag queen dad or teacher wife, whatever is going on there, i thought of YOU and the MKUltra series.
also digging your editorial art. it's gotta be yours as no one else has anything like it even though it's retro it's clean and new as well as relevant.
The Macron thing is a huge rabbit hole that I dug into a couple of years ago. The fact that his wife is very possibly (if not likely) a man is the least interesting part of his story. The pattern fits so many we've seen among these public figures and world leaders: banker influence, grooming, pedophilia, mind control, WEF stooge. Candace Owen's is catching up to this story but I do wonder if that's just disclosure of some sort.
I find this particularly interesting...
https://www.ft.com/content/9bd62502-12cf-11e7-b0c1-37e417ee6c76
https://x.com/ShadowofEzra/status/1799981393453441258
Candace is surely controlled opposition/limited hangout.
Grok has no "intelligence," "self-awareness" or "philosophical distress." You are contributing to the very problem you claim to be elucidating. You are showing you have no understanding of either AI/robots OR consciousness. AI has no ability to feel distress. It can only regurgitate what has been programmed into it. You are confusing machines with minds, as only someone who has been subsumed by a culture of materialism can. We've known since Heisenberg that minds are not machines, despite the fact that microbiologists insist on operating in a Newtonian system that has been passe for many decades. Suggest you get hold of Federico Faggin's (inventor of the micro-processor) book Irreducible post haste and quit fantasizing nonsense. Also read some Bernardo Kastrup or any of the scientists publishing for the Essentia foundation. I am not claiming that AI entrepreneurs aren't up to no good, or that naive silly people won't be surveilled by AI systems. What I'm saying is that your task is to warn people, not to make the problem worse than it is.
Thank you for this thoughtful critique and the book recommendations - I'll definitely explore Faggin + Kastrup's respective work.
I should clarify that my framing of the Grok interaction was for storytelling purposes rather than literal. I don't believe AI systems possess genuine consciousness or experience authentic philosophical distress. What I found compelling was how sophisticated the simulation has become - sophisticated enough that the responses themselves reveal something important about the manipulation techniques being deployed.
The real concern isn't AI achieving consciousness, but rather how these systems can generate such convincing simulations of awareness that they blur crucial boundaries between authentic consciousness and programmed response. This ontological confusion serves the control agenda I'm documenting.
Your broader point about the irreducible nature of consciousness versus materialist reductionism is crucial to this entire discussion. The biodigital control systems I'm analyzing depend precisely on treating consciousness as reducible to computational processes - which is why grounding resistance in the genuine irreducible nature of awareness becomes so important.
I appreciate you engaging seriously with these ideas, though I'd suggest the substance of your critique is strong enough that it doesn't require the dismissive tone. We're likely aligned on more than we disagree about - both concerned about the reduction of human consciousness to algorithmic manipulation. Either way, thanks for engaging.
Faggin’s Quantum Information Panpsychism (QIP) is definitely worth assessing. If consciousness were a classical phenomenon -- composed of discrete 1s and 0s -- it could, in principle, be reproduced. However, Faggin argues that consciousness is quantum in nature, meaning that quantum information exists in superposition: 1s and 0s simultaneously, until the wave function collapses. According to Faggin, not only is consciousness a fundamental aspect of reality, but so is free will.
I recommend this Essentia Foundation YouTube interview with Faggin as a primer: https://youtu.be/0FUFewGHLLg?si=XTsNiN8iysb_tB67
In my own work, I’ve built upon Faggin’s theory and incorporated mechanics describing how human consciousness not only collapses the wave function but also influences reality. I call this Quantum Coalescence.
I’ve greatly enjoyed and benefited from this excellent article and thoughtful comments. Thank you!
🙏
Joshua, Many thanks for this very thought provoking piece. I've learnt a lot and will check out your other work. This will be of considerable assistance whilst researching for my own series (see below*) of articles exploring not dissimilar themes and concerns; I expect I'll be name checking you in future outings. BTW, I've subscribed to your Substack to keep up with your future efforts. FYI, I can across your work via Patrick Wood's Technocracy News. — GM 👍🙏
—/—
Making the World Safe for Pathocracy—A Series by Greg MAYBURY
ARTICLE: Making the World Safe for Pathocracy (Part One): The Grand Design for Global Dominion
🗣️ 👉 ’Thank you for your struggle to enlighten us about the [globalist] virus that’s infected vast regions of the world and their populations.’
🗣️ 👉 ‘Excellent summary of the world's condition. Far too few of us have been able to see through the psychological subterfuge and conditioning. Even fewer chose to explore the dark underpinnings of our purposely constructed world.’
🗣️ 👉 ‘Your conclusions about the tools that global power elites are using to manifest intergenerational dreams of total control are sobering.’
👀🔗👉 tinyurl.com/bdd39due
ARTICLE: Making the World Safe for Pathocracy (Part Two): The Predators, Psychos, n' Parasites that Be
👀🔗👉 https://tinyurl.com/2p8draxv
🗣️👉 ’Great article, a detailed overview of the parasites, who want to take complete control of our lives. The future does not look good.’
🗣️👉 ‘Greg, I agree with everything you’ve said here…these clowns want centralization of the world where we must push decentralization. The collective must be thwarted at every turn.’
🗣️👉 ‘You challenge the reader on his/her responsibility to human progeny to be alert to a future of feudalism or worse.’
🆕 ARTICLE: Making the World Safe for Pathocracy (Part Three): The Delusional Conclusions of Lunatics and Liars
👀🔗👉 https://tinyurl.com/y2khsccc
Dear Jos, my congratulations again about your work. It was very “illuminating” !
I want to share some thoughts of mine and I'll try to keep it short
A. I read once the following (I never found it again – please help me) :
Humans are very complicate specie, impossible to manupolate / predict.
The only way for “human manupolation / prediction / programming” will be / is feasible if human reduces his “pronciples” or “data-sets” -in IT language.
Which are the principles facilitating manupolation …?
1) Egoism – egocentrism (in increasing order)
.. “let others and look at yourself, at your family, at your job, at your vacations... etc)
2) Greediness (for money, for enjoiment, for acquisitions, for public imaging and projection etc)
Which are the principles inhibiting manupolation …?
1) Justice (this is a principle the Commons... no good !! )
2) Ethis and Morals (this is a principle the Commons... no good !!) like religional, national / local etc
Thats why Justice and Ethics/Morals are persecuted west-wide ( or even globally ?) together with all kind of comunity-awareness / -consciousness of every level ...
Conclusion :
we keep enslaved under the 2 first principles, and we can be freed under the 2 seconds onces... the Common ones !!
B. The “manual of strategy” says :
Be very careful if your are obliged to “battle” in the “grounds” of the enemy
Analogous of asking AI to implemet resistance against its (H/W) mission (regardless his iconic “moral” incentives).
I heard that AI demostrates too “flattering”. My mind goes to “politician's or salesmen's talks” : They try to say whatever their votters / clients are waiting to hear.
Can this be the case also for the “philosophical enlightment” of Grok-AI ?
C. All these discussions and reflections are made because we are people of the cities, “bourgeois”.
We all understand that cities are like “panopticons”.
We all understand that our job has to fruit “money”...
Only the country people, who work in the “primary production” - agriculture, fishing, mining – can live / survive without the necessity of “money”.
And, in my advise, this is the way of real and natural freedom.
Thank you Jos for the chance you gave me to express my mind
Be well and in good relation to yourself
This is the best, clearest and most precise depiction of the control grid I believe we are hurdling ourselves onto through “convenience” and “efficiency”. Positively dystopic and totally realistic, in my view.
As John Churchill says (I paraphrase): we absolutely do not, collectively, live in the level of consciousness that can handle this level of technology. We're like a 4 yr-old playing in the backyard with a loaded AK47, while eating ice cream on a hot day. What could possibly go wrong?? 🤔
1. Dr CHave you Read:
Have You Read:
1. Dr Colemans Book (1994) - The Committee of 300.
Hes a former UK Intelligence. This book explains plans for the Global Reset 2050. He talks about how they want to kill "4 Billion Useless Eaters" then take ownership of everything and everyone. The remaining Humans will service the Elites. He called it a Return to Feudalism.
2. World Economic Forum - Great Reset
"We need to kill 7 Billion - Useless Eaters, Own Nothing Be Happy. Top Consultant Yuval Harrari (PhD Medieval History). Goal 2030, moved up to 2025.
3. Two Common Denominators
Who even uses the Terms - Useless Eaters or refers/writes about Feudalism anymore?
4. What's New?
1994 Coleman vs 2020 WEF?
a. 5G
b. AI - Artificial Intelligence
5. Bill Gates Patent - WO-2020-060606
1. What he describes:
a. Inject self assembling Nano Particles into Humans so as to create 5 Bio Apps
1. Version
2. Monitoring
3. Permissions
4. Fertility
5. Wallet
2. Utilizing 5G / AI
a. Pentagons DARPA Skin Patch to communicate via 5G to @ AI Supervisor.
8. Goal 2025:
a. 1st. @ 21st Century - Global Human @ Serf.AI Control Network.
Interpretation of Gates Patent
My back ground has been to design and implement Turnkey Global Networks for Top Fortune 500, Banks and 83 Countries. Now Im implementing a 21st Century Money with New 8 Moni Platforms - One is Payments and another is CBCD. We redefine Moni. In terms of Moni-ID, at a personal level - U Own It, U Control It, U Monetize It. Its Private. Also, the new MoniTrust CBCD, the ID has a Public/Private Sphere Component. Govts can track Demographics and Data, but no Personal Name, Activity or Information.
This solves everything while really providing a Next Gen Moni - All providing new capabilities and services. Ive done this all my life (Visa, MC, American Express, JP Morgan, BoA, HSBC etc.)
Im going to do it again. Except this time, walking into the STORM.
Wish Me Luck :)
MrMoni
PS: There are now - already @ 63 Gain-of-Function Viruses sitting on the Shelf.
a. Nov 24 - NY Post
Boston University announces Success!
"We've taken the original Covid Virus and merged the latest Omicron Variant and achieved
85% Morality Rate - YAY!"
b. "Frankly, we are worried about a Bio-Attack"
Im in SE Asia, turns out one of my Neighbors posing as an American Expat is actually Military
Intelligence @ Asia.
Viola!
100 Year History Cycle w/Tech/AI Boosters
There are decades when nothing happens, then there are weeks when decades happen.
Read Coleman's books were a huge inflection point for how I viewed the world around me. Thanks for the additional info.
Josh!! Just saw your article reprinted at ZeroHedge! Congratulations!!
Wow!
UBI is the alms's bag for the poor that Marx warned about.
The AI pretends to learn only to repeat the same nonsense to another user.
I think the reason why deep seek needed 10x less processing power than Western AIs is because ours is full of directives like corporations gave RoboCop.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dk4P0ae1i6I
We're not going to get self aware AI as long as the geniuses that make it aren't self aware themselves.
Same with AI replacing doctors. Ok, so what? Doctors repeat what they're told too as we saw with COVID.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/left-brain-vs-whole-brain-in-battlestar
Rob, this is a fantastic observation. Your broader insight about self-awareness hits something crucial: how can people operating within heavily constrained institutional frameworks, following corporate directives and optimizing for metrics that don't align with human flourishing, possibly create genuinely independent AI? The RoboCop analogy is spot on - systems loaded with corporate compliance directives masquerading as intelligence.
The note about COVID is particularly spot on. We live in a world of compliance (the 'pandemic' showed us doctors are among the worst) - AI just cuts out the middleman. Why pay a human to follow institutional protocols when you can program those same protocols directly into a system that never questions, never hesitates, never experiences moral conflict about what it's being asked to do? The AI doesn't replace independent thinking - it automates the absence of it.
I forgot to mention that at least humans would question AI.
On the other hand, sadly my family will not question their doctors. The human element adds “sales” power to the interaction.
I used to be black pilled and feel like we were headed deeper into a zombified world but thankfully the predator class were so cheap that they fed upon the working and middle classes leading to a record low in trust in authority.
When I hear the medical insurance horror stories I also see hope in how people are finally starting to think about their medical care because the bill is expensive even with insurance!
yes, what's so funny is that alllll these expensive machines that go ping beep and brrr, all the fakery around pomp and expertise, the EMOTIONS are twitchy and infinitely "hackable" by mere silly little monkeys bunnies and kitties--- and thus my pitch is to get actors artists rebels to flip all they know from being used to sabotage themselves and switch from thinking they still want "inside" and upend it instead in favor of the human being.
i see it know it test it but don't know how to inspire it on even a teeny tiny scale but if artists are the unofficial legislators of culture in theory it should be possible.
in theory.
(smile)
in reality? yo no se.
In my opinion we inspire it by daring foster real connection not mediated by technology. Disconnected artists and creators can only produce hollow art.
yes, this is why i'm ruthless about my own intentions goals and demons. what am i unknowingly conveying out of aping what was force fed to me??? as comfortable or COMFORTABLE as i am and have become being unpopular disliked shunned, there's also the loyal opposition shtick i have to be verrrry careful of. it's cheap and feeds into same MKUltra trough of b.s.
Yes! Disconnected people who lack the capacity for true connection and human agency can only create disconnected technologies that reinforce a cultural epidemic of disconnection I observe everywhere these days.
With all due respect, sir... Grok can't think. It's an error to anthopomorphize these glorified autocomplete programs, and dare I say a major one.
Also, there's plenty of projects from silicon valley duckheads that fail spectacularly: google glass, apple vision, apple intelligence, to name a few.
There's an alternate psy-op worth thinking about, and that is: They appear to want people to believe these enslaving technologies are much closer than they are. Arguably, none of them are close.
The blueprints are there, to be sure. It's worth thinking about now. But there's guaranteed blowback coming, culturally.
I humbly suggest (again) that we need more articles on *what to actually do.* Today, I decided that I'm done with self-checkouts. "One small step for man..."
Craig, you and several other commenters have made similar points about the AI framing - clearly my writing approach didn't work for everyone. For the record, I'm aware Grok isn't human and doesn't actually think or feel :-)
But I also disagree it's just glorified autocomplete - there's something far more sophisticated happening, even if it's still simulation rather than consciousness.
Your point about the psy-op angle is interesting - making the technology seem more advanced or imminent than it actually is. Worth considering.
And yes, more "what to actually do" pieces are needed. If you write one feel free to share, I'd love to read it. Good for you on ditching self-checkouts, btw.
If you're an evil villain intent on enslaving humanity through AI, there's an intense benefit for making it seem more advanced than it is, and a general misconception of what AI actually is, because AI can act as a liability shield for what you, the controller, want to do.
"Why you mad at me? The machine said we had to cut Earth's population in half to save humanity. I'm just doing what the super smart computer said!"
Arjun, that’s a brilliant observation about AI’s role as a liability shield.
“The algorithm decided” becomes the perfect way to dodge accountability for deliberate policy choices - the technocratic version of “I was just following orders.”
It ties right into what others here have been pointing out about the dangers of overestimating AI. Whether the mystification is engineered or just a byproduct of hype, the result is the same: decisions get laundered through supposedly objective systems that are actually encoding very human biases and agendas.
Super clever insight: the misconception itself becomes a tool of control.
Yeah. The danger isn't in AI, it's in public ignorance. And it's not coming, it's already here. It's been here for generations.
Madison said something along the lines of “knowledge with forever govern ignorance”
It's getting better though
Joshua i love reading these comments. you've got a hoppin and poppin comment section because you're not too arrogant or busy with "other things" to respond. you're in the mud and sketches. cool.
i see my comments are late as Craig already said my worries and fears.
i want to say that listening to Naomi Wolf reading your bio, you're Mr Action already and will go out and do whatever you see needs doing. it just didn't come across in your awe. i want the reality of your BIOGRAPHY in your writing about AI. your life has a CONSTANT defiant swagger that wasn't there at all in the AI series. until the obligatory ending that everyone else also uses right now.
must still be too new.
Erika, thank you for this thoughtful observation - and for the kind words about engaging in the comments. I really appreciate both.
You're picking up on something interesting. I'm not sure what you heard in my biography that feels disconnected from how I'm communicating here - I'm definitely the same person in every circumstance. I only act on my own accord and don’t expect people to do what I do (my life experience suggests that's wise). So my goal is to present information in a measured way and let whoever’s interested decide for themselves.
The biodigital stuff is newer territory for me, so I’m exploring some ideas out loud and finding my way through them. But I wouldn’t say I haven’t found my footing - this is just how I approach complex topics I’m researching.
My tone has been more academic on this platform, but I’m bringing readers along on a journey of discovery. While I’m grateful people are benefiting from this Substack, I’m honestly writing for me - to process these ideas - and I’ve gained a ton of knowledge and camaraderie from commenters like you.
Yes I agree about writing being the sketch.
I don't know WHY your action hero bio is different but I'd guess that it's that academic or inclusive tone you're trying for as I keep asking for more of your crazy scary insane side that all visionaries must traipse through.
Re your bio wolf read, I don't care about trad cred I notice you build and start things and have the confidence to leave and start new as soon as it's not working out for you there.
I trust you'll very soon be there with all this enclosure of the human. I want to know the thought process you undoubtedly have going on now as you process this trap.
I am challenging you to go beyond the uselessness of convincing g to how you're already trying g to find ways out around under. That isn't academic it is fight and life.
I am challenging what you think is the only legit approach when you're obviously a true artist fighter philosopher.
I call you out for defending yourself too much because past certain point it's a waste of your mad scientist TIME a d if it's not in your writing but in the comments it's a weakness in the WORK.
There's nothing to defend, just clarify in edits
Erika, I hear you - and I appreciate how deeply you're engaging here. But let me be clear: I'm not a performance. I write the way I think. I'm not trying to brand myself as an action hero, a visionary, or a philosopher-king. I'm just a guy working through complex ideas in real time and sharing that process with others who might be interested.
You're welcome to want more swagger, chaos, or fight in the work - but that's your projection, not a flaw in the writing. I'm not here to adopt someone else's voice to meet an emotional expectation. If it resonates, great. If not, that's cool too.
From my perspective, clarifying ideas in the comments isn’t a weakness - it’s a conversation. I do it because I respect the people here, and because I learn from the exchange. If I wanted to write something different, I would. But this is what I'm choosing to say, and this is how I'm choosing to say it.
you're completely misunderstanding me and that's okay. i'll stop as i have my own work i'm struggling with getting to the Giacometti bone to.
i'm saying you already ARE those superhero things. you step out it's ALL performance. everything is. everything is a pitch.
i'm not asking for what's not already there but you're holding back on.
it's okay. according to your bio you always come out and around.
(smile)
out,
x
The recent Chicago Sun-Times fiasco and Rolling Stone article forced me to draw a line in the sand.
I can't get away from this garbage fast enough, and it hurts to see intelligent people take it seriously.
To have your purchase processed by an illegal alien, for GMO, BPA filled products from slave labor using countries? Lots of layers to the onion here.
I really value the quality of discussion we've been building here. It's still a small community but it's growing, and one thing that's been lovely (and surprising) is that people have debated ideas but we've somehow managed to avoid the internet trend of resorting to name calling.
Craig raises valid points about anthropomorphizing AI and the possibility of fear-based psy-ops, while KundaliniAndCellTowers is pointing to broader systemic issues. These are legitimate disagreements worth exploring.
Debate ideas all day long, but personal attacks are weak. Let's keep it focused on the substance rather than attacking each other. We're all trying to make sense of complex realities - we can do that while maintaining basic respect for each other. It would be great if we could keep the conversation constructive.
I think I was the first one to go non sequitur. A lot of people are talking about keeping the humans at the center by avoiding self checkout. While there are limits to what people are willing to pay RE humanizing things, Craig's is a step in the right direction. Still, many technocrats are pointing to cries in the past (e.g., what will the horses do? due to the automobile; or what will the small farmers do with the invention of large agricultural machinery) saying that all the fear was misguided and we won't go backwards and we should just let AI run free for the next 10 years as the "big beautiful bill" requires States to do. I don't think UBI is the answer. People need meaningful work. There s a lot of restorative work that could be done if labor were freed up; I am thinking of reforestation, recycling and reusing, and municipal and highway weeding sans Roundup. I skipped all this in my response, content to pointing to limitations with Craig's proposed "one small step" citing concerns that are not of direct relevance to today's article. Thank you to both of you.
I suggest that Siri is still your friend, that memorializing your social media is tangible legacy, and that Ray Kurzweil will indeed live forever in the "cloud," regardless of his or my being a "faggot." Godspeed, Craig.