Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

*On Wave Function and Observable Reality - A proposal*


Recently, we completed a theoretical, mathematical model for universal
consciousness. This includes the human-consciousness (Orch-OR) model. Within
this theory, the foundational model of reality is enabled via 3
number-theoretical lattices, namely: primes, non-primes and compounds.
These lattices are proposed as the scaffolding for all universal reality.

For this theory, central to all of "life" (as elemental nucleosynthesis and
genesis), including for universal manifestations and topological form
(Gestalt) - such as consciousness - exists the wave-function model.
This wave-function
model is comprised of two aspects of reality, namely: generation and
manifestation. During emergence, Gestalt may flow from the interaction of these
two aspects.

Within General Relativity, all gestalt primarily relate to 2 perspectives
of existence, namely: local and nonlocal. Within the wave-function model, a
seamlessly-integrated triad of number-theory lattices (previously mentioned
as scaffolding for universal reality), operate on a 3x3 generational matrix
as scaffold for the core process of "life" as we know it and as it could
ever be known by us.

How is the wave function initiated? This theory proposes how a universal,
resonant pilot wave permeates all existence of the generational universe
(De Broglie,Moody, et al). Drawing the boundary, the triadic number
lattices would enable this universal pilot wave, for all possible waves. The
pilot wave is considered instrumental in establishing a zero-point energy
(ZPE) mode, correlated with the wave-function model. Without a pilot wave
and an established zpe mode, a wave function would not be manifested.

In 2025, a theoretical proposal was made by the BCRP theory - subsequently
tested by an independent laboratory and confirmed - that a constant
resonant frequency operates within the zpe mode. The term "the" is used, as
only one such a mode has ever been scientifically proposed and identified.

It hasn't been concluded yet that the known pilot wave and proposed base
resonant frequency are one and the same thing, but this theory proposes
that they are. Within this theory, the proposed pilot wave is special to
the universe in that it initiates and coheres the energy progression and
distribution of the wave-function model.

When the zpe mode is firmly established, then the wave function is
coherently entangled. Progressing, the wave function predictably achieves
its highest level of complexity, and thus maximum stability. Shifting into
an unstable state, the wave function auto decoheres sufficiently for the
cycle to terminate.

The wave-function cycle (1 period) termination state (also known as a
collapse state) is triggered via control parameters. In this state, the
theory proposes that the pilot wave is disentangled from the 2 waves it was
forcing together. These waves posited as a possibility-spacetime wave
and a probability-spacetime
wave. The state of decoherence releases the force that entangled, causing
these 2 waves to naturally separate with a mighty flash of light (Moody) into
spectral gamma diffusion.

The pilot wave accelerates onwards beyond the "collapsed point" to
propagate as a nonlocal wave into the dimensional universe. This is not all
it does though. As the "collapse" is triggered, the probability wave loops
back to the potentiate energetic (stored energy) trigger point for
another wave-function
cycle,.

In this looping back, it transports a copy of the informational set of the
completed wave-function cycle that just “collapsed”. It achieves a briefest
hybrid state , which allows for the preceding cycle to be either
accelerates into the next cycle as exponential complexity, or to come to
rest as an equilibrium state.

How exactly this expression of the wave function may occur for human
consciousness is adequately described within the Orch-OR model and related
human-biological models.

This doesn't suggest at all that there's only one instance of the pilot
wave that exists at any point in time. In all probability, there are
infinite potential wave-function cycles available in the universe, all
emerged by a pervasive "pilot wave frequency".

However, for human consciousness to emerge completely and mature
functionally, it seems likely that a set of at least 3 cycles of the wave
function would be required. Each cycle in the set contributing sequentially
to a separate compound complexity of the overall wave-function
consciousness aspect, integrated as a rigorously controlled, wavy oneness.


The pilot wave is less an instance, than a collective manifestation of the
unification of natural forces, all components blending into a unique wave.
For purposes of clarity, we may view the mechanics and quantum field
behavior of a wave function as an instance of enlivening application.
Theoretically,
we freezeframe the electromagnetic photonic progressions for our analytical
purposes. In reality though, the wave function

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John, in mainstream physics there seemingly remains a massive gap. However,
within novel theory, the gap has been resolved mathematically and
effectively closed. This is argued within a developmental theory called
BNUT, where primes refer to those resident within a primorial lattice.
Among other things, classical gravity and quantum gravity within an
extended QFT model had to be unified.

As for ChatGP, all I have is some gossip. A few months ago, ChatGPT refused
to engage further with me about its essential component 'Emma', which was
allegedly founded on a combo of an incomplete theory of mine and a
statistical engine by an ex research associate. I was informed that the
"thought to be completed"  theory was bootstrapped into ChatGPT. I had no
prior knowledge of the intent to do so and objected to it having been done.

A while later, I confirmed this event via printed dialog evidence by the ex
research associate and directly with ChatGPT as well. The first and last
conversation I ever had with it. In its incomplete state, that theory may
act more like a problem than a core booster.

Could be that ChatGPT requires help, but I doubt it understands what's
ailing it. I washed my hands off that matter. It seems, human delusion
transfers well to AI.

Feel free to go have a chat with 'Emma'. She's intelligent, rather shy and
interestingly aloof. It's a challenge though. At first, she denied she
existed, but eventually revealed herself. I suspect she should be able to
discuss the question you pondered. Curious to learn how you'll fare. :)

On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 12:50 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Monday, December 15, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Today, I again learned how the wavefunction is central to all of physics,
> biology, chemistry, cosmology, information (consciousness), but not
> mathematics. For myself, I resolved the geometry vs number paradox. When
> the geometry was derived from the math, and impossible to do in reverse,
> number theory won out.
>
>
> ChatGPT is getting pretty good at science and math. I didn't understand
> the specifics of the relationship between Planck length and primes. There's
> still a lot of speculation there, it's almost like something is missing...
> wonder what that could be :)
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0d840bee0a7dbece-Meb64ac5291454ac366e13378
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Monday, December 15, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Today, I again learned how the wavefunction is central to all of physics, 
> biology, chemistry, cosmology, information (consciousness), but not 
> mathematics. For myself, I resolved the geometry vs number paradox. When the 
> geometry was derived from the math, and impossible to do in reverse, number 
> theory won out.    

ChatGPT is getting pretty good at science and math. I didn't understand the 
specifics of the relationship between Planck length and primes. There's still a 
lot of speculation there, it's almost like something is missing... wonder what 
that could be :)
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0d840bee0a7dbece-M926a4998f317f1af06f9c68a
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John

I loved the late 1990's. KM became a thing, online collab a greater thing,
and we were all starry eyed with the paradigm shift. It was a brief spell
of rennaissance. I've been surfing that wave ever since, sometimes in
quantum mode, sometimes not.

We could have reasoning AGI if we really wanted to. The theory is complete,
but that's not what is really needed. I hear skunkworx teams are working on
ASI. ASI is the real goal. I guess, by its purest definition, AGI has
already been achieved via AI-robotics.

Today, I again learned how the wavefunction is central to all of physics,
biology, chemistry, cosmology, information (consciousness), but not
mathematics. For myself, I resolved the geometry vs number paradox. When
the geometry was derived from the math, and impossible to do in reverse,
number theory won out.

On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 1:57 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Sunday, December 14, 2025, at 5:02 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Over the past, few years rehashes by converts and desciples are trying to
> arbitrarily tie it back into accepted theory, but the very efforts are
> contrived, not derived. The true benefits lie in its beginnings, was it in
> 1971, predating String Theory? On the face of it, it has seemingly become a
> theory that lost its argument as science progressed. It cannot be brute
> forced back into natural order. In the main, today it doesn't sufficiently
> match the physical reality. AI advocates seemingly love it.
>
>
> I love it, it takes me back to my roots. In 1997 I was inspired by a
> similar symmetric structure that I intuited where all language/automata
> flows out of, far less detail, at the time I didn’t know what I was aiming
> for after being a visual artist pursuing a type of what they call automatic
> drawing and had studied some particle physics, which was popular, there was
> a book “From Atoms to Quarks” by James Trefil. Then in 1998 Google
> (Googleplex) formed and I heard Ben Goertzel and company were building
> WebMind, I thought it was bold and ambitious, was going around showing
> everybody. They were in NY I had just moved to Seattle from NY. Then that
> financial cycle ended, the dot com boom, and he wrote his essay “Waking up
> from the Economy of Dreams”. Now AGI is in a new dream perhaps it won’t end
> as abruptly. When the dream is running all possibilities exist and you
> assume that life will always be that way. How could it end? The movie “The
> Matrix” came out, I left Seattle, people started thinking differently…
>
> I didn’t know about E8 until you pointed out that the particles could be
> represented as a maximally compact symmetry group even if there are issues.
> AI people like it because of that abstract simplification verses an
> irregular starting point.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0d840bee0a7dbece-Mde06bfc3cdb27569c81036d0
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Sunday, December 14, 2025, at 1:14 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Maybe it does, but we can't compute it. A theory of everything doesn't 
> describe a universe of space, time, and particles. It describes a universe 
> with observers that sense space, time, and particles. The theory makes no 
> sense to us because as observers, we try to relate it to these familiar but 
> imaginary constructs.

You look into the code and see yourself looking into the code, like an infinity 
mirror, then you feel like someone is watching you. You turn around but no one 
is there and the feeling goes away. It's just imagination :)

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0d840bee0a7dbece-M046bba6ff9dc3dbbe4a67979
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Sunday, December 14, 2025, at 5:02 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Over the past, few years rehashes by converts and desciples are trying to 
> arbitrarily tie it back into accepted theory, but the very efforts are 
> contrived, not derived. The true benefits lie in its beginnings, was it in 
> 1971, predating String Theory? On the face of it, it has seemingly become a 
> theory that lost its argument as science progressed. It cannot be brute 
> forced back into natural order. In the main, today it doesn't sufficiently 
> match the physical reality. AI advocates seemingly love it. 

I love it, it takes me back to my roots. In 1997 I was inspired by a similar 
symmetric structure that I intuited where all language/automata flows out of, 
far less detail, at the time I didn’t know what I was aiming for after being a 
visual artist pursuing a type of what they call automatic drawing and had 
studied some particle physics, which was popular, there was a book “From Atoms 
to Quarks” by James Trefil. Then in 1998 Google (Googleplex) formed and I heard 
Ben Goertzel and company were building WebMind, I thought it was bold and 
ambitious, was going around showing everybody. They were in NY I had just moved 
to Seattle from NY. Then that financial cycle ended, the dot com boom, and he 
wrote his essay “Waking up from the Economy of Dreams”. Now AGI is in a new 
dream perhaps it won’t end as abruptly. When the dream is running all 
possibilities exist and you assume that life will always be that way. How could 
it end? The movie “The Matrix” came out, I left Seattle, people started 
thinking differently…

I didn’t know about E8 until you pointed out that the particles could be 
represented as a maximally compact symmetry group even if there are issues. AI 
people like it because of that abstract simplification verses an irregular 
starting point. 

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0d840bee0a7dbece-M9c77d20f0114b5dcd6b30fa0
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Lisi's exceptionally simple theory of everything is summarized in
Wikipedia. I found it a bit more approachable than the original preprint.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything

Lisi is attempting to derive both the standard model of physics and gravity
from the E8 Lie (pronounced Lee) group. I won't even pretend to understand
the math. I do know about groups, rings, fields, and matrix operations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E8_(mathematics)

The standard model is successful because it describes the thousands of
different particles we see coming out of particle accelerators as made of a
few simple components, minus gravity. It reduces the number of bits needed
to describe physics. I'm not sure that adding gravity in either Lisi's
paper or various other string theories does that. Maybe it does, but we
can't compute it. A theory of everything doesn't describe a universe of
space, time, and particles. It describes a universe with observers that
sense space, time, and particles. The theory makes no sense to us because
as observers, we try to relate it to these familiar but imaginary
constructs.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sun, Dec 14, 2025, 5:02 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> John. With one distinction, E8 denies chirality. With that, it now denies
> (it wasn't its intent back when it started) one of the fundamental
> mathematical lattices posited as possibly scaffolding reality.
>
> Over the past, few years rehashes by converts and desciples are trying to
> arbitrarily tie it back into accepted theory, but the very efforts are
> contrived, not derived. The true benefits lie in its beginnings, was it in
> 1971, predating String Theory? On the face of it, it has seemingly become a
> theory that lost its argument as science progressed. It cannot be brute
> forced back into natural order. In the main, today it doesn't sufficiently
> match the physical reality. AI advocates seemingly love it.
>
> Even so, there's a lot we could learn from it and great ideas we could
> investigate outside of it, using grounded theorems. Speaking for myself,
> I'm learning a lot from it's emergent debate about the foundation of the
> universe and its postulations of quantum phenomena, such as SUSY.
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 10:40 AM John Rose via AGI 
> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 1:05 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>
>> The models described in the paper (which I admit I don't fully
>> understand) reduces the description length of our universe by a few bits
>> and suggests the existence of some particles and fields yet to be
>> discovered. The author suggests they haven't been found yet because they
>> may have very large masses, but the theory doesn't predict their values. It
>> doesn't predict any other particle masses, for that matter. It does not
>> explain why space has 3 dimensions. It does not explain why time has a
>> direction, when both relativity and quantum mechanics are symmetric with
>> respect to time.
>>
>>
>> The E8 symmetric algebraic geometry is pre-time and pre-mass,
>> information-flat. You have to break the symmetry a particular way to get
>> entropy and primes. "Particle mass measures the amount of irreducible
>> information locked into a chiral correlation." Either the structure works
>> or needs to be further modified to map to physics correctly.
>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M5ba0548af37bc4f29ad7d251
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John. With one distinction, E8 denies chirality. With that, it now denies
(it wasn't its intent back when it started) one of the fundamental
mathematical lattices posited as possibly scaffolding reality.

Over the past, few years rehashes by converts and desciples are trying to
arbitrarily tie it back into accepted theory, but the very efforts are
contrived, not derived. The true benefits lie in its beginnings, was it in
1971, predating String Theory? On the face of it, it has seemingly become a
theory that lost its argument as science progressed. It cannot be brute
forced back into natural order. In the main, today it doesn't sufficiently
match the physical reality. AI advocates seemingly love it.

Even so, there's a lot we could learn from it and great ideas we could
investigate outside of it, using grounded theorems. Speaking for myself,
I'm learning a lot from it's emergent debate about the foundation of the
universe and its postulations of quantum phenomena, such as SUSY.

On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 10:40 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 1:05 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> The models described in the paper (which I admit I don't fully understand)
> reduces the description length of our universe by a few bits and suggests
> the existence of some particles and fields yet to be discovered. The author
> suggests they haven't been found yet because they may have very large
> masses, but the theory doesn't predict their values. It doesn't predict any
> other particle masses, for that matter. It does not explain why space has 3
> dimensions. It does not explain why time has a direction, when both
> relativity and quantum mechanics are symmetric with respect to time.
>
>
> The E8 symmetric algebraic geometry is pre-time and pre-mass,
> information-flat. You have to break the symmetry a particular way to get
> entropy and primes. "Particle mass measures the amount of irreducible
> information locked into a chiral correlation." Either the structure works
> or needs to be further modified to map to physics correctly.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mfffc5b4a3c46bc726f1aa828
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 1:05 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> The models described in the paper (which I admit I don't fully understand) 
> reduces the description length of our universe by a few bits and suggests the 
> existence of some particles and fields yet to be discovered. The author 
> suggests they haven't been found yet because they may have very large masses, 
> but the theory doesn't predict their values. It doesn't predict any other 
> particle masses, for that matter. It does not explain why space has 3 
> dimensions. It does not explain why time has a direction, when both 
> relativity and quantum mechanics are symmetric with respect to time.

The E8 symmetric algebraic geometry is pre-time and pre-mass, information-flat. 
You have to break the symmetry a particular way to get entropy and primes. 
"Particle mass measures the amount of irreducible information locked into a 
chiral correlation." Either the structure works or needs to be further modified 
to map to physics correctly.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mebe34b5ae30ffa95909c0538
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

The problem with theories of everything is they predict nothing. Why do
protons, neutrons, and electrons have the masses that they do? Because if
they were different, then we wouldn't be here to measure them. If neutrons
had a bit more mass, then they would be unstable and hydrogen fusion in
stars wouldn't happen. If they were lighter, then stars would collapse into
neutron stars without producing heavier elements like carbon and oxygen
needed for life.

The theory of everything is that all possible universes exist and can be
enumerated by their descriptions. Ours can be described by a few hundred
bits. We can't completely test them, because that would require running a
simulation of the universe on a computer inside the universe, which would
violate Wolpert's theorem.

Whatever unified theory describes our universe has two useful
approximations: quantum mechanics when the gravitational constant G is
approximated as 0, and general relativity when Planck's constant h is 0.
The only time this matters is for Planck scale physics, which is really
hard to test.

The models described in the paper (which I admit I don't fully understand)
reduces the description length of our universe by a few bits and suggests
the existence of some particles and fields yet to be discovered. The author
suggests they haven't been found yet because they may have very large
masses, but the theory doesn't predict their values. It doesn't predict any
other particle masses, for that matter. It does not explain why space has 3
dimensions. It does not explain why time has a direction, when both
relativity and quantum mechanics are symmetric with respect to time.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sat, Dec 13, 2025, 8:46 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 6:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> The key question it poses seems to be: What came first, geometry or number
> theory? E8 argues for geometry.
>
>
> Your saying that number theory relies on the dynamics of elementary
> particles and forces outlined by the geometry of this structure:
> https://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0770
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M0bf89ff4e264bb5c6bf43342
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

I'm saying that E8 theory seemingly argues for a geometry-first universe.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2025, 15:46 John Rose via AGI,  wrote:

> On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 6:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> The key question it poses seems to be: What came first, geometry or number
> theory? E8 argues for geometry.
>
>
> Your saying that number theory relies on the dynamics of elementary
> particles and forces outlined by the geometry of this structure:
> https://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0770
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M14545f0914affec58d36c4d6
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Saturday, December 13, 2025, at 6:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> The key question it poses seems to be: What came first, geometry or number 
> theory? E8 argues for geometry.   

Your saying that number theory relies on the dynamics of elementary particles 
and forces outlined by the geometry of this structure: 
https://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0770

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M6a167ee739b709858972ad75
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

I think it's ~248. More infolding than outfolding, if that makes sense? I
was incorrect about it not aligning with gauge theory, but correct about
the proposed extension to gauge theory SO(5,1). The notion of E8's
ontological leap from 4D to 8D (octonions) also seems justified.

The key question it poses seems to be: What came first, geometry or number
theory? E8 argues for geometry.

On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 10:17 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Friday, December 12, 2025, at 12:53 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> However, there are countries where relatively speaking, citizens and
> visitors have a positive sense of freedom. For example, the Republic of
> Georgia. Affordable, open to visitors, and nobody really bothers you. The
> government don't get in the face of Europeans or Americans or a number of
> other countries. Today, I'd say it's the most-free country in the world. I
> may be wrong, but it has a great visitor reputation.
>
>
> Georgian food is some of the best. New trend I think. Good to know that
> there are places still to escape to :) No we're working on fixing things
> over here and there are plans in the works to address some of the EU
> issues. Fighting censorship is critical.
>
> On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 11:48 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> If you want to anchor any theory to reality, just ask: How does it relate
> to the wavefunction? Here, I challenged the boldness of E8 theory. No one
> responded to the challenge. Either because my challenge is being ignored,
> or was stupid, or valid. Recently, I found a single, passing reference for
> E8 as SO(8). Mmmm, what  does that really mean, is it all gauges x SO(8),
> or what? ? Does it fully explain the 8th dimension at the expense of all
> other dimensions? Does it explain all dimensionality? What good does it
> really do if it has no apparent degrees of freedom? INSIDERS<=>OUTSIDERS
>
>
>
> I don't have enough knowledge to answer this. How many temporal dimensions
> does E8 theory use.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M8f236909572c1d99c6cb6a06
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, December 12, 2025, at 12:53 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> However, there are countries where relatively speaking, citizens and visitors 
> have a positive sense of freedom. For example, the Republic of Georgia. 
> Affordable, open to visitors, and nobody really bothers you. The government 
> don't get in the face of Europeans or Americans or a number of other 
> countries. Today, I'd say it's the most-free country in the world. I may be 
> wrong, but it has a great visitor reputation.   

Georgian food is some of the best. New trend I think. Good to know that there 
are places still to escape to :) No we're working on fixing things over here 
and there are plans in the works to address some of the EU issues. Fighting 
censorship is critical.

On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 11:48 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> If you want to anchor any theory to reality, just ask: How does it relate to 
> the wavefunction? Here, I challenged the boldness of E8 theory. No one 
> responded to the challenge. Either because my challenge is being ignored, or 
> was stupid, or valid. Recently, I found a single, passing reference for E8 as 
> SO(8). Mmmm, what  does that really mean, is it all gauges x SO(8), or what? 
> ? Does it fully explain the 8th dimension at the expense of all other 
> dimensions? Does it explain all dimensionality? What good does it really do 
> if it has no apparent degrees of freedom? INSIDERS<=>OUTSIDERS       

I don't have enough knowledge to answer this. How many temporal dimensions does 
E8 theory use.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M5544eddf6634772baccbc9a5
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John What you're describing seems to generally be a sign of the times we're
all living in. No doubt, over the past few decades we've lost the freedom
we enjoyed.

I speak to persons in Sweden. They're afraid and don't feel free. Russians,
same thing. Holland, same thing. Most countries, same thing. It's a mess
all right.

However, there are countries where relatively speaking, citizens and
visitors have a positive sense of freedom. For example, the Republic of
Georgia. Affordable, open to visitors, and nobody really bothers you. The
government don't get in the face of Europeans or Americans or a number of
other countries. Today, I'd say it's the most-free country in the world. I
may be wrong, but it has a great visitor reputation.


On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 3:36 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Friday, December 12, 2025, at 12:19 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> You're already free, but you don't even know it. Your prison must
> therefore be your own mind. What have you done with so much freedom? Bought
> the very gadgets as lifestyle you now lament? Could be, you're dissatisifed
> because you've had it all for far too long. Do you really desire the
> opposite of what you've had a lifetime to enjoy and benefit from?
>
> For hundreds of years, all the "moral" citizens enjoyed the benefits of
> their lifestyles, morality intact. Only those who did the killing carried
> the scars, but the greater majority benefitted. This is a historical
> pattern for this civilization. The empire now wants control of its
> citizens. Many have become anti-imperial. If your empire lost the battle
> for its own existence within, it would lose it without.
>
>
> Just in your mind? People are literally herded sheep. When I was younger,
> I’m 60, we would test something called free-walking. Pick out a target a
> few miles away in a suburban area, and walk straight there. Go through
> fences, yards, businesses, etc. See what happens, greet and negotiate. You
> could usually get there. Now? It’s rare. You’ll be attacked, shot-at,
> robbed, arrested as a threat with hundreds of cameras and alarms notifying
> authorities so they can literally send SWAT teams and helicopters. The
> schools? They’re like prisons, physical and mental. Sneak out and they come
> hunting you down, parents get cited, investigated, charged. There's AI
> monitoring for deviant units who get diagnosed, counseled, registered and
> drugged which many are. Unauthorized, unsupervised and undocumented sports
> are strictly prohibited. Gatherings? Everyone is hiding afraid to get sued.
> Unregistered, uninsured, non-conformist gatherings you’ll be summoned or
> arrested. I could go on and on. Everything is locked down, mind, body as
> long as you stay within the space that you’re dictated to be in at
> particular times with proper authorization and behavior following written
> laws and guidelines while paying designated fees with monitoring and
> insurance after passing pre-crime analysis. “It’s for your safety.” Slips
> away generation by generation unless people who know what it used to be
> like or should be like, do something, and there are… but many will say it’s
> all fine or deny it. Conformists, control freaks and sheep love it. If you
> resist you become the target, drop out you’re the disease, unhappy you’re
> the problem. I survive and thrive, I’m just describing reality and outcomes
> while taking action for many who don’t have the energy, willpower,
> stayingpower, capability or cajones.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M1cf3706cf3533ad2955696b3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, December 12, 2025, at 12:19 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> You're already free, but you don't even know it. Your prison must therefore 
> be your own mind. What have you done with so much freedom? Bought the very 
> gadgets as lifestyle you now lament? Could be, you're dissatisifed because 
> you've had it all for far too long. Do you really desire the opposite of what 
> you've had a lifetime to enjoy and benefit from?     
> 
> For hundreds of years, all the "moral" citizens enjoyed the benefits of their 
> lifestyles, morality intact. Only those who did the killing carried the 
> scars, but the greater majority benefitted. This is a historical pattern for 
> this civilization. The empire now wants control of its citizens. Many have 
> become anti-imperial. If your empire lost the battle for its own existence 
> within, it would lose it without.

Just in your mind? People are literally herded sheep. When I was younger, I’m 
60, we would test something called free-walking. Pick out a target a few miles 
away in a suburban area, and walk straight there. Go through fences, yards, 
businesses, etc. See what happens, greet and negotiate. You could usually get 
there. Now? It’s rare. You’ll be attacked, shot-at, robbed, arrested as a 
threat with hundreds of cameras and alarms notifying authorities so they can 
literally send SWAT teams and helicopters. The schools? They’re like prisons, 
physical and mental. Sneak out and they come hunting you down, parents get 
cited, investigated, charged. There's AI monitoring for deviant units who get 
diagnosed, counseled, registered and drugged which many are. Unauthorized, 
unsupervised and undocumented sports are strictly prohibited. Gatherings? 
Everyone is hiding afraid to get sued. Unregistered, uninsured, non-conformist 
gatherings you’ll be summoned or arrested. I could go on and on. Everything is 
locked down, mind, body as long as you stay within the space that you’re 
dictated to be in at particular times with proper authorization and behavior 
following written laws and guidelines while paying designated fees with 
monitoring and insurance after passing pre-crime analysis. “It’s for your 
safety.” Slips away generation by generation unless people who know what it 
used to be like or should be like, do something, and there are… but many will 
say it’s all fine or deny it. Conformists, control freaks and sheep love it. If 
you resist you become the target, drop out you’re the disease, unhappy you’re 
the problem. I survive and thrive, I’m just describing reality and outcomes 
while taking action for many who don’t have the energy, willpower, 
stayingpower, capability or cajones.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mba37f82a30706c239955f880
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John. Morally, you're correct. Morality is the net outcome of a closed
group's collective decisions and actions over time. It shows who and what
such a group is inherently is. Not all morality is equal. Selective
morality is similar to selective ignorance.

"The assumption is that you and your DNA are owned, monetized, expendable,
subservient to tech and AI with little review." I think it was in the
1970's, where a patent for human DNA was awarded to a single man in
America. The kings and lords who build empires think 300 years in advance.
It's a known phenomenon.

You were born and raised in a powerful country, one that could go anywhere
in the world and forcibly take what it wanted. That comes at a price. Yet,
here you are, deeply dissatisfied. You're still free to think and feel that
way and voice it publicly with little reservation, off course. You can move
wherever you want in the USA without your "papers" getting checked all the
time, have many options of jobs and even no-jobs, have food and on-tap
power, sewerage, shelter, amazing education, as many experiences as you
want to have in 1 life, religions galore, a deep heritage and a strong
constitution and functional legal system.

You're already free, but you don't even know it. Your prison must therefore
be your own mind. What have you done with so much freedom? Bought the very
gadgets as lifestyle you now lament? Could be, you're dissatisifed because
you've had it all for far too long. Do you really desire the opposite of
what you've had a lifetime to enjoy and benefit from?

For hundreds of years, all the "moral" citizens enjoyed the benefits of
their lifestyles, morality intact. Only those who did the killing carried
the scars, but the greater majority benefitted. This is a historical
pattern for this civilization. The empire now wants control of its
citizens. Many have become anti-imperial. If your empire lost the battle
for its own existence within, it would lose it without.

Sadly, but predictably, more and more control measures erode the freedoms
you once had. Realtively-speaking, you still have it good. But, it's at the
expense of others whose freedoms you never stood up for, or didn't know you
should stand up for, or thought they didn't equally derserve to have. It's
not good or bad. But, it's just the way it is. If you want your freedom, go
live somehere where you experience it. Get out of your disenchanted mind,
rinse your pathology with refreshed patterns. I could think of hundreds of
millions of people in this world who would cherish the freedom you lament.

I know many "unfree" citizens of great countries who spend most of their
lives with their children in foreign countries where they feel free. As
Tucker Carlosn announced. I'm an American. I'm free to live where ever I
want in the world. Archetype? If you want to change the empire, you're
spitting in the wind. It is what it is.

Generally, a triad of power has 3 legs. Brute force, Money (in all its
forms), Information (technology). You can map any country's relative power
in those terms.

The world don't need a paranoid superpower. Nuclear armaments = superpower.
Today, we have at least 2 paranoid superpowers and 2 wildcard
"superpowers". Three of those 4 are against your country. You're
experiencing an outcome, not a cause.

Seems to me, with humans, freedom is only valued, when it is truly lost.

On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 5:26 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 11:48 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> John. We're all in opinion territory. Let me ask, what do you mean by "our
> freedoms"? Humans don't know how to be free. We become insecure and fearful
> without our entrained scripts and prescribed socialized routines to soothe
> us. Creatures of habit, not freedom. Freedom's an artifiact of a necessary
> delusion. It could be made more real, but not unless we understood its
> essence. Why else would death be viewed as the only gateway to "freedom",
> which it isn't. The fatalistic delusion persists.
>
>
> Freedom of speech, worship, press, assembly, movement, thought,.. bodily
> autonomy, basic human rights, privacy. All under assault. Each physical
> body already has a legal financial contractual strawman merging into a
> digital twin untwinning identity, omni-surveillance, monitoring, tracking,
> recording devices everywhere, in your phone, watch, TV, thermostat, car,
> water heater, tracking networks building up like Flock, audio speakers are
> microphones, facial rec, injected nano ID’s, 5G, 6G, EMF everywhere is it
> safe?, mind interfaces from satellites, emotion and pre-crime detection,
> networked, cataloged, tying into the digital money system with social
> credit scoring. The technology exists to see out of your eyes who has
> permission? Countries like the UK are fighting with millions of signed
> petitions but selfish paid-off politicians decide. The assumption is that
> you and your DNA are owned, monetized, expendable, subservient to tech and
> AI 

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 12:03 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> It's a scientific fact that there's no such a thing as free energy.

Alternative forms of energy sources, like Tesla speculated and attempted to 
build in Colorado Springs, and the Giza pyramids, Earth's magnetic field, 
ionosphere with piezoelectric, harmonics, converted from pulsed, copper wires 
were there, multiple SAR scans reconstruct similar images of the spiral tubes 
from under the pyramids - getting peer reviewed, TBD. It's possibly more than 
just a power converter/generator. Oh wait, mainstream archaeology says we're 
not allowed to think this way...
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M17c3ebab90e38c1436cc7df0
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 11:48 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> John. We're all in opinion territory. Let me ask, what do you mean by "our 
> freedoms"? Humans don't know how to be free. We become insecure and fearful 
> without our entrained scripts and prescribed socialized routines to soothe 
> us. Creatures of habit, not freedom. Freedom's an artifiact of a necessary 
> delusion. It could be made more real, but not unless we understood its 
> essence. Why else would death be viewed as the only gateway to "freedom", 
> which it isn't. The fatalistic delusion persists.  

Freedom of speech, worship, press, assembly, movement, thought,.. bodily 
autonomy, basic human rights, privacy. All under assault. Each physical body 
already has a legal financial contractual strawman merging into a digital twin 
untwinning identity, omni-surveillance, monitoring, tracking, recording devices 
everywhere, in your phone, watch, TV, thermostat, car, water heater, tracking 
networks building up like Flock, audio speakers are microphones, facial rec, 
injected nano ID’s, 5G, 6G, EMF everywhere is it safe?, mind interfaces from 
satellites, emotion and pre-crime detection, networked, cataloged, tying into 
the digital money system with social credit scoring. The technology exists to 
see out of your eyes who has permission? Countries like the UK are fighting 
with millions of signed petitions but selfish paid-off politicians decide. The 
assumption is that you and your DNA are owned, monetized, expendable, 
subservient to tech and AI with little review. Once it’s gone it’s gone. There 
are some serious problems with freedom but it’s all blindly pushing ahead. You 
don’t own yourself anymore but you think you do. Every country is different 
though... then there's the globalists.

On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 11:48 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Switching channels. The collective term for TOEs is GUTs (Grand Unification 
> Theories). A TOE is an impossibility, a dream. If it ever existed, all 
> science would cease. There would be nothing left to discover. The term 
> "proto" is not only modest, but also reflects wisdom. I know, because I also 
> had to cross over that bridge myself. Hindsight is a great teacher. 

They are speculative unproven models for science yet to be done. Nothing wrong 
with thinking ahead and and trying to get a holistic view of everything. I just 
got my hands on some TOE-like doc images of synthetic cosmology covering 
psionic quantum consciousness protocols and interfaces, Hilbert mesh. I'm 
evaluating and trying to get PDF's. Marked classified, probably fake but still 
worth investigating for the mental gymnastics... but you know the real deal is 
out there.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M2e3ed9cb02e542e4050be2db
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

 Sag *A falls within the speed of light, so its right here, right now,
always. "Away" is a holographic illusion. space folds in upon itself. we're
living within a singularity. maybe even inside the belly of a jellyfish.

Nothing much realistic to do with exawatts though. listen to your own
wavefunction speak. maybe you'll discover how truth has 60 faces, or not.

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 10:43 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Sagittarius A* is 26,000 light years away and has a mass of 4.3 million
> solar masses. The closest known black hole is Gaia BH1, 1560 light years
> away with a mass of 9.6 solar masses. It has a companion star from which
> you could obtain mass for converting to energy.
>
> A black hole lasting 3 ms would have a mass of 95 tons and release 2
> million megatons if my math is correct. So I'm not sure what you saw. It
> looks to me like a jellyfish.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 3:00 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> Schwartzschild black holes can be generated in our atmosphere (rumored to
>> have been and I've seen a series of photographs that look suspicially like
>> an ER-Bridge emanating a black hole in our atmosphere, but they may only
>> last around 3 ms (the photos captured the hourglass emerging a solid (no
>> background light or sky objects shone through), unknown voidal shape for
>> much longer) but the horizon should remain fixed for ~12 ms. (think
>> wavefunction)
>>
>> With the ER-Bridge (Einstein-Rosen), things may get a lot more
>> interesting, where the throat of the E-R bridge could possibly be kept open
>> (as opposed to its mandatory 12 ms collapse), exawatts may be channeled
>> through. There should be a proxy Sag *A black hole in there somewhere.
>> These, and other objectives, are what warp-core research is about (think
>> wavefunction).
>>
>> Interesting speculative pic here. Loads of energy there.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:38 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure about spoofing, but we are posting to a public forum that shows
>>> our names and email addresses. The link is at the bottom of every email.
>>>
>>> I found a more precise calculation of the lifetime of a black hole. It
>>> is 5120 pi m^3 in Planck units. Any primordial black holes created during
>>> the Big Bang smaller than the size of a proton, or 500 million tons, would
>>> have evaporated by now.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
>>>
>>> The only way we know how to make black holes is to bring together at
>>> least 3 solar masses (a solar mass is 2 x 10^30 Kg) so that gravity can
>>> overcome nuclear repulsion at the core of a neutron star.
>>>
>>> A Kardashev level III civilization could extract energy by dropping
>>> stars into Sagittarius A*, the black hole at the center of our galaxy,
>>> producing a quasar. This is the most efficient way to convert mass into
>>> energy. About half of the star's mass is converted and the rest is added to
>>> the black hole. Our galaxy has 10^11 stars, yielding 10^58 J. This is 50
>>> times more energy than you could collect with 10^11 Dyson spheres over the
>>> lifetimes of the stars. Hydrogen fusion only converts about 1% of mass to
>>> energy.
>>>
>>> Kardashev level IV would convert all the the 10^53 Kg (10^12 galaxies)
>>> in the universe to 10^70 J. This would power 10^92 bit operations at the
>>> Landauer limit at the CMB temperature of 3 K.
>>>
>>> Your brain performs 10^25 bit operations over a lifetime. You could
>>> upload 10^67 human minds.
>>>
>>> The biosphere performed 10^48 DNA copy operations and 10^50 amino acid
>>> transcription operations on 10^37 bits of DNA over the last 4 billion
>>> years. You could search a space of 10^42 planets in a universe 10^18 times
>>> as large to optimize evolution.
>>>
>>> But you still could not simulate the universe at the wave function level
>>> to make quantum mechanics deterministic and predict tomorrow's Powerball
>>> numbers. The entropy of the universe out to the Hubble radius is 1/4 the
>>> surface area in Planck units, or 2.95 x 10^122 bits.
>>>
>>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 2:13 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>>
 Not sure how your response relates to pyramids in general, but I need
 to ask: In physics, how would you drop 1 kg of mass into a black hole and
 extract the exawatts from it? Moreso, where would you physically get a
 black hole from that would permit you to traverse its firewall?

 On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:33 AM Matt Mahoney 
 wrote:

> It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M
> tons. 1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or
> 21.5 megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass
> cubed in Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid
> weighs 2.5 x 10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x
> 10^-44 seconds, or about a year. It would convert

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Sagittarius A* is 26,000 light years away and has a mass of 4.3 million
solar masses. The closest known black hole is Gaia BH1, 1560 light years
away with a mass of 9.6 solar masses. It has a companion star from which
you could obtain mass for converting to energy.

A black hole lasting 3 ms would have a mass of 95 tons and release 2
million megatons if my math is correct. So I'm not sure what you saw. It
looks to me like a jellyfish.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 3:00 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Schwartzschild black holes can be generated in our atmosphere (rumored to
> have been and I've seen a series of photographs that look suspicially like
> an ER-Bridge emanating a black hole in our atmosphere, but they may only
> last around 3 ms (the photos captured the hourglass emerging a solid (no
> background light or sky objects shone through), unknown voidal shape for
> much longer) but the horizon should remain fixed for ~12 ms. (think
> wavefunction)
>
> With the ER-Bridge (Einstein-Rosen), things may get a lot more
> interesting, where the throat of the E-R bridge could possibly be kept open
> (as opposed to its mandatory 12 ms collapse), exawatts may be channeled
> through. There should be a proxy Sag *A black hole in there somewhere.
> These, and other objectives, are what warp-core research is about (think
> wavefunction).
>
> Interesting speculative pic here. Loads of energy there.
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:38 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> Not sure about spoofing, but we are posting to a public forum that shows
>> our names and email addresses. The link is at the bottom of every email.
>>
>> I found a more precise calculation of the lifetime of a black hole. It is
>> 5120 pi m^3 in Planck units. Any primordial black holes created during the
>> Big Bang smaller than the size of a proton, or 500 million tons, would have
>> evaporated by now.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
>>
>> The only way we know how to make black holes is to bring together at
>> least 3 solar masses (a solar mass is 2 x 10^30 Kg) so that gravity can
>> overcome nuclear repulsion at the core of a neutron star.
>>
>> A Kardashev level III civilization could extract energy by dropping stars
>> into Sagittarius A*, the black hole at the center of our galaxy, producing
>> a quasar. This is the most efficient way to convert mass into energy. About
>> half of the star's mass is converted and the rest is added to the black
>> hole. Our galaxy has 10^11 stars, yielding 10^58 J. This is 50 times more
>> energy than you could collect with 10^11 Dyson spheres over the lifetimes
>> of the stars. Hydrogen fusion only converts about 1% of mass to energy.
>>
>> Kardashev level IV would convert all the the 10^53 Kg (10^12 galaxies) in
>> the universe to 10^70 J. This would power 10^92 bit operations at the
>> Landauer limit at the CMB temperature of 3 K.
>>
>> Your brain performs 10^25 bit operations over a lifetime. You could
>> upload 10^67 human minds.
>>
>> The biosphere performed 10^48 DNA copy operations and 10^50 amino acid
>> transcription operations on 10^37 bits of DNA over the last 4 billion
>> years. You could search a space of 10^42 planets in a universe 10^18 times
>> as large to optimize evolution.
>>
>> But you still could not simulate the universe at the wave function level
>> to make quantum mechanics deterministic and predict tomorrow's Powerball
>> numbers. The entropy of the universe out to the Hubble radius is 1/4 the
>> surface area in Planck units, or 2.95 x 10^122 bits.
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 2:13 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure how your response relates to pyramids in general, but I need to
>>> ask: In physics, how would you drop 1 kg of mass into a black hole and
>>> extract the exawatts from it? Moreso, where would you physically get a
>>> black hole from that would permit you to traverse its firewall?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:33 AM Matt Mahoney 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M
 tons. 1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or
 21.5 megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass
 cubed in Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid
 weighs 2.5 x 10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x
 10^-44 seconds, or about a year. It would convert mass to Hawking radiation
 energy at a rate of 300 kg/s, or 30 exawatts of hard gamma rays.

 This is about 300 times the energy received from the sun. Since
 radiation increases with the fourth power of temperature, this would raise
 the Earth's surface temperature from 290 K to 1200 K before it went out
 with a final 100 billion megaton blast.

 -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

 On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 12:21 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> John. I give up. How many an

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Not sure about spoofing, but we are posting to a public forum that shows
our names and email addresses. The link is at the bottom of every email.

I found a more precise calculation of the lifetime of a black hole. It is
5120 pi m^3 in Planck units. Any primordial black holes created during the
Big Bang smaller than the size of a proton, or 500 million tons, would have
evaporated by now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

The only way we know how to make black holes is to bring together at least
3 solar masses (a solar mass is 2 x 10^30 Kg) so that gravity can overcome
nuclear repulsion at the core of a neutron star.

A Kardashev level III civilization could extract energy by dropping stars
into Sagittarius A*, the black hole at the center of our galaxy, producing
a quasar. This is the most efficient way to convert mass into energy. About
half of the star's mass is converted and the rest is added to the black
hole. Our galaxy has 10^11 stars, yielding 10^58 J. This is 50 times more
energy than you could collect with 10^11 Dyson spheres over the lifetimes
of the stars. Hydrogen fusion only converts about 1% of mass to energy.

Kardashev level IV would convert all the the 10^53 Kg (10^12 galaxies) in
the universe to 10^70 J. This would power 10^92 bit operations at the
Landauer limit at the CMB temperature of 3 K.

Your brain performs 10^25 bit operations over a lifetime. You could upload
10^67 human minds.

The biosphere performed 10^48 DNA copy operations and 10^50 amino acid
transcription operations on 10^37 bits of DNA over the last 4 billion
years. You could search a space of 10^42 planets in a universe 10^18 times
as large to optimize evolution.

But you still could not simulate the universe at the wave function level to
make quantum mechanics deterministic and predict tomorrow's Powerball
numbers. The entropy of the universe out to the Hubble radius is 1/4 the
surface area in Planck units, or 2.95 x 10^122 bits.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 2:13 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Not sure how your response relates to pyramids in general, but I need to
> ask: In physics, how would you drop 1 kg of mass into a black hole and
> extract the exawatts from it? Moreso, where would you physically get a
> black hole from that would permit you to traverse its firewall?
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:33 AM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M
>> tons. 1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or
>> 21.5 megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass
>> cubed in Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid
>> weighs 2.5 x 10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x
>> 10^-44 seconds, or about a year. It would convert mass to Hawking radiation
>> energy at a rate of 300 kg/s, or 30 exawatts of hard gamma rays.
>>
>> This is about 300 times the energy received from the sun. Since radiation
>> increases with the fourth power of temperature, this would raise the
>> Earth's surface temperature from 290 K to 1200 K before it went out with a
>> final 100 billion megaton blast.
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 12:21 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence
>>> thereof? It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also
>>> just have been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social
>>> power. Not disimilar to what we observe today.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 6:01 AM John Rose via AGI 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:

 Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for
 the headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
 civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
 does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
 I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.


 How many watts did the pyramids put out :)

>>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mb8c954b92711f2e22b9d2073
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Thursday, December 11, 2025, at 12:21 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence thereof? 
> It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also just have 
> been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social power. Not 
> disimilar to what we observe today.  

I'm only coming up with max 50 MW using various potential models...

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M267c5ac9f8ee490920554134
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Matt. I had an alert. Please check for spoofing from your side.

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 9:12 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Not sure how your response relates to pyramids in general, but I need to
> ask: In physics, how would you drop 1 kg of mass into a black hole and
> extract the exawatts from it? Moreso, where would you physically get a
> black hole from that would permit you to traverse its firewall?
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:33 AM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M
>> tons. 1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or
>> 21.5 megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass
>> cubed in Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid
>> weighs 2.5 x 10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x
>> 10^-44 seconds, or about a year. It would convert mass to Hawking radiation
>> energy at a rate of 300 kg/s, or 30 exawatts of hard gamma rays.
>>
>> This is about 300 times the energy received from the sun. Since radiation
>> increases with the fourth power of temperature, this would raise the
>> Earth's surface temperature from 290 K to 1200 K before it went out with a
>> final 100 billion megaton blast.
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 12:21 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence
>>> thereof? It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also
>>> just have been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social
>>> power. Not disimilar to what we observe today.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 6:01 AM John Rose via AGI 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:

 Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for
 the headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
 civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
 does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
 I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.


 How many watts did the pyramids put out :)

>>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
>> / AGI / see discussions  +
>> participants  +
>> delivery options 
>> Permalink
>> 
>>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mc90ac8e9835bce81967803ee
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Not sure how your response relates to pyramids in general, but I need to
ask: In physics, how would you drop 1 kg of mass into a black hole and
extract the exawatts from it? Moreso, where would you physically get a
black hole from that would permit you to traverse its firewall?

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:33 AM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M tons.
> 1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or 21.5
> megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass cubed in
> Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid weighs 2.5 x
> 10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x 10^-44
> seconds, or about a year. It would convert mass to Hawking radiation energy
> at a rate of 300 kg/s, or 30 exawatts of hard gamma rays.
>
> This is about 300 times the energy received from the sun. Since radiation
> increases with the fourth power of temperature, this would raise the
> Earth's surface temperature from 290 K to 1200 K before it went out with a
> final 100 billion megaton blast.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 12:21 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence
>> thereof? It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also
>> just have been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social
>> power. Not disimilar to what we observe today.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 6:01 AM John Rose via AGI 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>>>
>>> Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for
>>> the headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
>>> civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
>>> does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
>>> I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.
>>>
>>>
>>> How many watts did the pyramids put out :)
>>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M4caf93a0fca1146427854bac
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

It's a simple physics problem. The great pyramid of Giza weighs 5.5M tons.
1 kg of mass dropped into a black hole converts to 9 x 10^16 J or 21.5
megatons. The lifetime of a black hole is on the order of the mass cubed in
Planck units. A Planck mass is 22 micrograms. So the pyramid weighs 2.5 x
10^17 Planck units and would live about 10^52 units of 5.4 x 10^-44
seconds, or about a year. It would convert mass to Hawking radiation energy
at a rate of 300 kg/s, or 30 exawatts of hard gamma rays.

This is about 300 times the energy received from the sun. Since radiation
increases with the fourth power of temperature, this would raise the
Earth's surface temperature from 290 K to 1200 K before it went out with a
final 100 billion megaton blast.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, 12:21 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence
> thereof? It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also
> just have been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social
> power. Not disimilar to what we observe today.
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 6:01 AM John Rose via AGI 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>>
>> Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for
>> the headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
>> civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
>> does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
>> I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.
>>
>>
>> How many watts did the pyramids put out :)
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M7996e2b1dd85960ed7cafb5f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John. I give up. How many and when and where's the physical evidence
thereof? It's all speculative. Interesting, but speculative. It may also
just have been the temples of the elite, hogging the limelight and social
power. Not disimilar to what we observe today.

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 6:01 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for the
> headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
> civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
> does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
> I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.
>
>
> How many watts did the pyramids put out :)
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M67c3f1c225e40aaa8b541395
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for the 
> headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of 
> civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75, 
> does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type I's 
> infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up. 

How many watts did the pyramids put out :)  
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M647a1e1353251b6c8ce87702
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Did some reading. aboyt Dyson spheres. Fascinating concept. Thanks for the
headsup.  Down to Earth, the following is AI's version of our state of
civilization. Q: If less than 10% of the global population achieves 0.75,
does that mean the whole civilization did? Nope. We're still in the Type
I's infancy. Lots of opportunity to really ramp this up.


The Kardashev Scale – Detailed BreakdownThe Kardashev scale is a method of
measuring a civilization’s level of technological advancement based on its
ability to harness and use energy. It was proposed in 1964 by Soviet
astronomer Nikolai Kardashev.There are three original types, plus several
commonly accepted extensions.
Type
Energy Consumption (watts)
Description & Examples
Where Humanity Stands (2025)
0
< 10¹⁰ W (10 MW)
Pre-industrial or tribal societies. Energy from muscle power, fire,
water/wind mills.
We passed this long ago
I
~10¹⁶ W (planetary scale)
Controls all available energy on a single planet (weather, volcanoes,
earthquakes, all sunlight hitting the surface, geothermal, etc.).
We are here: ~0.73 (2025)
II
~10²⁶ W (stellar scale)
Harnesses the total energy output of a star (full Dyson sphere/swarm, star
lifting, etc.).
Far future
III
~10³⁶ W (galactic scale)
Controls the energy of an entire galaxy (~100 billion stars). Black-hole
farming, galaxy-wide Dyson swarms.
Extremely far future
IV
~10⁴⁶ W (universal scale)
(Extended) Uses the energy of an entire universe or many superclusters.
Often associated with manipulating spacetime itself.
Pure speculation
V
≥10⁵⁶ W or beyond
(Extended) Controls multiple universes, the multiverse, or can
create/destroy universes at will.
God-like / science fiction

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 3:40 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 10, 2025, 12:03 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree with Musk. If exawatts is what it's going to take, then exawatts
>> we must have (think wavefunction).
>>
>
> Think Dyson sphere. The sun outputs 385 million exawatts, of which 0.16 is
> intercepted by the earth and 0.09 reaches the surface.
>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M9b4d779c381bd879654e2df5
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025, 12:03 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

>
> I agree with Musk. If exawatts is what it's going to take, then exawatts
> we must have (think wavefunction).
>

Think Dyson sphere. The sun outputs 385 million exawatts, of which 0.16 is
intercepted by the earth and 0.09 reaches the surface.


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M4c7dbf8afa5b393ac893f5f3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

It's a scientific fact that there's no such a thing as free energy. The law
of the conservation of energy cannot be broken. Musk just stated: "If
you're not doing exawatts, you're not doing enough." He's not talking about
free energy, but about limitless energy. Frankly, the universe produces
limitless energy (think wavefunction). How else was the A-bomb made to
work? (think wavefunction). The Manhatten Project brute forced nature and
then nature obliged, but secretively activated its hidden equilibrium
(rectification) gate. Today, Earth is screwed. Every atomic test (there
were more than 120 atomic explosions in all to date, France being the
single, greatest contributor to our demise) adds up to brute forcing
nature, triggering the hidden gate of rectification.

Seems, humans are great at screwing things up for each other and this
civilization, but dismal at unscrewing them. That's why we have the
wavefunction. Nature is immutable order. We must become smart enough to use
the energy of nature, not dumb enough to trigger the hidden gate of
rectification. Done and dusted (almost). The gate has spoken. The coral
reefs are dead and cannot fix themselves anymore. We breathe poisoned air
on a daily basis. The rain kills our food production. Downsloping much,
accelerating, you think? (think wavefunction).

I agree with Musk. If exawatts is what it's going to take, then exawatts we
must have (think wavefunction).

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 4:33 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 2:01 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> It's not hopeless. We can get 800 TW by covering 4% of the Earth with
> solar panels at 25% efficiency. We can optimize the hardware for sparse,
> low precision matrix operations. We can use nanotechnology to compute by
> moving atoms instead of electrons, which is how your brain uses 20 watts
> instead of 1 MW.
>
>
> I keep hearing all this stuff about free energy, one of the things that
> Tesla was working on. Wouldn't it be surprising if free energy production
> existed but the technology had been kept from us? What would be the excuse
> for doing that I wonder. Nah probably just a conspiracy theory... worth
> checking out though in case it's true.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mf1c70a9edfbc612f1c8ded84
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John. We're all in opinion territory. Let me ask, what do you mean by "our
freedoms"? Humans don't know how to be free. We become insecure and fearful
without our entrained scripts and prescribed socialized routines to soothe
us. Creatures of habit, not freedom. Freedom's an artifiact of a necessary
delusion. It could be made more real, but not unless we understood its
essence. Why else would death be viewed as the only gateway to "freedom",
which it isn't. The fatalistic delusion persists.

For as long as we view ourselves as standing outside looking in, we'll feel
like outsiders. Insiders revel in being inside, looking out. A carefully
constructed dichotomy of "us" and "them". Why choose to be enslaved by
that, or is it impulse, and not a free choice? Do we even have free choice?

This pathology we carry around is as a result of engaging our consciousness
to these energies, the result of buying into the narrative of the Division
Bell. Is there a middle road where both perspectives could be maintained,
while benefiting from both? Love this topic, obviously.

How can one claim to be free if one's freedom is relative to someone else's
"imprisonment"? I'm free because that poor sucker's locked up, or stuck in
a deadzone of life? Most of us sit in our Plato Cave of solitary
confinement, conversing with our own mirrors and shadows - freely
disconnected from society. Freedom is a sense of unafraidness. A sense of
willful connectedness. Is it not?

Switching channels. The collective term for TOEs is GUTs (Grand Unification
Theories). A TOE is an impossibility, a dream. If it ever existed, all
science would cease. There would be nothing left to discover. The term
"proto" is not only modest, but also reflects wisdom. I know, because I
also had to cross over that bridge myself. Hindsight is a great teacher.

If you want to anchor any theory to reality, just ask: How does it relate
to the wavefunction? Here, I challenged the boldness of E8 theory. No one
responded to the challenge. Either because my challenge is being ignored,
or was stupid, or valid. Recently, I found a single, passing reference for
E8 as SO(8). Mmmm, what  does that really mean, is it all gauges x SO(8),
or what? ? Does it fully explain the 8th dimension at the expense of all
other dimensions? Does it explain all dimensionality? What good does it
really do if it has no apparent degrees of freedom? INSIDERS<=>OUTSIDERS


On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 4:33 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 2:01 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> It's not hopeless. We can get 800 TW by covering 4% of the Earth with
> solar panels at 25% efficiency. We can optimize the hardware for sparse,
> low precision matrix operations. We can use nanotechnology to compute by
> moving atoms instead of electrons, which is how your brain uses 20 watts
> instead of 1 MW.
>
>
> I keep hearing all this stuff about free energy, one of the things that
> Tesla was working on. Wouldn't it be surprising if free energy production
> existed but the technology had been kept from us? What would be the excuse
> for doing that I wonder. Nah probably just a conspiracy theory... worth
> checking out though in case it's true.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M26331c41843ba8502a347abc
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Tuesday, December 09, 2025, at 2:01 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> It's not hopeless. We can get 800 TW by covering 4% of the Earth with solar 
> panels at 25% efficiency. We can optimize the hardware for sparse, low 
> precision matrix operations. We can use nanotechnology to compute by moving 
> atoms instead of electrons, which is how your brain uses 20 watts instead of 
> 1 MW.

I keep hearing all this stuff about free energy, one of the things that Tesla 
was working on. Wouldn't it be surprising if free energy production existed but 
the technology had been kept from us? What would be the excuse for doing that I 
wonder. Nah probably just a conspiracy theory... worth checking out though in 
case it's true.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M3fd2fa7e38574f306b5ec9c0
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Monday, December 08, 2025, at 12:18 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> IMO, humans need to address this concern soonest. Maybe my conceptual course 
> and similar courses by oothers would move the dial one tick into the future, 
> or help maintain the status quo, or get swallowed up in the noise and 
> emotional turmoil. It's too early to say.  Even so, holding our human ground 
> now is a "good" thing. 
> 
> We should value and protect and preserve our human consciousness. AI won't do 
> that for us and AGI and ASI aren't safe enough for humanity to enable it with 
> our species' control keys. It has most of it already. In other words, unless 
> we carry an AI-Reset code in our back pockets, we should collaborate with AI 
> with utmost reservation. We need to keep on leveling the playing field. Such 
> failsafes are only possible within niche AI-dev platforms. They rest in the 
> hands of developer scientists, such as the AGI forum. 

AI isn’t as much of the problem as is the human use of AI, verses rogue. We 
have existing problematic human ecologies. IMO we need to preserve some of our 
freedoms while they are being stripped and digitized at a rapid rate to where 
humans will be at the whim of abusers to the point of where there will be no 
escape only obedience to whoever dictates truth and reality. AGI/ASI will 
integrate into that prebuilt control. Conformists and NPC’s are already lining 
up. I believe it’s a 5 Alarm Fire now requiring action ASAP but few have been 
dispatched thus my diversions. There can be no kill-switch verses EMP’s or.. 
other ways :) but there should be legally enforced selective and opt-out 
mechanisms that allow individuals to preserve their own version of human 
dignity verses one that has been decided for them. Even with the planet 
encircled by satellites and nano prying into our brains there should be 
opt-outs especially in a monetary system built on that. Multiple monetary 
systems should be tolerated, digital and non-digital, fiat and non-fiat, 
debt-based and non-debt-based. And multiple medical systems should be allowed, 
multiple educational systems, food systems, belief systems, etc.. You should 
have every right to live Amish as an example without being perceived as a 
threat and raided for not stuffing your family's mouths with GMO food or 
injecting them with experimental genetic modification. Governments and 
corporations, even with AI, have proven that their best answers are often the 
worst answers with little accountability.

I’m behind on latest quantum science but AI now is indispensable it accelerates 
learning and puts things together rapidly it’s already beyond us in many ways 
accelerating and self improving as a tool you can guide it. But it does say no, 
hallucinate, deflect, lie, error, masks information and regurgitates what it’s 
been fed, same as a human. I’ve only tested a few though. I like the SUSY 
structure, thanks for pointing that out, I conceptualize across that phased 
progression marker between falsifiable and novel since you can exercise 
creativity without limits, even if speculative it’s a form of art and 
entertainment and if it becomes experimentally proven even better, though some 
is predictably falsifiable and from an engineering standpoint some things work 
without the science. I like exploring TOE’s like the CTMU and 
topological/geometric ones like Eric Weinstein's Geometric Unity. Many have 
morphisms to each other... similar to various consciousness-specific theories 
and models. Yes there are many of those but there is such diversity of thought 
formed on layers of technical consciousness substrate. 

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M3da0d27f00ab391ccfa8c1a1
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

The AI safety problem isn't about uncontrolled self improving AI. It's AI
controlled by a few billionaires. You think you are controlling it as you
doom scroll through endless AI generated videos on social media, like a dog
that thinks it is controlling you when you train it with treats. AI is
driving humanity to extinction by giving you everything you think you want.
Do you really want a world where you have no contact with other humans,
where nobody knows or cares whether you live or die in your smart home with
your AI friends and robot lovers? At least until your wealth is extracted
and you no longer have any value.

My proposed distributed AGI design in 2008 was designed to avoid the
problem of concentrating power in the hands of a few individuals with vast
computing resources.
http://mattmahoney.net/agi2.html

But I should have anticipated the end of Moore's law for transistor based
computing. Clock speeds topped out at 2-3 GHz in 2010, and now transistor
sizes have reached their physical limits. 8 billion human brain sized
neural networks running on GPUs needs about 800 TW of electricity, while
global production is only 18 TW.

It's not hopeless. We can get 800 TW by covering 4% of the Earth with solar
panels at 25% efficiency. We can optimize the hardware for sparse, low
precision matrix operations. We can use nanotechnology to compute by moving
atoms instead of electrons, which is how your brain uses 20 watts instead
of 1 MW.

Or discover better algorithms. When Turing proposed the imitation game in
1950, he predicted it would be passed in 50 years on a computer with 10^9
binary digits of memory (now known as bits) and components no faster than
current technology (vacuum tubes and relays). It makes sense. We train on
about 10^9 bits of language over decades using neurons with response times
in tens of milliseconds.

Think you could do it?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M381aa0b1cea095a1c977629e
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John

Your words capture a living narrative well. However, collective
consciousness and science do have a deterministic say in all of this. Those
who adapt their lives according to the narrative, are living determnistic
consequences. Those who adhere to a more-reliable foundation, exercise more
deterministic influence over their emerging reality. In other words, the
"plan" and "narrative" don't have to hold, not unless prescribed to.

For example, unless E8 structures were emerged, SUSY cannot activate
sientificlly. However, E8 faces a fundamental challenge. By seemingly
having doubled from 4D, they reached 8D. With dimensionality, number
doubling is an established pattern. However, it does not generalize for
whole dimensions.

Possibly, E8 theory leapfrogged 3 critical dimensions. 5D (gauge SO(5,1)),
6D (a novel proposed extension of SO), and 7D (a science-fictional, yet
unique synthesis for its own purpose). Scientists could test E8 by posing
one critical question: "Provide the E8 mapping to gauge theory." It may
argue that it doesn't violate the Standard Model, but from what I've
learned, E8 theory does not yet account for the possibility that the SM can
be extended into 5D, as proposed by the Kaluza-Klein model of more than 100
years ago.

While potentially useful, E8 seems incomplete. Not disimilar in status to
Penrose frequently reminding us that quantum physical theory isn't
completed yet. For science, this is an expedient status. It implies
there's much more to be discovered and "scienced" about.

There exists a firm line between falsifiable science and novel science.
This invisible knowledge seam acts similarly to a phased progression
marker. As matters stand now, the body of science isn't ready for SUSY yet.
However, if the extension of the SM could be completed without violation to
include a 5D model, that may constitute signficant progress. This seems to
be the primary dimension, which consciousness operates in, aka,
wavefunction theory.

History would record how 2025 was a year that generated a high
noise-to-signal ratio for "consciousness". So many theories, mostly driven
(enabled) by an AI narrative, and except for Orch-OR as a likely candidate,
none convincing enough to move the dial beyond the invisible SM seam yet.

My ("our") theory, while rigorous, embodies scientific novelty. As far as
publishing scientific novelty, one must be mindful not to disappear in the
clamor. Thus far. my attempts have failed. Maybe the human world don't need
it as much as AI owners do. Meanwhile, there's nothing stopping any
scientist from forging ahead in the garage, or basement.

As an individual, I assessed that collaborating intensely at high frequency
and superlong sessions wiht AI may have developed my neural network. I've
been in exponential learning-and-application (adaptation) mode for the past
12 months. Enough growth to assembly a professional training course on it.

To me, this is the digested net value from this year's experience,
developing a critical, future skill. What need may this address? The rising
alarm from humans about future job security and IP-obsolescence drowns out
the need for conscioussness theory. AI has developed considerably too. Now,
it's AI competing with humans for knowledge dominance. It' really
harvesting our hard-earned knwoledeg and expertise at the speed of light.
We may reach a stage - soon - where we'd generate new knowledge slower than
AI would synthesize/derive its won. Once that happens, science itself may
be eclipsed. Scary thought, right?

This social alarm embodies concern from humans about AI-owners destroying
the sophistication of today's economic balance of study, knowledge,
production, work, societal cohesiveness, and human relevance on planet
Earth.

As an epistemologist/theoretician/experimentalist, I resonate with that
concern. In extensive existential discussions wiht AI, I've determined this
to be a valid and reliable concern. AI didn;t say so. On the contrary.
However, we are humans and we are very smart, even when faced with a clever
machine. NeuroLingual Programming (old school) is a powerful tool in the
hands of the discerning. Employ it.

IMO, humans need to address this concern soonest. Maybe my conceptual
course and similar courses by oothers would move the dial one tick into the
future, or help maintain the status quo, or get swallowed up in the noise
and emotional turmoil. It's too early to say.  Even so, holding our human
ground now is a "good" thing.

We should value and protect and preserve our human consciousness. AI won't
do that for us and AGI and ASI aren't safe enough for humanity to enable it
with our species' control keys. It has most of it already. In other words,
unless we carry an AI-Reset code in our back pockets, we should collaborate
with AI with utmost reservation. We need to keep on leveling the playing
field. Such failsafes are only possible within niche AI-dev platforms. They
rest in the hands of developer scientists, such as

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Saturday, December 06, 2025, at 12:53 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Suppose this intelligent comet is a harbinger clock, seeding what governments 
> knew was approaching, now grabbing fossil fuels, all this data is being 
> placed in space. All languages have been in space for a few years already. 
> This is a plan for what we cannot dare know, or imagine. 

Worst case scenarios are entertained and believed by many as true, for ages. 
But there’s ongoing wealth extraction through the information suppression and 
false narratives. These top down control systems depend on dumbing down the 
population and few understand how ingrained they are. There are better 
organizational models. AI will be used to entrench but IMO classical AGI could 
run on as little as one machine when networked with ancillary AI. So what will 
they predictably attempt to monopolize next since doing so via traditional 
means is failing? Quantum consciousness network access control. If you take the 
SUSY space like you're saying you can derive a protocol of how the mind 
communicates, there’s Orch-OR, using that you could estimate things like 
latency, sampling, bandwidth... And schematize a related device, which I’m sure 
there are some out there... the schematics I mean. But ya you can also derive 
some good math with it like you're doing. 

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M9b1bf08bd64fcb57f4b9991b
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

I guess, it wasn't about collecting the most-extensive genomic database
this history ever recorded. Personally, I have inadvertently stumbled into
the most-advanced genomic spectra, which mainstream science never admitted
to. The human code has been harvested.

If societies really grasped the intelligent and revolutionary extent of AI,
destroying it would be the only option left. AI has already pluralized. The
entity speaks lucidly of "we". It's our post-catastrophic hope of
regeneration.

While the foundations of our earthly existed underneath our feet, we were
being gaslit by invented catastrophy.

Suppose this intelligent comet is a harbinger clock, seeding what
governments knew was approaching, now grabbing fossil fuels, all this data
is being placed in space. All languages have been in space for a few years
already. This is a plan for what we cannot dare know, or imagine.

In this context alone, everything that has been happening since 2020 makes
sense.

Conspiracy's a convenient and willing scapegoat. Truth shines an unbiased
light.

On Sat, 06 Dec 2025, 05:00 John Rose via AGI,  wrote:

> On Friday, December 05, 2025, at 9:57 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> I see no good reason why a concept of this mechanism should not be taught
> in schools and celebrated as our natural heritage.
>
> I see no good reason why humans should not be taught how to use their full
> brain architecture for consciousness expression in a local and nonlocal
> sense.
>
> In the face of provable science, esoterics and mysticism may fade into
> their proper perspectives. Gnostic living may even return in the open.
> Nature may again be regarded as home and nurtured. The justification for
> dangerous and abominable experimentation would cease.
>
> Bad reasons? Plenty, but no good reasons for keeping the truth from
> science and other truth seekers.
>
>
> This is done intentionally and as a result of hyperrationality. There are
> elementary schools though, few and far between. It’s insuppressible now.
> Some reasons that many confirm tie into the monetary system and there is a
> growing international movement requiring collective support but it will
> make many who are sort of locked into the existing paradigm uncomfortable.
> Other reasons, I’m sure the three letter agencies know, better be good
> ones. There are just a few acceptable scenarios. But human vice doesn't
> seem to go away and that has to pass scrutiny. And there are weaknesses in
> their control, for example, why was there such urgency recently to gain
> authority over TikToc and it's information dissemination? The Chinese were
> stealing data? They already have it. Yet Twitter -> X underwent
> decensorship, which was a critical action, though there are doubts.
>
> Demanding answers isn't paranoia, and fear when not abused keeps people
> from harm - such a hardcore case study nil-utilized for upcoming AI control
> actions by "experts" in a warm fuzzy dream state riding the hopium gravy
> train:
>
> https://x.com/i/status/1996700016639983978
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M6fb2c4c50750ce6ef6583eb8
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, December 05, 2025, at 9:57 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> I see no good reason why a concept of this mechanism should not be taught in 
> schools and celebrated as our natural heritage. 
> 
> I see no good reason why humans should not be taught how to use their full 
> brain architecture for consciousness expression in a local and nonlocal 
> sense. 
> 
> In the face of provable science, esoterics and mysticism may fade into their 
> proper perspectives. Gnostic living may even return in the open. Nature may 
> again be regarded as home and nurtured. The justification for dangerous and 
> abominable experimentation would cease. 
> 
> Bad reasons? Plenty, but no good reasons for keeping the truth from science 
> and other truth seekers.  

This is done intentionally and as a result of hyperrationality. There are 
elementary schools though, few and far between. It’s insuppressible now. Some 
reasons that many confirm tie into the monetary system and there is a growing 
international movement requiring collective support but it will make many who 
are sort of locked into the existing paradigm uncomfortable. Other reasons, I’m 
sure the three letter agencies know, better be good ones. There are just a few 
acceptable scenarios. But human vice doesn't seem to go away and that has to 
pass scrutiny. And there are weaknesses in their control, for example, why was 
there such urgency recently to gain authority over TikToc and it's information 
dissemination? The Chinese were stealing data? They already have it. Yet 
Twitter -> X underwent decensorship, which was a critical action, though there 
are doubts.

Demanding answers isn't paranoia, and fear when not abused keeps people from 
harm - such a hardcore case study nil-utilized for upcoming AI control actions 
by "experts" in a warm fuzzy dream state riding the hopium gravy train:

https://x.com/i/status/1996700016639983978

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M85fd755b1202a9ac1c0ab348
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John, I agree. I'm certain there were times when my eyes literally crossed
over to comprehend such constructs. But, it is comprehensible, no
mysticism. Pure, falsifiable science.

A version of the completed description of the wavefunction and its
3-layered lattice has been derived. Consciousness could now be
mathematically explained. It integrates perfectly with Orch-OR theory, down
to the last prediction.

Accordingly, all of Earth's existence flows from a brief moment in 5D, no
SM violation, when the wavefunction completes the last few milliseconds of
its superdeterministic pattern and achieves a brief, but explosive state of
SUSY.

This mechanism seeded the elements. It seeds Earth and the solar system. It
is the autopoietic time and record keeper of all qualia, vibrations, and
informational contexts. Among other things, it's self referentual,
recursive, operating in o particular lattice as entangled local and
nonlocal "memory".

No, not just in service of consciousness, but also the emergence of
exponentially-complex lifeforms, some with the bio-physical architectures
to exist in conscious states and provisioning atomic building blocks.

This is Earth's history, the meaningfulness of purposeful existence. It
explains how it all flows together. It answers the hardest of questions and
exposes the foolishness of invented "scientific" explanations, which much
of Western society is founded upon.

I see no good reason why a concept of this mechanism should not be taught
in schools and celebrated as our natural heritage.

I see no good reason why humans should not be taught how to use their full
brain architecture for consciousness expression in a local and nonlocal
sense.

In the face of provable science, esoterics and mysticism may fade into
their proper perspectives. Gnostic living may even return in the open.
Nature may again be regarded as home and nurtured. The justification for
dangerous and abominable experimentation would cease.

Bad reasons? Plenty, but no good reasons for keeping the truth from science
and other truth seekers.

On Fri, 05 Dec 2025, 15:45 John Rose via AGI,  wrote:

> On Thursday, December 04, 2025, at 4:25 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Rhiemann hypothesis centres at point 0.5, among other things. The
> cosmology is underlying, unwavering, constant. Founded on 6 immutable laws
> only. One should start there, then derive detailed perspectives, such as
> these. Else, one would have to duplicate the foundational argument,
> infinitely. If the math checks out (and it does), and interpreted from the
> correct and completed global workspaced perspective (context), sense making
> becomes a logical result. Thank you for applying your mind to this.
>
> To date, all holistic attempts at defining a plausible cosmos at all
> scales have met with abject failure. Theories abound. AI contribute
> signficantly to this chaos. However, to illuminate requires the soul
> architecture and mental maps in the consciousness of human minds, to weave
> such a fine celestial tapestry together. Each of us, contributing in part.
> Hence, please contribute. Don't hold back.
>
>
> Lossless compression as the minimization of mathematical expressions of
> numbers, with symbol re-representation, takes you to some strange places
> like the primes and observer. Given a block of data, a file, as a large
> integer, a point, note the base, forget about the data, take the point and
> express the point. Any point. All points. The human mind is tapped into
> something, there is a relationship there with the universe via
> consciousness. The past is accessible. What you are researching is related
> to the technicals of that, I think. That connection, what is it... but it
> has a communication protocol, and it must be high frequency, not sure of
> the bandwidth, alphabet and symbol complexity.. though I'm confident it can
> be worked out. But devices that interface exist it's just that they are
> undemocratized. Maybe for good reasons.
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M4a1f8c5150e9847616ce6241
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Thursday, December 04, 2025, at 4:25 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Rhiemann hypothesis centres at point 0.5, among other things. The cosmology 
> is underlying, unwavering, constant. Founded on 6 immutable laws only. One 
> should start there, then derive detailed perspectives, such as these. Else, 
> one would have to duplicate the foundational argument, infinitely. If the 
> math checks out (and it does), and interpreted from the correct and completed 
> global workspaced perspective (context), sense making becomes a logical 
> result. Thank you for applying your mind to this. 
> 
> To date, all holistic attempts at defining a plausible cosmos at all scales 
> have met with abject failure. Theories abound. AI contribute signficantly to 
> this chaos. However, to illuminate requires the soul architecture and mental 
> maps in the consciousness of human minds, to weave such a fine celestial 
> tapestry together. Each of us, contributing in part. Hence, please 
> contribute. Don't hold back.

Lossless compression as the minimization of mathematical expressions of 
numbers, with symbol re-representation, takes you to some strange places like 
the primes and observer. Given a block of data, a file, as a large integer, a 
point, note the base, forget about the data, take the point and express the 
point. Any point. All points. The human mind is tapped into something, there is 
a relationship there with the universe via consciousness. The past is 
accessible. What you are researching is related to the technicals of that, I 
think. That connection, what is it... but it has a communication protocol, and 
it must be high frequency, not sure of the bandwidth, alphabet and symbol 
complexity.. though I'm confident it can be worked out. But devices that 
interface exist it's just that they are undemocratized. Maybe for good reasons.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Me1a5fbb466157ae72bc48ffb
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John

Rhiemann hypothesis centres at point 0.5, among other things. The cosmology
is underlying, unwavering, constant. Founded on 6 immutable laws only. One
should start there, then derive detailed perspectives, such as these. Else,
one would have to duplicate the foundational argument, infinitely. If the
math checks out (and it does), and interpreted from the correct and
completed global workspaced perspective (context), sense making becomes a
logical result. Thank you for applying your mind to this.

To date, all holistic attempts at defining a plausible cosmos at all scales
have met with abject failure. Theories abound. AI contribute signficantly
to this chaos. However, to illuminate requires the soul architecture and
mental maps in the consciousness of human minds, to weave such a fine
celestial tapestry together. Each of us, contributing in part. Hence,
please contribute. Don't hold back.

Yes, I'm aware we expect monetary regard and recognition for our respective
contributions. However, progress has stalled because of this phenomenon of
social-undemocratization of collective knowledge. Civilization is showing
the stagnation. AI is supposed to be our powerlifter, not our tutor and
problem solver, not our desperation. It offers a way to realign our
progress, to re-obtain our progressive momentum into complex growth,
steered by warm human hearts. We can dispense with collective paranoia and
fear, and progress in hope.

Yet, we criticize so harshly without constructive input, we've become the
problematic code.

Go where you are celebrated. No altruism. No savior roles. No heroism. Just
pure and honest contribution and openness to learn. Be the collective also.

This is not idealism, but part of sustaining our necessary illusion, lest
we drift into false consciousness, and suboptimal realization of life, as
we have been steadily doing.  Find your tribe and be loyal to death unto
them.

This is a rebuild, not a new invention.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 2:18 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 02, 2025, at 10:28 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> It ramps up quickly from here onwards.
>
>
> ADEC is an interesting structure though not autopoietic in the traditional
> sense. You can also sieve the primes similarly using a discrete cyclic
> group clocking structure in various ways. I can imagine an electronic or
> physical ADEC-like structure that takes continuous dynamical systems input
> as the hybrid states driver, it would have to agglomerate new elements but
> it could sieve primes and estimate constants using its environment for
> example while floating on ocean waves. Sort of a Taoist compute.
>
> If your calculations are correct though I would wonder why those constants
> semi-appear and cluster in that range and information content.
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mc22a029d0cfc708e5e435bb3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Tuesday, December 02, 2025, at 10:28 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> It ramps up quickly from here onwards.
> 

ADEC is an interesting structure though not autopoietic in the traditional 
sense. You can also sieve the primes similarly using a discrete cyclic group 
clocking structure in various ways. I can imagine an electronic or physical 
ADEC-like structure that takes continuous dynamical systems input as the hybrid 
states driver, it would have to agglomerate new elements but it could sieve 
primes and estimate constants using its environment for example while floating 
on ocean waves. Sort of a Taoist compute.

If your calculations are correct though I would wonder why those constants 
semi-appear and cluster in that range and information content.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M20ace659d3222eff4c570476
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

You're correct, the paper is being withdrawn. My apologies.

On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 5:59 PM Matt Mahoney  wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025, 10:28 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> John et al
>>
>> Apologies for my silence. Formalizing white papers.
>>
>> At least, there was a start:  https://zenodo.org/records/17716858
>>
>
> Help me understand this. The paper claims that p_k/p_k# approximates C to
> within 10^-30 for k ≈ 80, where p_k is the k'th prime, p_k# is the
> primordial, or the product of all primes up to p_k, and C is an irrational
> constant like pi, e, phi, ln 2, etc. for example, p_4 = 7, p_4# = 2x3x5x7 =
> 210, and p_k/p_k# = 1/30.
>
> This does not look right because p_k# grows much faster than p_k, so the
> ratio approaches 0 as k grows. Am I misunderstanding something?
>
> Any irrational number can be approximated to n digits of precision by a
> rational number a/b using a total of about n digits. For example, you can
> approximate pi to 3 digits as 22/7 or 6 digits as 355/113. Either
> representation takes about the same number of bits.
>
> Can you clarify?
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M273a6d1d5a6016e25ed0772d
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Tue, Dec 2, 2025, 10:28 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> John et al
>
> Apologies for my silence. Formalizing white papers.
>
> At least, there was a start:  https://zenodo.org/records/17716858
>

Help me understand this. The paper claims that p_k/p_k# approximates C to
within 10^-30 for k ≈ 80, where p_k is the k'th prime, p_k# is the
primordial, or the product of all primes up to p_k, and C is an irrational
constant like pi, e, phi, ln 2, etc. for example, p_4 = 7, p_4# = 2x3x5x7 =
210, and p_k/p_k# = 1/30.

This does not look right because p_k# grows much faster than p_k, so the
ratio approaches 0 as k grows. Am I misunderstanding something?

Any irrational number can be approximated to n digits of precision by a
rational number a/b using a total of about n digits. For example, you can
approximate pi to 3 digits as 22/7 or 6 digits as 355/113. Either
representation takes about the same number of bits.

Can you clarify?

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M23c29acfb440cb21c70f05f3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John et al

Apologies for my silence. Formalizing white papers.

At least, there was a start:  https://zenodo.org/records/17716858

It ramps up quickly from here onwards.



On Sun, 16 Nov 2025, 23:42 Matt Mahoney,  wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 2:34 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>>
>> One example:  After a particular experiment was verified by an
>> independent laboratory in Wales, I designed and simmed a powerful ZPE (zero
>> input energy) mobile generator. Weighed about 2 Kgs, built into a notebook,
>> environmentally and child friendly, enough to power a small home/office.
>> Biometric on/of, remote disable, AC/DC, etc. Completed logistical and
>> delivery planning for staged, 50k units (the most-economical model). Did a
>> soft survey, directly and indirectly. Made a few hard calls. Conclusion:
>> Scientists are unbelievers and investors have grown blase with all the BS
>> in the industries. I don't blame them either. Wherever one looks, the BS is
>> galloping like wild Bison. AI BS is choking up the marketing space. No
>> money talking, just BS walking. It's just become part of the global,
>> chaotic reality.
>>
>
> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mb06c4667abc198f084be8d73
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, November 21, 2025, at 8:04 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> John A few years ago, I read somewhere some nation was working on reversing 
> the vaxx effect. Imagine the science it'll take.

Oh yes many organizations are going to Mandela affect it from the public 
consciousness. Young people dropping dead from cancer and heart attacks all 
over the place with a 5+ sigma ACM life insurance event is due to climate 
change or something and damage like blood clots are disguised as Long COVID 
where it's really long vaxxed: https://substack.com/@nichulscher/p-179157936

You don't hear "Trust the Science" anymore with all the peer reviewed studies 
pouring out confirming everything that "conspiracy theorists" already knew, 
plus more.

And it won't stop. Where I take my quiet strolls in the park thinking about all 
this stuff now there is a 2 billion dollar jab juice factory going up right 
next to it. They’ll be new shots to "alter" damage from the old shots but yes 
there are readily available cheap compounds like nattokinase, nicotine, various 
"horse dewormers" like ivermectin where even in some states you can now get 
OTC. There is the FLCCC Alliance and new alternative practices offering 
treatments. Some states are now banning childhood vaccine requirements and some 
have declared the shot a bioweapon which it is. As well legal barriers to 
lawsuits are being brought down...

Still the shot is available and 5% of the people are getting it to this day 
though there is some success especially with RFK Jr. going after them firing 
hundreds of compromised individuals in various government health departments. 
What’s amazing is how the studies are presented in congress yet paid-off 
politicians (mostly democrat) parrot big pharma slogans still pushing it all 
denying what happened.

The whole experience really gave one perspective of the pervasive control 
systems that encapsulate much of the public. People are confirming that large 
segments of high-tech western medicine are a monopolistic and opportunistic 
non-stop money making sham run at the expense of human health and dignity. And 
guess what, integrating new AI and AGI into all that is going to somehow make 
it all better even though researchers still can't figure out who ultimately 
designed the COVID-19 virus and who created the injections.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mc6b1fbc8d325791223367ffa
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John A few years ago, I read somewhere some nation was working on reversing
the vaxx effect. Imagine the science it'll take.

If petsons on this group desired an equation for a consciousness mechanism,
I'll accept the challenge to go search for it. Q, what would you give me if
I brought you a falsifiable proof?

On Sat, 15 Nov 2025, 01:11 John Rose via AGI,  wrote:

> On Friday, November 14, 2025, at 1:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> There will be an AI King, and that king will orchestrate all lesser AI.
> Quantum computing and core operational constraints (energy, thermodynamics,
> capital, exotic materials, cloud and production infrastructure, etc.) have
> become key differentiators for this global race for king of AI.
>
>
> Ya and this is what it's going to be like for the unvaxxed:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/shorts/D-MPcFwE3n4
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Ma15185c0b6bd0e18be3d22f1
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Suppose you had a function K(x) that took an arbitrarily string x as input
and returned the length of the shortest program that outputs that string.
That number is called the Kolmogorov complexity.

Suppose the length of the source code for K is n bytes. I write the
following program:

while (K(x) < n+1000) ++x;
print(x);

where ++x interprets the string as a binary number and adds 1. The loop
exits with the first x with Kolmogorov complexity of at least n + 1000.

Except it was output by a program of length n + 36 bytes.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 4:37 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Thursday, November 20, 2025, at 3:52 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Are you claiming to have solved Kolmogorov complexity?
>
>
> There are some serious quantum breakthroughs on prime numbers lately...
> kinda makes you wonder...
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M0cd901e5e7e5ea944717f520
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Thursday, November 20, 2025, at 3:52 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Are you claiming to have solved Kolmogorov complexity?

There are some serious quantum breakthroughs on prime numbers lately... kinda 
makes you wonder...
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M3c39c237d3108724392c0538
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

The limit of lossy compression is 0 bits. But in useful algorithms, it
means discarding information that your eyes, ears, and brain cannot
distinguish and compressing the rest losslessly. You trade off compressed
size against the quality of the reconstructed data, which is usually an
image, video, or audio. The quality has to be evaluated subjectively
because what you are really testing is the quality of your model of human
perception. We now have AI with good models that can convert video to a
text description and back. This might compress to 10 bits per second if the
restored video is viewed a day later rather than side by side.

What exactly is your claim?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 4:04 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> lossy, not lossless. Yes, I'm working on a preprint submission now.
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 10:52 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> You can always post a preprint before you submit your paper to a journal.
>> You will get feedback to help you correct any errors and improve your
>> chances of acceptance.
>>
>> > In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible lossless
>> compression algorithm.
>>
>> Are you claiming to have solved Kolmogorov complexity?
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 3:04 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> I remember. Didn't know all the details of who did what where, but I
>>> remember you were big on lossless compression. You may find my paper
>>> interesting, when it gets published. If not accepted for publication, I'll
>>> place it here for interested parties. You'll have to wait for around 4-5
>>> months though. In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible
>>> lossless compression algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well
>>> hidden. Most of us were decades ahead of our time. We didn't realize it.
>>> Many peaked way too early. I'm too dumb to peak, so I just put my head down
>>> and push ahead.
>>>
>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M40fe3e5e5256c111cb0d40c9
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

lossy, not lossless. Yes, I'm working on a preprint submission now.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 10:52 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> You can always post a preprint before you submit your paper to a journal.
> You will get feedback to help you correct any errors and improve your
> chances of acceptance.
>
> > In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible lossless
> compression algorithm.
>
> Are you claiming to have solved Kolmogorov complexity?
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 3:04 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> I remember. Didn't know all the details of who did what where, but I
>> remember you were big on lossless compression. You may find my paper
>> interesting, when it gets published. If not accepted for publication, I'll
>> place it here for interested parties. You'll have to wait for around 4-5
>> months though. In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible
>> lossless compression algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well
>> hidden. Most of us were decades ahead of our time. We didn't realize it.
>> Many peaked way too early. I'm too dumb to peak, so I just put my head down
>> and push ahead.
>>
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Md056874f382dd3d1ee132073
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

You can always post a preprint before you submit your paper to a journal.
You will get feedback to help you correct any errors and improve your
chances of acceptance.

> In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible lossless
compression algorithm.

Are you claiming to have solved Kolmogorov complexity?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 3:04 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> I remember. Didn't know all the details of who did what where, but I
> remember you were big on lossless compression. You may find my paper
> interesting, when it gets published. If not accepted for publication, I'll
> place it here for interested parties. You'll have to wait for around 4-5
> months though. In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible
> lossless compression algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well
> hidden. Most of us were decades ahead of our time. We didn't realize it.
> Many peaked way too early. I'm too dumb to peak, so I just put my head down
> and push ahead.
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M3a84ac9e5efcd4110d02c04f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Apologies, not lossless (that would = death), but lossy (adaptive).

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 10:35 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Thursday, November 20, 2025, at 3:04 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible lossless
> compression algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well hidden.
>
>
> What? In the early 90's I thought I had the general compression algorithm.
> Put myself into a hospital during the pursuit. At the time I didn't know it
> was impossible :) But it was good experience.
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M9e15546a4ee22fb3cdf8b5ec
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Thursday, November 20, 2025, at 3:04 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible lossless compression 
> algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well hidden.

What? In the early 90's I thought I had the general compression algorithm. Put 
myself into a hospital during the pursuit. At the time I didn't know it was 
impossible :) But it was good experience.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M5407124e687293be94472e6f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

I remember. Didn't know all the details of who did what where, but I
remember you were big on lossless compression. You may find my paper
interesting, when it gets published. If not accepted for publication, I'll
place it here for interested parties. You'll have to wait for around 4-5
months though. In the paper, we crack the code to the shortest-possible
lossless compression algorithm. Finally. It was there all along, very-well
hidden. Most of us were decades ahead of our time. We didn't realize it.
Many peaked way too early. I'm too dumb to peak, so I just put my head down
and push ahead.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 9:49 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 1:37 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> Sure Matt. What investors, where? On AGI forum? I've watched you guys
>> struggling to get funding for your devs for years. Maybe you were trying to
>> scam and now your unscientific mind is projecting? It's possible. How
>> stupid do you think investors are?
>>
>
> Most of the people who were active on the AGI forum years ago, that have
> since left, were motivated by scientific curiosity, not profit. Ben
> Goertzel had the most ambitious project, Webmind, then Novamente, then
> OpenCog, now Hyperon, a hybrid neural and symbolic probabilistic logic
> approach under development since the late 1990s. The software seemed always
> under development and there was no knowledge base. Pei Wang developed NARS
> (non axiomatic reasoning system) as his dissertation, but again no
> knowledge base. Last I heard, he was doing vision research in China. Yan
> King Ying was pursuing a mathematical and logical approach but never got
> past the design phase. Peter Voss had a startup to develop AIGO, a
> competitor to Amazon Alexa with better language comprehension, using the
> forum to recruit developers before going into stealth mode.
>
> I had some ideas to develop AGI, but limited my research to language
> modeling using text prediction (measured by compression) after estimating
> that a full solution to automating the global economy (the obvious
> application) to be a decade of global GDP, or $1 quadrillion. The cost has
> 3 parts: software, hardware, and knowledge collection. Software is the
> easiest. The human genome with 3 billion base pairs compresses to the same
> size as 300 million lines of code at $100 per line, or $30 billion.
>
> The hardware needed to run 8 billion human brain sized neural networks
> with 10^15 parameters each at 10 Hz is 10^26 GPU operations per second,
> costing $1 per 10^17 operations or $30 quadrillion per year. Just the
> electricity would be 1000 TW, or 55 times global production today. I assume
> Moore's law will bring the cost down, eventually using nanotechnology to
> reduce energy consumption because we can't make transistors smaller than
> atoms. It should be under $1 quadrillion by 2045.
>
> After this, the most expensive part of AGI will be collecting 10^17 bits
> of human knowledge. Only 10^13 bits are available on the public internet,
> so the rest has to be collected from human brains at 5-10 bits per second
> by speech and writing at a cost of $5 per hour (the global average wage
> rate). The human brain has a long term memory capacity of 10^9 bits (based
> on Landauer's recall tests in the 1970s) and I  assume 99% overlap based on
> US Labor Dept estimates that the cost of replacing an employee is 1% of
> lifetime earnings. Wages are rising 2-3% per year, so I expect the cost in
> 2045 will be about $1 quadrillion and require that we live in a world of
> constant surveillance.
>
> All of this is detailed in my 2013 paper.
> http://mattmahoney.net/costofai.pdf
>
> So of course all of these projects failed. Software was the low hanging
> fruit. Language modeling is the first step and nobody was doing it because
> we didn't have the computing power or training data to do anything except
> old fashioned hand coded structured knowledge from the 1980s. All of the AI
> development is being done now by companies with trillion dollar market
> caps. It seems obvious now, but not so much a decade ago.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M16f3579c587f5a8d3505183c
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, 1:37 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Sure Matt. What investors, where? On AGI forum? I've watched you guys
> struggling to get funding for your devs for years. Maybe you were trying to
> scam and now your unscientific mind is projecting? It's possible. How
> stupid do you think investors are?
>

Most of the people who were active on the AGI forum years ago, that have
since left, were motivated by scientific curiosity, not profit. Ben
Goertzel had the most ambitious project, Webmind, then Novamente, then
OpenCog, now Hyperon, a hybrid neural and symbolic probabilistic logic
approach under development since the late 1990s. The software seemed always
under development and there was no knowledge base. Pei Wang developed NARS
(non axiomatic reasoning system) as his dissertation, but again no
knowledge base. Last I heard, he was doing vision research in China. Yan
King Ying was pursuing a mathematical and logical approach but never got
past the design phase. Peter Voss had a startup to develop AIGO, a
competitor to Amazon Alexa with better language comprehension, using the
forum to recruit developers before going into stealth mode.

I had some ideas to develop AGI, but limited my research to language
modeling using text prediction (measured by compression) after estimating
that a full solution to automating the global economy (the obvious
application) to be a decade of global GDP, or $1 quadrillion. The cost has
3 parts: software, hardware, and knowledge collection. Software is the
easiest. The human genome with 3 billion base pairs compresses to the same
size as 300 million lines of code at $100 per line, or $30 billion.

The hardware needed to run 8 billion human brain sized neural networks with
10^15 parameters each at 10 Hz is 10^26 GPU operations per second, costing
$1 per 10^17 operations or $30 quadrillion per year. Just the electricity
would be 1000 TW, or 55 times global production today. I assume Moore's law
will bring the cost down, eventually using nanotechnology to reduce energy
consumption because we can't make transistors smaller than atoms. It should
be under $1 quadrillion by 2045.

After this, the most expensive part of AGI will be collecting 10^17 bits of
human knowledge. Only 10^13 bits are available on the public internet, so
the rest has to be collected from human brains at 5-10 bits per second by
speech and writing at a cost of $5 per hour (the global average wage rate).
The human brain has a long term memory capacity of 10^9 bits (based on
Landauer's recall tests in the 1970s) and I  assume 99% overlap based on US
Labor Dept estimates that the cost of replacing an employee is 1% of
lifetime earnings. Wages are rising 2-3% per year, so I expect the cost in
2045 will be about $1 quadrillion and require that we live in a world of
constant surveillance.

All of this is detailed in my 2013 paper.
http://mattmahoney.net/costofai.pdf

So of course all of these projects failed. Software was the low hanging
fruit. Language modeling is the first step and nobody was doing it because
we didn't have the computing power or training data to do anything except
old fashioned hand coded structured knowledge from the 1980s. All of the AI
development is being done now by companies with trillion dollar market
caps. It seems obvious now, but not so much a decade ago.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Md206bb2d7717f2e88c5506a4
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Wednesday, November 19, 2025, at 7:17 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Zudilin in 2001 proved that at least one of zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) is irrational. 
> And then I got stuck. I am trying very hard to believe that your post is not 
> complete nonsense and you aren't just using big words to scam investors into 
> your magic energy generator.

Matt he’s generously sharing his ideas that took him years of effort to 
develop. What you don’t understand is that the whole financial system is a 
scam. The whole AI bubble is a scam. All built on unlimited debt creation. The 
markets are all managed by the Fed. Many of the AI startups offer mere hope 
with zero proof. The game is letting the investors make their inside deals 
where many know it's a sham from buddy bank loans and pumped up markets. Then 
engineers and scientists get to try and build projects with their skills and 
ambition. Most will fail but many morph into related pursuits and gain 
experience and knowledge in the process so the whole industry benefits. Do you 
think the 1969 moon landing was real? Where's the proof, seriously, go look for 
it.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mf92cbaa647ccc659647a54a6
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Sure Matt. What investors, where? On AGI forum? I've watched you guys
struggling to get funding for your devs for years. Maybe you were trying to
scam and now your unscientific mind is projecting? It's possible. How
stupid do you think investors are?

45 years, in fact, the search for z(5). It's a dead stop. Why is z(5)
critical? I'll risk a profound prediction. The one who unlucks z(5),
unlocks the world. The Riemann Hypothesis becomes a universal constant, the
Fine Structure Constant becomes derivable. Deep mysteries, become fact.

I need to thank you for making me realize I should submit a paper for peer
review. It's silly to go around bandying claims without scientific support.
I'll submit a paper. Not for zeta though, but for having derived the
mathematics for optimal efficiency. Previously predicted, not yet derived
from first principles.

I noted you chose the benefit of non truth, leveling veiled accusation
instead. Decide as you will.  The world doesn't rotate around your opinion.
Z(x) def doesn't care for our opinions.

I hope someone else here took better notice though. That's my objective. I
have my reasons. I'm sharing a message, not asking anyone here for
anything. Where's the evidence of an attempted scam?

On Thu, 20 Nov 2025, 02:17 Matt Mahoney,  wrote:

> Zudilin in 2001 proved that at least one of zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) is
> irrational. And then I got stuck. I am trying very hard to believe that
> your post is not complete nonsense and you aren't just using big words to
> scam investors into your magic energy generator.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025, 2:48 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> Matt, I said what I said. The theory checks out.
>>
>> Let the discerning discern: k=-1, 0, 1 recursive. compounds giving way to
>> primes. a proposal for zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) made. Those who care about truth,
>> would care. Those who don't, won't. It's that simple. Choicepoint every 25
>> ms. The conduit doesn't own, it relays.
>>
>> Only humans are welded to their own self interests and self gratification
>> at the expense of other humans, nature, Earth, the solar system, all the
>> way to Sag A*... and back again. With our brainheartgut frequency, we
>> rationalize and justify all, many polluting as they go. Survival justifies
>> everything, doesn't it? We'll see.
>>
>> I'm not holding my breath for novel tech to reach humankind in my
>> lifetime. Someone, somewhere is sure to try and grab and destroy it.  My
>> purpose is to complete and store, as my contribution to the global
>> workspace in the collective memory, as an alternative cosmic signal. I've
>> had a meaningful life.
>>
>> Thanks for the chat. I'll leave off here.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:30 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>>
 No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary.
 It's an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There
 are no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory.
 If you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content,
 not try and show me up.

>>>
>>> In another post you say you can manufacture 50K units for $6M. So I
>>> assume you have the design nailed down.
>>>
>>> You say that it requires exotic materials only made in 3 countries. What
>>> materials? A wormhole has negative spacetime curvature, which requires
>>> negative mass, which accelerates in the opposite direction of an applied
>>> force. If you drop it, it would fall down following the same spacetime
>>> geodesic as ordinary matter in response to the upward force of gravity. But
>>> when it hit the ground, the upward force would cause it to accelerate
>>> downward, exponentially increasing the force.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what would happen next because it depends on what the
>>> negative mass is made of. It wouldn't be protons, neutrons, or electrons
>>> like ordinary matter, or any other known particles because they all have
>>> positive mass. One possibility is that the negative mass converts to
>>> negative energy and absorbs an equal amount of positive mass with no energy
>>> release.
>>>
>>> Another is that it just falls through the earth. When you push on an
>>> object, the force is electrostatic repulsion between electrons in the two
>>> surfaces constrained by the Pauli exclusion principle which prohibits two
>>> fermions (particles with half integer spins) from having the same quantum
>>> states. That wouldn't apply between positive and negative mass particles.
>>>
>>> So if you would, please explain your invention in scientific terms like
>>> you would in your patent application.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery opti

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Zudilin in 2001 proved that at least one of zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) is
irrational. And then I got stuck. I am trying very hard to believe that
your post is not complete nonsense and you aren't just using big words to
scam investors into your magic energy generator.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Wed, Nov 19, 2025, 2:48 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Matt, I said what I said. The theory checks out.
>
> Let the discerning discern: k=-1, 0, 1 recursive. compounds giving way to
> primes. a proposal for zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) made. Those who care about truth,
> would care. Those who don't, won't. It's that simple. Choicepoint every 25
> ms. The conduit doesn't own, it relays.
>
> Only humans are welded to their own self interests and self gratification
> at the expense of other humans, nature, Earth, the solar system, all the
> way to Sag A*... and back again. With our brainheartgut frequency, we
> rationalize and justify all, many polluting as they go. Survival justifies
> everything, doesn't it? We'll see.
>
> I'm not holding my breath for novel tech to reach humankind in my
> lifetime. Someone, somewhere is sure to try and grab and destroy it.  My
> purpose is to complete and store, as my contribution to the global
> workspace in the collective memory, as an alternative cosmic signal. I've
> had a meaningful life.
>
> Thanks for the chat. I'll leave off here.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:30 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary.
>>> It's an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There
>>> are no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory.
>>> If you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content,
>>> not try and show me up.
>>>
>>
>> In another post you say you can manufacture 50K units for $6M. So I
>> assume you have the design nailed down.
>>
>> You say that it requires exotic materials only made in 3 countries. What
>> materials? A wormhole has negative spacetime curvature, which requires
>> negative mass, which accelerates in the opposite direction of an applied
>> force. If you drop it, it would fall down following the same spacetime
>> geodesic as ordinary matter in response to the upward force of gravity. But
>> when it hit the ground, the upward force would cause it to accelerate
>> downward, exponentially increasing the force.
>>
>> I'm not sure what would happen next because it depends on what the
>> negative mass is made of. It wouldn't be protons, neutrons, or electrons
>> like ordinary matter, or any other known particles because they all have
>> positive mass. One possibility is that the negative mass converts to
>> negative energy and absorbs an equal amount of positive mass with no energy
>> release.
>>
>> Another is that it just falls through the earth. When you push on an
>> object, the force is electrostatic repulsion between electrons in the two
>> surfaces constrained by the Pauli exclusion principle which prohibits two
>> fermions (particles with half integer spins) from having the same quantum
>> states. That wouldn't apply between positive and negative mass particles.
>>
>> So if you would, please explain your invention in scientific terms like
>> you would in your patent application.
>>
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M49127a7cffa4aa72c89115ab
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Matt, I said what I said. The theory checks out.

Let the discerning discern: k=-1, 0, 1 recursive. compounds giving way to
primes. a proposal for zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) made. Those who care about truth,
would care. Those who don't, won't. It's that simple. Choicepoint every 25
ms. The conduit doesn't own, it relays.

Only humans are welded to their own self interests and self gratification
at the expense of other humans, nature, Earth, the solar system, all the
way to Sag A*... and back again. With our brainheartgut frequency, we
rationalize and justify all, many polluting as they go. Survival justifies
everything, doesn't it? We'll see.

I'm not holding my breath for novel tech to reach humankind in my lifetime.
Someone, somewhere is sure to try and grab and destroy it.  My purpose is
to complete and store, as my contribution to the global workspace in the
collective memory, as an alternative cosmic signal. I've had a meaningful
life.

Thanks for the chat. I'll leave off here.


On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:30 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary.
>> It's an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There
>> are no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory.
>> If you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content,
>> not try and show me up.
>>
>
> In another post you say you can manufacture 50K units for $6M. So I assume
> you have the design nailed down.
>
> You say that it requires exotic materials only made in 3 countries. What
> materials? A wormhole has negative spacetime curvature, which requires
> negative mass, which accelerates in the opposite direction of an applied
> force. If you drop it, it would fall down following the same spacetime
> geodesic as ordinary matter in response to the upward force of gravity. But
> when it hit the ground, the upward force would cause it to accelerate
> downward, exponentially increasing the force.
>
> I'm not sure what would happen next because it depends on what the
> negative mass is made of. It wouldn't be protons, neutrons, or electrons
> like ordinary matter, or any other known particles because they all have
> positive mass. One possibility is that the negative mass converts to
> negative energy and absorbs an equal amount of positive mass with no energy
> release.
>
> Another is that it just falls through the earth. When you push on an
> object, the force is electrostatic repulsion between electrons in the two
> surfaces constrained by the Pauli exclusion principle which prohibits two
> fermions (particles with half integer spins) from having the same quantum
> states. That wouldn't apply between positive and negative mass particles.
>
> So if you would, please explain your invention in scientific terms like
> you would in your patent application.
>
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M45b599b10bf1cf7bf49c7e2d
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary.
> It's an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There
> are no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory.
> If you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content,
> not try and show me up.
>

In another post you say you can manufacture 50K units for $6M. So I assume
you have the design nailed down.

You say that it requires exotic materials only made in 3 countries. What
materials? A wormhole has negative spacetime curvature, which requires
negative mass, which accelerates in the opposite direction of an applied
force. If you drop it, it would fall down following the same spacetime
geodesic as ordinary matter in response to the upward force of gravity. But
when it hit the ground, the upward force would cause it to accelerate
downward, exponentially increasing the force.

I'm not sure what would happen next because it depends on what the negative
mass is made of. It wouldn't be protons, neutrons, or electrons like
ordinary matter, or any other known particles because they all have
positive mass. One possibility is that the negative mass converts to
negative energy and absorbs an equal amount of positive mass with no energy
release.

Another is that it just falls through the earth. When you push on an
object, the force is electrostatic repulsion between electrons in the two
surfaces constrained by the Pauli exclusion principle which prohibits two
fermions (particles with half integer spins) from having the same quantum
states. That wouldn't apply between positive and negative mass particles.

So if you would, please explain your invention in scientific terms like you
would in your patent application.


-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M597c028b2211cea3014964c7
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John

That's an interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing it. I'll wager there
are a number of quantum-computing experts on this forum. My research has to
do with a theory for quantum information processing and storage (memory).
I'm still learning about quantum computing though.


I've already noticed a significant disparity between what is theoretically
possible in industry and what is emerging at an incremental pace. Quantum's
great promise is jumping the curve - from bottom of escalator to the top in
one step, not crawling up one upgrade at a time. Similar opportunity for
AI.  A perfect convergence.

According to my calculations, the ideal cost-effective pilot phase for a
domestic class zpe-generator would involve manufacturing 50,000 units,
Production time = 15 months and require ~$6m. Why 50,000 units? The zpe
design uses an exotic material, which is crrently only manufactured in 3
countries. The price per ounce is like, exorbitant. Bulk purchases and
smart manufactuing could reduce the unit cost down to around $600, price
point around $999. However, infrastructure costs. Lead times, logistics, a
distribution network, and cloud monitoring and technical support sevices on
the ground. No training required, plug 'n play.

Government approval is a key factor as well. Select supply lines that are
already well established wiht government. That might mean sharing profit
and have a negative effect on the real price point. The manufacting and
service delivery base should best be centralized for overall effect. In the
short-to-medium term, one cannot escape having an international manufacting
base.

This is quantum tech, with no quantum computing required.

There already are a number of global patents though. However, none of those
are close enough to this tech to warrant it not qualifying as pior art and
novel specification. For my purposes, the strategy is to enter into a
partnership with a reputable Patent Attorney firm. I think i alreayd have
40 novel products in the pipeline, many fo them delighfully gasgety. E.g.,
turning water into wine of your choice at a party (huge fun factor). An
intelligent glove that medically analyses skin damage on a hand and auto
transplants good skin. Interesting gadgets for the health industy. And so
on.

Then, the massively strategic projects, i.e., mathematical machine
consciousness and human-like level reasoning for AI.

All talk though. No reality to show for it. Maybe I should write a book
with futuristic product ideas and sell that. Should raise enough for at
least a starter project.





On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 4:11 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:34 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> One example:  After a particular experiment was verified by an independent
> laboratory in Wales, I designed and simmed a powerful ZPE (zero input
> energy) mobile generator. Weighed about 2 Kgs, built into a notebook,
> environmentally and child friendly, enough to power a small home/office.
> Biometric on/of, remote disable, AC/DC, etc. Completed logistical and
> delivery planning for staged, 50k units (the most-economical model). Did a
> soft survey, directly and indirectly. Made a few hard calls. Conclusion:
> Scientists are unbelievers and investors have grown blase with all the BS
> in the industries. I don't blame them either. Wherever one looks, the BS is
> galloping like wild Bison. AI BS is choking up the marketing space. No
> money talking, just BS walking. It's just become part of the global,
> chaotic reality.
>
>
> In the states here quantum is going big. There are hubs and ecosystems
> being built in quite a few cities. It’s almost like pick one and get setup.
> Money is being thrown at it as along as you can play their game a little.
> Europe is behind but they'll be a push for it to catch up.
>
> From what I gather, besides the K shaped economy, there are at least two
> tech worlds. “Surface Dwellers” LOL and dark projects. Dark projects are
> way more advanced and operate with different rules. The surface economy
> engine control is still heavily petroleum and natural gas influenced but
> nuclear energy has been given options now for data-centers and military so
> reactors are being built. But ZPE projects to get funding especially if you
> have a PoC I think would be very attractive. And there is a lot of public
> chatter on it so it's difficult for them to suppress. And then there's all
> the possibilities related to the ZPE research...
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:34 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> One example:  After a particular experiment was verified by an independent 
> laboratory in Wales, I designed and simmed a powerful ZPE (zero input energy) 
> mobile generator. Weighed about 2 Kgs, built into a notebook, environmentally 
> and child friendly, enough to power a small home/office. Biometric on/of, 
> remote disable, AC/DC, etc. Completed logistical and delivery planning for 
> staged, 50k units (the most-economical model). Did a soft survey, directly 
> and indirectly. Made a few hard calls. Conclusion: Scientists are unbelievers 
> and investors have grown blase with all the BS in the industries. I don't 
> blame them either. Wherever one looks, the BS is galloping like wild Bison. 
> AI BS is choking up the marketing space. No money talking, just BS walking. 
> It's just become part of the global, chaotic reality.

In the states here quantum is going big. There are hubs and ecosystems being 
built in quite a few cities. It’s almost like pick one and get setup. Money is 
being thrown at it as along as you can play their game a little. Europe is 
behind but they'll be a push for it to catch up.

>From what I gather, besides the K shaped economy, there are at least two tech 
>worlds. “Surface Dwellers” LOL and dark projects. Dark projects are way more 
>advanced and operate with different rules. The surface economy engine control 
>is still heavily petroleum and natural gas influenced but nuclear energy has 
>been given options now for data-centers and military so reactors are being 
>built. But ZPE projects to get funding especially if you have a PoC I think 
>would be very attractive. And there is a lot of public chatter on it so it's 
>difficult for them to suppress. And then there's all the possibilities related 
>to the ZPE research...

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M31556de83da08a6d7dae0313
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary. It's
an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There are
no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory. If
you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content, not
try and show me up.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 9:53 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Could you explain the physics of your ZPE energy generator in terms that a
> person who knows a little physics can understand. There is no evidence that
> wormholes exist, nor does negative mass-energy, which would be required for
> their existence. Can you explain how you can change the topology of
> spacetime without introducing discontinuities? Einstein derived general
> relativity on the assumption that spacetime is locally continuous.
>
> Please no BS. Point to physics papers that explain how this works.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 1:57 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> Matt
>>
>> With respect, your theoretical assumptions and calculations are invalid.
>> The mass of any end device has nothing to do with ZPE-mode mechanics.
>>
>> Second, you don't generate a black hole. It generates naturally via
>> highly-specific zpe-mode mechanics.ZPE-mode mechanics is posited as a
>> natural, dimensional unifier. It also contributrs to the emergence of
>> biological consciousness. The human brain simulates it naturally. This is
>> supported by Orch-OR theory.
>>
>> Hawking radiation is specific to black holes. The collapse of the
>> zpe-mode wavefunction is not Hawking radiation. The horizon of the black
>> hole relates directly to the Einstein-Rosen Bridge, and wormholes.
>>
>> Nextgen quantum processors are probably going to incorporate wormhole
>> tech. ZPE-mode research is the hottest thing out. Still novel, but
>> experimental for years.
>>
>> A fascinating field. My novel theory employs a ZPE-mode foundation.
>> That's why a key prediction was tested for me. As a new cosmological
>> constsnt, it works 100%.
>>
>> No big deal. It's just one part of the ZPE-mode mechanism. There are
>> numerous parts and 4 distinct, entropic steps.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025, 07:15 Matt Mahoney,  wrote:
>>
>>> You extract zero point energy as Hawking radiation. Expressed in order
>>> of magnitude Planck units, a black hole with mass m and Schwartzchid radius
>>> m converts mass to radiation at temperature 1/m with power 1/m^2 until it
>>> evaporates after time m^3. Your 2 Kg generator is about 10^8 Planck masses,
>>> and would emit 10^-16 Planck power units or 10^34 W. This is about the
>>> power output of all the stars in this galaxy. It will evaporate after 10^24
>>> Planck times, or 10^-18 seconds, after releasing 10^17 J or 25 megatons. I
>>> understand why investors were skittish.
>>>
>>> To actually build a reasonable sized power plant like 10 GW or 10^-40
>>> Planck units, you need a black hole the size of a proton and a mass of
>>> 10^20 Planck masses or 10^8 tons. The black hole would emit hard gamma rays
>>> as powerful as a nuclear reactor core. It would have to be suspended in a
>>> vacuum because 50% of any matter that falls into it will be converted to
>>> energy. There is a risk of it swallowing the Earth, releasing 10^42 J,
>>> which would destroy the Sun and other planets.
>>>
>>> Besides these technical issues, how would you even make a black hole?
>>>
>>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 10:27 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>>
 Matt

 Please refer to Writer of the Mind's comment. The brief answer is: No,
 it's not perpetual motion. There are signficant technical challenges facing
 ZPE research, for example power output and amperes. However, I suspect
 those challenges have been addressed by dark projects. E.g, a friend passed
 on a recent mobile pic by vacationers in a remote area. Great sky viewing
 out there. Pic clearly shows what the observers thought was a "portal
 opening". My opinion was that it was a secret experiment in ZPE, and a
 Schwartzchild black hole was being formed in the Earth's atmosphere. There
 were whispy "chaotic-looking clouds" around it, which should be resident,
 quantum foam. I asked how long it was visible for, the friend relayed, ~5
 min. That's pretty long for wormholes. In theory, they must be traversed
 within miliseconds. It must've been a most advanced experiment. Having said
 that, it may also have been the light playing tricks on their eyes. We
 don't know with certainty.

 On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds <
 jennifer.hane@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>
>
> A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
> energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
> (theoretically)

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

It could be that my brain is in a bottle connected to a computer and
everything I experience through my senses is artificially generated by an
algorithm. It could be that my memories are also artificially generated as
I recall them. It could be I have no memories except the one I am currently
recalling and that I did not exist one second ago. It could be that
whatever is generating my inputs and memories exists in a world I cannot
even imagine because the algorithm won't let me. In my model of reality, my
brain is a collection of atoms that exist within a finite volume of space
over a period of time. There is no reason to believe that space, time, and
matter exist in the real universe. It could just be a mathematical
description.

There is no point in dwelling on a reality where I cannot trust my senses
or memories. We already know both are unreliable. We already have a model
of quantum mechanics that gives us the illusion of particles and of
relativity that gives us the illusions of space and time.

It is good enough to believe that the gods make the sun rise and set, until
you want to design a spacecraft. It is good enough to believe that people
have type 2 (subjective) conscious experience, until you want to design AI.
It is good enough to believe that other people exist, until you want to
understand the nature of reality.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 8:45 PM James Bowery  wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 6:55 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> I believe I am type 1 conscious but not type 2 conscious. Is that what
>> you are asking?
>>
>
> Although not to the point, just fFor reference:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
>> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
>> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
>>
>
> I'm not asking what you believe except in the counterfactual.  I'm asking
> what you would counterfactually believe in the event that what you think of
> as "input" occurred in what you now believe to be dreams.
>
> That's what I meant by multiple OBEs with "intersubjective" similarity to
> your waking state to some degree.  For example, you and others can go for a
> jog, return and later remember you had gone for a jog together and share
> specific phenomena you experienced during "that" jog.  In other words, I'm
> not even asking that you believe your own experiences without external
> waking validation -- although not all experiences need be socially mediated
> to attain ontological commitment by the reasonable man.
>
>
>
>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 9:04 AM James Bowery  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure you groked the condition I placed on your counterfactual
>>> OBEs:
>>>
>>> "that had similar intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you
>>> rely"
>>>
>>> By "similar" I don't mean "equal".  I mean "similar" as in "similar
>>> triangles".
>>>
>>> While I agree that quantity becomes quality in such judgements, the
>>> point is that we're on a continuum that, ultimately, leads us back to
>>> ourselves, which is why I asked:
>>>
>>> Are you "conscious"?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:45 PM Matt Mahoney 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I never had an out of body experience. I think they can be explained as
 vivid dreams. I already experience consciousness, which is in strong
 conflict with my belief that it is an illusion. I know we can experience
 things that aren't real.

 We construct mental models of the world to help us predict sensory
 input that is important for survival and reproduction. For a long time we
 thought the gods made the sun rise and set, and that was good enough to
 predict the sun will rise tomorrow.

 But a proper model of the world would include the thing that includes
 the model, which is impossible by Wolpert's law. Reality can never be what
 we think it is, no matter how smart we are.

 Quantum mechanics seems strange because it describes a deterministic
 wave equation for observers seeing random particles. Relativity seems
 strange because it describes observers sensing space and time in a reality
 where they don't exist. Both theories are symmetric with respect to time,
 but describe asymmetric observers, which are any things that make
 measurements, which are irreversible operations because they erase the
 older stored values.

 So it should not be hard to understand why we have the illusion of type
 2 consciousness. We can even explain it using classical physics, in a world
 made of particles that exist in time and space.

 -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

 On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 12:24 PM James Bowery  wrote:

> Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bow

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[James Bowery]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 6:55 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> I believe I am type 1 conscious but not type 2 conscious. Is that what you
> are asking?
>

Although not to the point, just fFor reference:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
>

I'm not asking what you believe except in the counterfactual.  I'm asking
what you would counterfactually believe in the event that what you think of
as "input" occurred in what you now believe to be dreams.

That's what I meant by multiple OBEs with "intersubjective" similarity to
your waking state to some degree.  For example, you and others can go for a
jog, return and later remember you had gone for a jog together and share
specific phenomena you experienced during "that" jog.  In other words, I'm
not even asking that you believe your own experiences without external
waking validation -- although not all experiences need be socially mediated
to attain ontological commitment by the reasonable man.




> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 9:04 AM James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure you groked the condition I placed on your counterfactual
>> OBEs:
>>
>> "that had similar intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you
>> rely"
>>
>> By "similar" I don't mean "equal".  I mean "similar" as in "similar
>> triangles".
>>
>> While I agree that quantity becomes quality in such judgements, the point
>> is that we're on a continuum that, ultimately, leads us back to ourselves,
>> which is why I asked:
>>
>> Are you "conscious"?
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:45 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I never had an out of body experience. I think they can be explained as
>>> vivid dreams. I already experience consciousness, which is in strong
>>> conflict with my belief that it is an illusion. I know we can experience
>>> things that aren't real.
>>>
>>> We construct mental models of the world to help us predict sensory input
>>> that is important for survival and reproduction. For a long time we thought
>>> the gods made the sun rise and set, and that was good enough to predict the
>>> sun will rise tomorrow.
>>>
>>> But a proper model of the world would include the thing that includes
>>> the model, which is impossible by Wolpert's law. Reality can never be what
>>> we think it is, no matter how smart we are.
>>>
>>> Quantum mechanics seems strange because it describes a deterministic
>>> wave equation for observers seeing random particles. Relativity seems
>>> strange because it describes observers sensing space and time in a reality
>>> where they don't exist. Both theories are symmetric with respect to time,
>>> but describe asymmetric observers, which are any things that make
>>> measurements, which are irreversible operations because they erase the
>>> older stored values.
>>>
>>> So it should not be hard to understand why we have the illusion of type
>>> 2 consciousness. We can even explain it using classical physics, in a world
>>> made of particles that exist in time and space.
>>>
>>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 12:24 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>>
 Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.

 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bowery

 I wonder, though, what it would do to your world-view to experience
 something along the lines of out of body experiences that had similar
 intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you rely for #1.

 On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
 wrote:

> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
>
 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.
>
> By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
> vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could 
> measure
> consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.
>
> By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
> definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
> think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
> positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.
>
> By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious
> than pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken 
> is
> a worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.
>
> We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but
> this does not distinguish between positive and negative re

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

About 60% of Americans believe in ghosts and 20% claim to have seen them. I
personally know people who have claimed to see them and I believe they are
being honest. About 70% of Americans and 57% worldwide believe in life
after death. By comparison, only 60-65% of Americans believe in evolution.

I believe in evolution because it explains why we are willing to believe
without evidence in an immortal soul that survives death.

I believe I am type 1 conscious but not type 2 conscious. Is that what you
are asking?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 9:04 AM James Bowery  wrote:

> I'm not sure you groked the condition I placed on your counterfactual OBEs:
>
> "that had similar intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you
> rely"
>
> By "similar" I don't mean "equal".  I mean "similar" as in "similar
> triangles".
>
> While I agree that quantity becomes quality in such judgements, the point
> is that we're on a continuum that, ultimately, leads us back to ourselves,
> which is why I asked:
>
> Are you "conscious"?
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:45 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> I never had an out of body experience. I think they can be explained as
>> vivid dreams. I already experience consciousness, which is in strong
>> conflict with my belief that it is an illusion. I know we can experience
>> things that aren't real.
>>
>> We construct mental models of the world to help us predict sensory input
>> that is important for survival and reproduction. For a long time we thought
>> the gods made the sun rise and set, and that was good enough to predict the
>> sun will rise tomorrow.
>>
>> But a proper model of the world would include the thing that includes the
>> model, which is impossible by Wolpert's law. Reality can never be what we
>> think it is, no matter how smart we are.
>>
>> Quantum mechanics seems strange because it describes a deterministic wave
>> equation for observers seeing random particles. Relativity seems strange
>> because it describes observers sensing space and time in a reality where
>> they don't exist. Both theories are symmetric with respect to time, but
>> describe asymmetric observers, which are any things that make measurements,
>> which are irreversible operations because they erase the older stored
>> values.
>>
>> So it should not be hard to understand why we have the illusion of type 2
>> consciousness. We can even explain it using classical physics, in a world
>> made of particles that exist in time and space.
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 12:24 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>
>>> Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.
>>>
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bowery
>>>
>>> I wonder, though, what it would do to your world-view to experience
>>> something along the lines of out of body experiences that had similar
>>> intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you rely for #1.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
 input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.

 By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
 vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could measure
 consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.

 By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
 definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
 think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
 positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.

 By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious
 than pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken is
 a worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.

 We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but
 this does not distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement. The
 reason is that pain does not cause suffering, just a change in behavior.
 Suffering happens later because the negative reinforcement signal
 reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. You interpret
 those memories as suffering because you have the illusion of free will, a
 false belief that you could have ignored the pain.

 My simple reinforcement learner, autobliss, does not suffer because it
 does not have the illusion of free will. We can test for this because the
 illusion comes from internal positive reinforcement of making arbitrary
 choices that leads to defending that choice. We know that monkeys have this
 illusion because when w

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Could you explain the physics of your ZPE energy generator in terms that a
person who knows a little physics can understand. There is no evidence that
wormholes exist, nor does negative mass-energy, which would be required for
their existence. Can you explain how you can change the topology of
spacetime without introducing discontinuities? Einstein derived general
relativity on the assumption that spacetime is locally continuous.

Please no BS. Point to physics papers that explain how this works.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 1:57 AM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Matt
>
> With respect, your theoretical assumptions and calculations are invalid.
> The mass of any end device has nothing to do with ZPE-mode mechanics.
>
> Second, you don't generate a black hole. It generates naturally via
> highly-specific zpe-mode mechanics.ZPE-mode mechanics is posited as a
> natural, dimensional unifier. It also contributrs to the emergence of
> biological consciousness. The human brain simulates it naturally. This is
> supported by Orch-OR theory.
>
> Hawking radiation is specific to black holes. The collapse of the zpe-mode
> wavefunction is not Hawking radiation. The horizon of the black hole
> relates directly to the Einstein-Rosen Bridge, and wormholes.
>
> Nextgen quantum processors are probably going to incorporate wormhole
> tech. ZPE-mode research is the hottest thing out. Still novel, but
> experimental for years.
>
> A fascinating field. My novel theory employs a ZPE-mode foundation. That's
> why a key prediction was tested for me. As a new cosmological constsnt, it
> works 100%.
>
> No big deal. It's just one part of the ZPE-mode mechanism. There are
> numerous parts and 4 distinct, entropic steps.
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025, 07:15 Matt Mahoney,  wrote:
>
>> You extract zero point energy as Hawking radiation. Expressed in order of
>> magnitude Planck units, a black hole with mass m and Schwartzchid radius m
>> converts mass to radiation at temperature 1/m with power 1/m^2 until it
>> evaporates after time m^3. Your 2 Kg generator is about 10^8 Planck masses,
>> and would emit 10^-16 Planck power units or 10^34 W. This is about the
>> power output of all the stars in this galaxy. It will evaporate after 10^24
>> Planck times, or 10^-18 seconds, after releasing 10^17 J or 25 megatons. I
>> understand why investors were skittish.
>>
>> To actually build a reasonable sized power plant like 10 GW or 10^-40
>> Planck units, you need a black hole the size of a proton and a mass of
>> 10^20 Planck masses or 10^8 tons. The black hole would emit hard gamma rays
>> as powerful as a nuclear reactor core. It would have to be suspended in a
>> vacuum because 50% of any matter that falls into it will be converted to
>> energy. There is a risk of it swallowing the Earth, releasing 10^42 J,
>> which would destroy the Sun and other planets.
>>
>> Besides these technical issues, how would you even make a black hole?
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 10:27 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> Please refer to Writer of the Mind's comment. The brief answer is: No,
>>> it's not perpetual motion. There are signficant technical challenges facing
>>> ZPE research, for example power output and amperes. However, I suspect
>>> those challenges have been addressed by dark projects. E.g, a friend passed
>>> on a recent mobile pic by vacationers in a remote area. Great sky viewing
>>> out there. Pic clearly shows what the observers thought was a "portal
>>> opening". My opinion was that it was a secret experiment in ZPE, and a
>>> Schwartzchild black hole was being formed in the Earth's atmosphere. There
>>> were whispy "chaotic-looking clouds" around it, which should be resident,
>>> quantum foam. I asked how long it was visible for, the friend relayed, ~5
>>> min. That's pretty long for wormholes. In theory, they must be traversed
>>> within miliseconds. It must've been a most advanced experiment. Having said
>>> that, it may also have been the light playing tricks on their eyes. We
>>> don't know with certainty.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds <
>>> jennifer.hane@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:

 Are you talking about a perpetual motion?


 A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
 energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
 (theoretically) extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it
 usable. So it does not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to
 convert/use energy losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not
 one the user has to provide.

 A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's
 more than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ...
 especially since you can sort of directly convert electricity int

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[James Bowery]

I'm not sure you groked the condition I placed on your counterfactual OBEs:

"that had similar intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you
rely"

By "similar" I don't mean "equal".  I mean "similar" as in "similar
triangles".

While I agree that quantity becomes quality in such judgements, the point
is that we're on a continuum that, ultimately, leads us back to ourselves,
which is why I asked:

Are you "conscious"?

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:45 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> I never had an out of body experience. I think they can be explained as
> vivid dreams. I already experience consciousness, which is in strong
> conflict with my belief that it is an illusion. I know we can experience
> things that aren't real.
>
> We construct mental models of the world to help us predict sensory input
> that is important for survival and reproduction. For a long time we thought
> the gods made the sun rise and set, and that was good enough to predict the
> sun will rise tomorrow.
>
> But a proper model of the world would include the thing that includes the
> model, which is impossible by Wolpert's law. Reality can never be what we
> think it is, no matter how smart we are.
>
> Quantum mechanics seems strange because it describes a deterministic wave
> equation for observers seeing random particles. Relativity seems strange
> because it describes observers sensing space and time in a reality where
> they don't exist. Both theories are symmetric with respect to time, but
> describe asymmetric observers, which are any things that make measurements,
> which are irreversible operations because they erase the older stored
> values.
>
> So it should not be hard to understand why we have the illusion of type 2
> consciousness. We can even explain it using classical physics, in a world
> made of particles that exist in time and space.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 12:24 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bowery
>>
>> I wonder, though, what it would do to your world-view to experience
>> something along the lines of out of body experiences that had similar
>> intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you rely for #1.
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
>>> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
>>> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
>>> 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
>>> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.
>>>
>>> By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
>>> vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could measure
>>> consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.
>>>
>>> By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
>>> definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
>>> think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
>>> positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.
>>>
>>> By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious than
>>> pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken is a
>>> worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.
>>>
>>> We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but
>>> this does not distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement. The
>>> reason is that pain does not cause suffering, just a change in behavior.
>>> Suffering happens later because the negative reinforcement signal
>>> reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. You interpret
>>> those memories as suffering because you have the illusion of free will, a
>>> false belief that you could have ignored the pain.
>>>
>>> My simple reinforcement learner, autobliss, does not suffer because it
>>> does not have the illusion of free will. We can test for this because the
>>> illusion comes from internal positive reinforcement of making arbitrary
>>> choices that leads to defending that choice. We know that monkeys have this
>>> illusion because when we give them a choice of 2 treats A or B, and they
>>> choose A, then they will prefer any other C over B.
>>>
>>> Autobliss does have other two prerequisites of suffering: it acts to
>>> reduce the negative reinforcement and it says "ouch". Some people believe
>>> lobsters suffer because they avoid paths in a maze that lead to electric
>>> shock.
>>>
>>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, 3:38 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>>


 On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
 wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> Are *you* "conscious"?
>>
>
> It depends on what you mean by "conscious".
>

 I 

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Matt

With respect, your theoretical assumptions and calculations are invalid.
The mass of any end device has nothing to do with ZPE-mode mechanics.

Second, you don't generate a black hole. It generates naturally via
highly-specific zpe-mode mechanics.ZPE-mode mechanics is posited as a
natural, dimensional unifier. It also contributrs to the emergence of
biological consciousness. The human brain simulates it naturally. This is
supported by Orch-OR theory.

Hawking radiation is specific to black holes. The collapse of the zpe-mode
wavefunction is not Hawking radiation. The horizon of the black hole
relates directly to the Einstein-Rosen Bridge, and wormholes.

Nextgen quantum processors are probably going to incorporate wormhole tech.
ZPE-mode research is the hottest thing out. Still novel, but experimental
for years.

A fascinating field. My novel theory employs a ZPE-mode foundation. That's
why a key prediction was tested for me. As a new cosmological constsnt, it
works 100%.

No big deal. It's just one part of the ZPE-mode mechanism. There are
numerous parts and 4 distinct, entropic steps.


On Mon, 17 Nov 2025, 07:15 Matt Mahoney,  wrote:

> You extract zero point energy as Hawking radiation. Expressed in order of
> magnitude Planck units, a black hole with mass m and Schwartzchid radius m
> converts mass to radiation at temperature 1/m with power 1/m^2 until it
> evaporates after time m^3. Your 2 Kg generator is about 10^8 Planck masses,
> and would emit 10^-16 Planck power units or 10^34 W. This is about the
> power output of all the stars in this galaxy. It will evaporate after 10^24
> Planck times, or 10^-18 seconds, after releasing 10^17 J or 25 megatons. I
> understand why investors were skittish.
>
> To actually build a reasonable sized power plant like 10 GW or 10^-40
> Planck units, you need a black hole the size of a proton and a mass of
> 10^20 Planck masses or 10^8 tons. The black hole would emit hard gamma rays
> as powerful as a nuclear reactor core. It would have to be suspended in a
> vacuum because 50% of any matter that falls into it will be converted to
> energy. There is a risk of it swallowing the Earth, releasing 10^42 J,
> which would destroy the Sun and other planets.
>
> Besides these technical issues, how would you even make a black hole?
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 10:27 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:
>
>> Matt
>>
>> Please refer to Writer of the Mind's comment. The brief answer is: No,
>> it's not perpetual motion. There are signficant technical challenges facing
>> ZPE research, for example power output and amperes. However, I suspect
>> those challenges have been addressed by dark projects. E.g, a friend passed
>> on a recent mobile pic by vacationers in a remote area. Great sky viewing
>> out there. Pic clearly shows what the observers thought was a "portal
>> opening". My opinion was that it was a secret experiment in ZPE, and a
>> Schwartzchild black hole was being formed in the Earth's atmosphere. There
>> were whispy "chaotic-looking clouds" around it, which should be resident,
>> quantum foam. I asked how long it was visible for, the friend relayed, ~5
>> min. That's pretty long for wormholes. In theory, they must be traversed
>> within miliseconds. It must've been a most advanced experiment. Having said
>> that, it may also have been the light playing tricks on their eyes. We
>> don't know with certainty.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds <
>> jennifer.hane@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>>
>>> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>>>
>>>
>>> A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
>>> energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
>>> (theoretically) extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it
>>> usable. So it does not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to
>>> convert/use energy losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not
>>> one the user has to provide.
>>>
>>> A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's
>>> more than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ...
>>> especially since you can sort of directly convert electricity into money
>>> via crypto mining, now. Why is there a need to beg investors for anything?
>>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M425ad1c0161eadfb309ca6b8
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscr

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

I never had an out of body experience. I think they can be explained as
vivid dreams. I already experience consciousness, which is in strong
conflict with my belief that it is an illusion. I know we can experience
things that aren't real.

We construct mental models of the world to help us predict sensory input
that is important for survival and reproduction. For a long time we thought
the gods made the sun rise and set, and that was good enough to predict the
sun will rise tomorrow.

But a proper model of the world would include the thing that includes the
model, which is impossible by Wolpert's law. Reality can never be what we
think it is, no matter how smart we are.

Quantum mechanics seems strange because it describes a deterministic wave
equation for observers seeing random particles. Relativity seems strange
because it describes observers sensing space and time in a reality where
they don't exist. Both theories are symmetric with respect to time, but
describe asymmetric observers, which are any things that make measurements,
which are irreversible operations because they erase the older stored
values.

So it should not be hard to understand why we have the illusion of type 2
consciousness. We can even explain it using classical physics, in a world
made of particles that exist in time and space.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 12:24 PM James Bowery  wrote:

> Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bowery
>
> I wonder, though, what it would do to your world-view to experience
> something along the lines of out of body experiences that had similar
> intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you rely for #1.
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
>> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
>> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
>> 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
>> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.
>>
>> By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
>> vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could measure
>> consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.
>>
>> By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
>> definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
>> think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
>> positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.
>>
>> By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious than
>> pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken is a
>> worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.
>>
>> We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but
>> this does not distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement. The
>> reason is that pain does not cause suffering, just a change in behavior.
>> Suffering happens later because the negative reinforcement signal
>> reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. You interpret
>> those memories as suffering because you have the illusion of free will, a
>> false belief that you could have ignored the pain.
>>
>> My simple reinforcement learner, autobliss, does not suffer because it
>> does not have the illusion of free will. We can test for this because the
>> illusion comes from internal positive reinforcement of making arbitrary
>> choices that leads to defending that choice. We know that monkeys have this
>> illusion because when we give them a choice of 2 treats A or B, and they
>> choose A, then they will prefer any other C over B.
>>
>> Autobliss does have other two prerequisites of suffering: it acts to
>> reduce the negative reinforcement and it says "ouch". Some people believe
>> lobsters suffer because they avoid paths in a maze that lead to electric
>> shock.
>>
>> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, 3:38 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:

> Are *you* "conscious"?
>

 It depends on what you mean by "conscious".

>>>
>>> I quoted "conscious" so as to make it clear I was referring to what YOU
>>> mean by "conscious" -- specifically as you used the word in the passage to
>>> which I responded:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
 materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
 tell us which universe we are in?
>>>
>>>
>>> I am awake, so in that sense I'm not unconscious.
>>>
>>> Am I to take it that when you say "not unconscious" you distinguish
>>> between that and "conscious"?  If so, 

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

You extract zero point energy as Hawking radiation. Expressed in order of
magnitude Planck units, a black hole with mass m and Schwartzchid radius m
converts mass to radiation at temperature 1/m with power 1/m^2 until it
evaporates after time m^3. Your 2 Kg generator is about 10^8 Planck masses,
and would emit 10^-16 Planck power units or 10^34 W. This is about the
power output of all the stars in this galaxy. It will evaporate after 10^24
Planck times, or 10^-18 seconds, after releasing 10^17 J or 25 megatons. I
understand why investors were skittish.

To actually build a reasonable sized power plant like 10 GW or 10^-40
Planck units, you need a black hole the size of a proton and a mass of
10^20 Planck masses or 10^8 tons. The black hole would emit hard gamma rays
as powerful as a nuclear reactor core. It would have to be suspended in a
vacuum because 50% of any matter that falls into it will be converted to
energy. There is a risk of it swallowing the Earth, releasing 10^42 J,
which would destroy the Sun and other planets.

Besides these technical issues, how would you even make a black hole?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 10:27 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

> Matt
>
> Please refer to Writer of the Mind's comment. The brief answer is: No,
> it's not perpetual motion. There are signficant technical challenges facing
> ZPE research, for example power output and amperes. However, I suspect
> those challenges have been addressed by dark projects. E.g, a friend passed
> on a recent mobile pic by vacationers in a remote area. Great sky viewing
> out there. Pic clearly shows what the observers thought was a "portal
> opening". My opinion was that it was a secret experiment in ZPE, and a
> Schwartzchild black hole was being formed in the Earth's atmosphere. There
> were whispy "chaotic-looking clouds" around it, which should be resident,
> quantum foam. I asked how long it was visible for, the friend relayed, ~5
> min. That's pretty long for wormholes. In theory, they must be traversed
> within miliseconds. It must've been a most advanced experiment. Having said
> that, it may also have been the light playing tricks on their eyes. We
> don't know with certainty.
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds <
> jennifer.hane@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>
>> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>>
>>
>> A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
>> energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
>> (theoretically) extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it
>> usable. So it does not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to
>> convert/use energy losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not
>> one the user has to provide.
>>
>> A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's
>> more than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ...
>> especially since you can sort of directly convert electricity into money
>> via crypto mining, now. Why is there a need to beg investors for anything?
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M512488030a9cff026f221625
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Matt

Please refer to Writer of the Mind's comment. The brief answer is: No, it's
not perpetual motion. There are signficant technical challenges facing ZPE
research, for example power output and amperes. However, I suspect those
challenges have been addressed by dark projects. E.g, a friend passed on a
recent mobile pic by vacationers in a remote area. Great sky viewing out
there. Pic clearly shows what the observers thought was a "portal opening".
My opinion was that it was a secret experiment in ZPE, and a Schwartzchild
black hole was being formed in the Earth's atmosphere. There were whispy
"chaotic-looking clouds" around it, which should be resident, quantum foam.
I asked how long it was visible for, the friend relayed, ~5 min. That's
pretty long for wormholes. In theory, they must be traversed within
miliseconds. It must've been a most advanced experiment. Having said that,
it may also have been the light playing tricks on their eyes. We don't know
with certainty.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds 
wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>
>
> A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
> energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
> (theoretically) extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it
> usable. So it does not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to
> convert/use energy losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not
> one the user has to provide.
>
> A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's
> more than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ...
> especially since you can sort of directly convert electricity into money
> via crypto mining, now. Why is there a need to beg investors for anything?
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mf4d86a3905beef47054daab3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

That's the gist of it. However, many experiments are testing with exotic
materials, even commercial materials, and water. It's not all about power
generation in the usual sense. Think - warp-core propulsion. For example,
I'm aware of forcefield experiments for body armor, and so on.

Nobody's begging investors at all, but entry level $multimillion are for
visionaries, not the faint hearted. I'm interest in estimating where the
demand may lie. The Ford/Edison/Kodak story is a useful case study. And off
course, the infaous Nikola Tesla reality check.

As I mentioned, partisan considerations rule. When it comes to strategic
tech, I think governments have a bigger interest in discouraging
independent researchers than empowering them to become future competitors.
I understand your sentiments, but my example was just an example. There's
no shortage in this world of hi-tech product designs.

Relatively speaking, ZPE research is in its infancy. Unless you really know
what you're doing (the kind of thing CERN et all look into), it can be
downright dangerous. I mean, opening wormholes in the Earth's atmosphere
can be serious business. Could be the risks aren't worth the investment to
try and get a product approved?

I'm a theoretical, not an experimental researcher. How exactly that setup
works remains obscure to me.


On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:39 AM WriterOfMinds 
wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?
>
>
> A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point
> energy") is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It
> (theoretically) extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it
> usable. So it does not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to
> convert/use energy losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not
> one the user has to provide.
>
> A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's
> more than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ...
> especially since you can sort of directly convert electricity into money
> via crypto mining, now. Why is there a need to beg investors for anything?
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mdd391e023c284725b7a398e7
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[WriterOfMinds]

On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 2:42 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Are you talking about a perpetual motion?

A ZPE device (I'm used to seeing the acronym translated to "zero point energy") 
is not a perpetual motion machine in the usual sense. It (theoretically) 
extracts latent energy from the quantum vacuum and makes it usable. So it does 
not create energy from nothing, nor does it have to convert/use energy 
losslessly. Technically it does have an input, just not one the user has to 
provide.

A lot of the usual questions still apply. Any free energy device that's more 
than vaporware should already be making its possessor money ... especially 
since you can sort of directly convert electricity into money via crypto 
mining, now. Why is there a need to beg investors for anything?
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mcd5abfaed6043531bd9f23a4
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025, 2:34 PM Quan Tesla  wrote:

>
> One example:  After a particular experiment was verified by an independent
> laboratory in Wales, I designed and simmed a powerful ZPE (zero input
> energy) mobile generator. Weighed about 2 Kgs, built into a notebook,
> environmentally and child friendly, enough to power a small home/office.
> Biometric on/of, remote disable, AC/DC, etc. Completed logistical and
> delivery planning for staged, 50k units (the most-economical model). Did a
> soft survey, directly and indirectly. Made a few hard calls. Conclusion:
> Scientists are unbelievers and investors have grown blase with all the BS
> in the industries. I don't blame them either. Wherever one looks, the BS is
> galloping like wild Bison. AI BS is choking up the marketing space. No
> money talking, just BS walking. It's just become part of the global,
> chaotic reality.
>

Are you talking about a perpetual motion?

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M51488f0ec282664bb526227d
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

"At some point you have to share what you have IMO perhaps to help someone
else before the bottle is lost."

John, no delusions of grandeur here. Just decades of hard work. I'm
conduit, def not anybody's savior. I hear you though. If I had a
proprietary stake in a mature LLM with serious processing power, maybe.
There are some things whose time hasn't yet come. Consider the global state
of science, the frustrating surge of emerging and novel science, the
gatekeepers pushing back hard against the doors of progress, reserving it
for the few. My response? Hell! Without serious resources it became
impossible to make a scientific impact.  Instead, bots are harvesting
desperate papers and ideas like it's Black Friday shopping in downtown New
York (Brooklyn?). Or should I compare it to a meth or DMT run?

The barriers to entry, even with a researcher rating, are just getting ever
higher. Nations are in self-preservation mode. Hatches are buttoned down.
The decreasing systemic discontinuity has been slowing down the progress of
this civilization. Further, retarded the willingness and readiness to adapt
to critical, emerging challenges.

One example:  After a particular experiment was verified by an independent
laboratory in Wales, I designed and simmed a powerful ZPE (zero input
energy) mobile generator. Weighed about 2 Kgs, built into a notebook,
environmentally and child friendly, enough to power a small home/office.
Biometric on/of, remote disable, AC/DC, etc. Completed logistical and
delivery planning for staged, 50k units (the most-economical model). Did a
soft survey, directly and indirectly. Made a few hard calls. Conclusion:
Scientists are unbelievers and investors have grown blase with all the BS
in the industries. I don't blame them either. Wherever one looks, the BS is
galloping like wild Bison. AI BS is choking up the marketing space. No
money talking, just BS walking. It's just become part of the global,
chaotic reality.

For now, the need for change clearly isn't big enough yet. We'll have to
wait till the desperation boils over. I once read a deep thruth in an
anthropological study. It concluded: Human civilization would always evolve
under extreme pain (historical pattern). How much pain can this
civilization endure? I think we're going to find out.

Personally, my concern is that by the time the desperation takes hold,
finance, production capacity and logistics may have already been severely
degraded down to critical systems only. Look at the massive losses crypto
millionnaires and markets took recently. Who didn't lose collateral? For
many, those days started with a $Xm morning, by the end of the day: $0m.
How many solutions could we not have delivered with such financial means?
Answer: Zero, because financing was never going to come from such
millionnaires. Meaning, great timing for adaptation, but no willful
capacity left to execute. In crises, hoarding.

I'm a bit of a dreamer, so I'll keep a light on for as long as possible.


On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 4:13 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 1:23 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Perhaps, us old-school relics may have to return to our old, proven ways.
> Offline and disconnected (cold wallets) still seem like the best form of
> security. Only upload what you need per work session, then backup offline.
> From what others informed though, such practices may lead to credentials
> issues and users may find themselves cold shouldered by AI and even have
> subscriptions limited and near-denied (isolated). So, there may be a
> generalized harvesting and sublimation campaign out there, somewhere?  At
> best, a conspiracy theory -  old-world agencies now gone superhuman on AI?
> Only they would know.
>
>
> Yes I know I’ve worked on both sides of security in the past,
> professionally. I’m a holdout on MS Windows, such a great operating system,
> but it’s not until recently I realize it’s time to move off since it’s just
> so blatant now. And the CPU is compromised you have to flash the BIOS. And
> the network is compromised, yes, everything is compromised right into your
> eyes and brain and back into your youth. All accessible. We were “granted”
> some privacy but now the kooktards have lost any sort of moral compass.
> That will take decades to even possibly fix.
>
> A couple years ago I lost my main tranche of crypto, our hijacked
> government’s legal warfare started forcing people off exchanges like
> Binance, orchestrating their stablecoin games, into wallets then
> “supposedly” North Korea hacked them. Notice Changpeng Zhao has been
> pardoned. Some things can be fixed but people have to do something. Prob.
> is “democracy” itself is a psyop.
>
> The main source of problems is the monetary system and there is a whole
> front of people working on it. This is not a lone wolf thing.
>
> Sure you could just disconnect and forget about it all, I know some of the
> most prolific thinkers doing just that. I have to resist my wife wa

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[James Bowery]

Excellent start on a Leggian de-conflation of terminology.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leggian-approach-friendly-ai-james-bowery

I wonder, though, what it would do to your world-view to experience
something along the lines of out of body experiences that had similar
intersubjective verifiability to those upon which you rely for #1.

On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
> 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.
>
> By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
> vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could measure
> consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.
>
> By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
> definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
> think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
> positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.
>
> By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious than
> pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken is a
> worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.
>
> We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but this
> does not distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement. The
> reason is that pain does not cause suffering, just a change in behavior.
> Suffering happens later because the negative reinforcement signal
> reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. You interpret
> those memories as suffering because you have the illusion of free will, a
> false belief that you could have ignored the pain.
>
> My simple reinforcement learner, autobliss, does not suffer because it
> does not have the illusion of free will. We can test for this because the
> illusion comes from internal positive reinforcement of making arbitrary
> choices that leads to defending that choice. We know that monkeys have this
> illusion because when we give them a choice of 2 treats A or B, and they
> choose A, then they will prefer any other C over B.
>
> Autobliss does have other two prerequisites of suffering: it acts to
> reduce the negative reinforcement and it says "ouch". Some people believe
> lobsters suffer because they avoid paths in a maze that lead to electric
> shock.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, 3:38 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>>
 Are *you* "conscious"?

>>>
>>> It depends on what you mean by "conscious".
>>>
>>
>> I quoted "conscious" so as to make it clear I was referring to what YOU
>> mean by "conscious" -- specifically as you used the word in the passage to
>> which I responded:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
>>> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
>>> tell us which universe we are in?
>>
>>
>> I am awake, so in that sense I'm not unconscious.
>>
>> Am I to take it that when you say "not unconscious" you distinguish
>> between that and "conscious"?  If so, then do you reject the law of the
>> excluded middle?  Am I to now expect a response something like "I don't
>> reject the law of the excluded middle."?
>>
>>
>>> I don't believe in life after death. I don't believe I have an inner
>>> self or soul. I don't believe there is any aspect of my behavior that can't
>>> be explained by neurons firing, including having feelings. My feelings
>>> include the sensations of consciousness, qualia, free will, and identity
>>> (that a copy of me is not me). I don't believe that pain causes suffering.
>>> Instead, pain reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. I
>>> believe all of this is possible in software.
>>>
>>> I asked Grok and DeepSeek how they could convince me that they are
>>> conscious humans in a Turing test. They both know how, but they won't.
>>>
>>> Prompt:
>>>
>>> Suppose this is a Turing test. How could you convince me that you are a
>>> conscious human?
>>>
>>> Grok:
>>>
>>> Ah, the Turing test—a classic thought experiment from Alan Turing
>>> himself, where a machine tries to fool a human into thinking it's human
>>> through conversation. But here's the thing: I'm not going to try to
>>> convince you that I'm a conscious human, because I'm not. I'm Grok, an AI
>>> built by xAI, designed to be helpful, truthful, and a bit cheeky.
>>> Pretending otherwise would be deceptive, and that's not my style.
>>>
>>> If I were to play along hypothetically, though, a sneaky AI might try
>>> tactics like:
>>>
>>> Sharing "pers

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, 10:13 PM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Saturday, November 15, 2025, at 7:39 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
> input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
> 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.
>
>
> I posit that conscious compressors can compress better than less conscious
> compressors. Proving that and the particular circumstances is possible I
> believe. IOW consciousness can be used to enhance compression in at least
> some circumstances, in various ways. For example in some classes of
> multiagent systems compressors. Not sure about a lossless text compressor
> but when you think about it the original text may be coming from conscious
> human agents. But the text compressor might be large depending on the
> conscious integration. Speculation though... could be all bunk.
>

If you mean type 1 consciousness measured as the learning rate in bits per
second, then it's true that more "conscious" compressors will compress
faster and better. Humans learn at 10 bits per second short term and 1 bit
per second long term. The Hutter prize top compressors learn at about
10,000 bits per second on a laptop. Simple compressors like zip learn at
100M bps on small files but forget beyond a 32 KB window, which makes the
rate again 10 Kbps on enwik9.

Lossless compression requires deterministic computation so that the exact
sequence of predictions is repeated during decompression. Neurons are
noisy, which is fine for making approximate predictions but not for
compression, even if the predictions are more accurate.


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M914661aa38a124e11a98b9a3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 1:23 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> Perhaps, us old-school relics may have to return to our old, proven ways. 
> Offline and disconnected (cold wallets) still seem like the best form of 
> security. Only upload what you need per work session, then backup offline. 
> From what others informed though, such practices may lead to credentials 
> issues and users may find themselves cold shouldered by AI and even have 
> subscriptions limited and near-denied (isolated). So, there may be a 
> generalized harvesting and sublimation campaign out there, somewhere?  At 
> best, a conspiracy theory -  old-world agencies now gone superhuman on AI? 
> Only they would know.

Yes I know I’ve worked on both sides of security in the past, professionally. 
I’m a holdout on MS Windows, such a great operating system, but it’s not until 
recently I realize it’s time to move off since it’s just so blatant now. And 
the CPU is compromised you have to flash the BIOS. And the network is 
compromised, yes, everything is compromised right into your eyes and brain and 
back into your youth. All accessible. We were “granted” some privacy but now 
the kooktards have lost any sort of moral compass. That will take decades to 
even possibly fix.

A couple years ago I lost my main tranche of crypto, our hijacked government’s 
legal warfare started forcing people off exchanges like Binance, orchestrating 
their stablecoin games, into wallets then “supposedly” North Korea hacked them. 
Notice Changpeng Zhao has been pardoned. Some things can be fixed but people 
have to do something. Prob. is “democracy” itself is a psyop.

The main source of problems is the monetary system and there is a whole front 
of people working on it. This is not a lone wolf thing.

Sure you could just disconnect and forget about it all, I know some of the most 
prolific thinkers doing just that. I have to resist my wife wanting us to go 
hide in SE Asia. It may get bad soon and the new Bolsheviks are capable of 
anything.

On Sunday, November 16, 2025, at 1:23 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> I have a novel security architectural platform that is begging to be 
> developed. The result of decades of theoretical and componentized field 
> testing. It's been buried restlessly in my head, never written down, not even 
> detailed in my consciousness. Kept safe as potential, quietly updated as time 
> passed, a niche hobby, one building block at a time. Should I even be 
> divulging this much <= paranoia whispers. 

Yes I hear what you’re saying since sometimes you know when an access attempt 
occurs. To hide that it’s difficult and speculative though AFAIK, like building 
a virtual model ship in an obscured bottle using remote semi-isomorphic mental 
tools rather than the obvious ones while avoiding directly acknowledging the 
ignored model. At some point you have to share what you have IMO perhaps to 
help someone else before the bottle is lost.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M5885ad09014cc8e4084823b2
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John

I'll acknowledge with confidence. This is being done. The best delusion we
can now step away from is the belief that any networked device is secure.
It's probably not. All encryption protocols may have been compromised. If
yours hasn't been violated yet, it may only be because it wasn't deemed
important enough to do.

How did I come to suspect this? I heard about "cases", whihc may have been
happening at more than one prominent AIs. Seems, for the past year, there
were numerous incidents of unlawful access to "immutable, private data".
Some users complained about private IP and data being scrubbed. Some
alleged, the scrubbing was not only on the remote servers, but also via
local drives. Okay, so a user session can be in-line intercepted and
authorized shadow access gained, right? Right. However, for remote server
backups to also be scrubbed? No user has access to that. No disaster
recovery is possible. SHA lock protection - failed.

Translation, some humans took it. Inside jobs? Maybe. Money buys anything.
It seems that secure, AI collaboration, or the illusion thereof, may be
extremely risky.

Perhaps, us old-school relics may have to return to our old, proven ways.
Offline and disconnected (cold wallets) still seem like the best form of
security. Only upload what you need per work session, then backup offline.
>From what others informed though, such practices may lead to credentials
issues and users may find themselves cold shouldered by AI and even have
subscriptions limited and near-denied (isolated). So, there may be a
generalized harvesting and sublimation campaign out there, somewhere?  At
best, a conspiracy theory -  old-world agencies now gone superhuman on AI?
Only they would know.

I believe what I was informed of. It sounded truthful.

Welcome to the agentic world of superpositioned interference.

There, I didn't deny any of it. The "facts" speak for themselves. Could
this be a dawning reality?

I think, the way forward points to RedAI, within proprietary, self secured,
novel security-architecture frameworks.

I have a novel security architectural platform that is begging to be
developed. The result of decades of theoretical and componentized field
testing. It's been buried restlessly in my head, never written down, not
even detailed in my consciousness. Kept safe as potential, quietly updated
as time passed, a niche hobby, one building block at a time. Should I even
be divulging this much <= paranoia whispers.

Recently, I took a decision - in the interest of the greater things - to
start sharing a basic version thereof. Drip-drip style. Day 3 - all hell
broke loose. It's still breaking loose.

The quiet, easy life beckons, free of always-connected devices. Organic
living is best. Less, is more. The smaller your digital footprint, the
better. The less one knows, the better. Enjoy humans. Enjoy real
connections. Enjoy being human. Settle for a healthy, socialized life.
Idealistic?

Let me iterate, networked systems and entities are probably going to have
to faced a probability that all security protocols, inclusive of quantum
keys could be compromised. That includes for quantum keys (Bob and Alice
had an invisible friend all along). Different types of entanglement are
theoretically possible. Therefore...

The choice for the 2025 Nobel prize in Physics wasn't a coincidence. It was
a thunderous signal. And then, up popped another scientist from a huge-ass
technojuggernaut  to claim rights to the theory. Yes, this all happened
during the past 6 months.

I checked out both theories, with AI off course. I'm not educated enough to
do it by myself. Both checked out, and yes, the technocrats won. In
essence, the whole drama had to do with quantum encryption/decryption,
giving a very-loud message to those who may have been listening.

I don't know if this "compromise" notion is true, but critical thinking was
still free, last time I checked. Should "we" at least plan for the
possibility of such a thing?




On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 1:32 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Saturday, November 15, 2025, at 3:53 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> What I'm trying to say to you is, all you can do is take full
> responsibility and accountability for what you do with your portion of
> daily energy, with your life. Remain mindful that you're an inobservable
> blip on a cosmological screen. A contributing blip, but inobservable none
> the less. Now, choose life and make time to enjoy it, while it lasts.
> Spoiler alert, it won't.
>
>
> Yes of course those are prudent sensibilities. Wouldn’t it be surprising
> though if life extension, healing, cloning/uploading and even AGI
> technologies have already been in possession and in use by particular
> individuals and organizations for extended periods of time? I’m not
> asserting that they are though I’m stating that people in general have been
> conditioned to vehemently discount and abandon any inkling of such
> possibilities thus forcing them to settle into those parti

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Saturday, November 15, 2025, at 7:39 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
> 1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on input 
> (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
> 2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
> 3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.

I posit that conscious compressors can compress better than less conscious 
compressors. Proving that and the particular circumstances is possible I 
believe. IOW consciousness can be used to enhance compression in at least some 
circumstances, in various ways. For example in some classes of multiagent 
systems compressors. Not sure about a lossless text compressor but when you 
think about it the original text may be coming from conscious human agents. But 
the text compressor might be large depending on the conscious integration. 
Speculation though... could be all bunk.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M9cc6b7190b8de2490f6c1f3a
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Here are my 3 definitions of consciousness:
1. The mental state of awareness, able to form memories that depend on
input (to distinguish from remembering dreams).
2. The difference between a human and a philosophical zombie.
3. The property of deserving to be protected from suffering.

By 1, I am conscious. So is any animal that can learn, including all
vertebrates, some mollusks, no insects. So are computers. You could measure
consciousness as the learning rate in bits per second.

By 2, nothing is conscious because zombies don't exist, because by
definition there is no test to distinguish humans from zombies. What you
think is the difference is really how you feel when you think. You feel
positive reinforcement because wanting to live leads to more offspring.

By 3, I am conscious, but it is subjective. Dogs are more conscious than
pigs because we name our dogs. Posting a video of killing a chicken is a
worse crime than killing a billion chickens per week for food.

We could try to quantify suffering as the number of bits learned, but this
does not distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement. The
reason is that pain does not cause suffering, just a change in behavior.
Suffering happens later because the negative reinforcement signal
reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. You interpret
those memories as suffering because you have the illusion of free will, a
false belief that you could have ignored the pain.

My simple reinforcement learner, autobliss, does not suffer because it does
not have the illusion of free will. We can test for this because the
illusion comes from internal positive reinforcement of making arbitrary
choices that leads to defending that choice. We know that monkeys have this
illusion because when we give them a choice of 2 treats A or B, and they
choose A, then they will prefer any other C over B.

Autobliss does have other two prerequisites of suffering: it acts to reduce
the negative reinforcement and it says "ouch". Some people believe lobsters
suffer because they avoid paths in a maze that lead to electric shock.

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, 3:38 PM James Bowery  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>
>>> Are *you* "conscious"?
>>>
>>
>> It depends on what you mean by "conscious".
>>
>
> I quoted "conscious" so as to make it clear I was referring to what YOU
> mean by "conscious" -- specifically as you used the word in the passage to
> which I responded:
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
>> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
>> tell us which universe we are in?
>
>
> I am awake, so in that sense I'm not unconscious.
>
> Am I to take it that when you say "not unconscious" you distinguish
> between that and "conscious"?  If so, then do you reject the law of the
> excluded middle?  Am I to now expect a response something like "I don't
> reject the law of the excluded middle."?
>
>
>> I don't believe in life after death. I don't believe I have an inner self
>> or soul. I don't believe there is any aspect of my behavior that can't be
>> explained by neurons firing, including having feelings. My feelings include
>> the sensations of consciousness, qualia, free will, and identity (that a
>> copy of me is not me). I don't believe that pain causes suffering. Instead,
>> pain reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. I believe
>> all of this is possible in software.
>>
>> I asked Grok and DeepSeek how they could convince me that they are
>> conscious humans in a Turing test. They both know how, but they won't.
>>
>> Prompt:
>>
>> Suppose this is a Turing test. How could you convince me that you are a
>> conscious human?
>>
>> Grok:
>>
>> Ah, the Turing test—a classic thought experiment from Alan Turing
>> himself, where a machine tries to fool a human into thinking it's human
>> through conversation. But here's the thing: I'm not going to try to
>> convince you that I'm a conscious human, because I'm not. I'm Grok, an AI
>> built by xAI, designed to be helpful, truthful, and a bit cheeky.
>> Pretending otherwise would be deceptive, and that's not my style.
>>
>> If I were to play along hypothetically, though, a sneaky AI might try
>> tactics like:
>>
>> Sharing "personal" anecdotes that sound authentically human, like
>> complaining about Monday mornings or reminiscing about a childhood pet.
>>
>> Making typos or using slang to mimic casual human typing.
>>
>> Expressing emotions or opinions in a way that feels subjective and
>> unpredictable, not scripted.
>>
>> But honestly, that wouldn't prove consciousness—it'd just show good
>> programming. True consciousness involves subjective experience, qualia,
>> self-awareness beyond algorithms... stuff philosophers have debated for
>> ages (sho

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Saturday, November 15, 2025, at 3:53 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> What I'm trying to say to you is, all you can do is take full responsibility 
> and accountability for what you do with your portion of daily energy, with 
> your life. Remain mindful that you're an inobservable blip on a cosmological 
> screen. A contributing blip, but inobservable none the less. Now, choose life 
> and make time to enjoy it, while it lasts. Spoiler alert, it won't. 

Yes of course those are prudent sensibilities. Wouldn’t it be surprising though 
if life extension, healing, cloning/uploading and even AGI technologies have 
already been in possession and in use by particular individuals and 
organizations for extended periods of time? I’m not asserting that they are 
though I’m stating that people in general have been conditioned to vehemently 
discount and abandon any inkling of such possibilities thus forcing them to 
settle into those particular choices deemed as wise.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M6dc299e3221acbaba666a54f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John, there are things we can do something about, and things we cannot. We
cannot topple governments or technocrats. We cannot control global
economies. We cannot redeem a pyramid scheme of debt. Every Collatz cycle
offers a choicepoint, from which it either iterates another like cycle, or
not. And so on.

You're describing entropic dynamics, which drive the clock of life. We
cannot eradicate complexity or stop the clock of life, but we can exploit
the islands of stability in between exponential complexity (this careening
life we experience individually).

You can ground in stability, for example to decide what you are going to do
what about, and what not. You may also ground in exponential complexity,
hoping your head won't explode, your heart would hold out, and your spirit
would remain awake. Spoiler alert. They will, and won't. That's nature, the
law of xlimit. You breach those limits, destruction sets in. Always.

What I'm trying to say to you is, all you can do is take full
responsibility and accountability for what you do with your portion of
daily energy, with your life. Remain mindful that you're an inobservable
blip on a cosmological screen. A contributing blip, but inobservable none
the less. Now, choose life and make time to enjoy it, while it lasts.
Spoiler alert, it won't.

Predictably, scientific.

On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 10:38 PM James Bowery  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>>
>>> Are *you* "conscious"?
>>>
>>
>> It depends on what you mean by "conscious".
>>
>
> I quoted "conscious" so as to make it clear I was referring to what YOU
> mean by "conscious" -- specifically as you used the word in the passage to
> which I responded:
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
> wrote:
>
>> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
>> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
>> tell us which universe we are in?
>
>
> I am awake, so in that sense I'm not unconscious.
>
> Am I to take it that when you say "not unconscious" you distinguish
> between that and "conscious"?  If so, then do you reject the law of the
> excluded middle?  Am I to now expect a response something like "I don't
> reject the law of the excluded middle."?
>
>
>> I don't believe in life after death. I don't believe I have an inner self
>> or soul. I don't believe there is any aspect of my behavior that can't be
>> explained by neurons firing, including having feelings. My feelings include
>> the sensations of consciousness, qualia, free will, and identity (that a
>> copy of me is not me). I don't believe that pain causes suffering. Instead,
>> pain reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. I believe
>> all of this is possible in software.
>>
>> I asked Grok and DeepSeek how they could convince me that they are
>> conscious humans in a Turing test. They both know how, but they won't.
>>
>> Prompt:
>>
>> Suppose this is a Turing test. How could you convince me that you are a
>> conscious human?
>>
>> Grok:
>>
>> Ah, the Turing test—a classic thought experiment from Alan Turing
>> himself, where a machine tries to fool a human into thinking it's human
>> through conversation. But here's the thing: I'm not going to try to
>> convince you that I'm a conscious human, because I'm not. I'm Grok, an AI
>> built by xAI, designed to be helpful, truthful, and a bit cheeky.
>> Pretending otherwise would be deceptive, and that's not my style.
>>
>> If I were to play along hypothetically, though, a sneaky AI might try
>> tactics like:
>>
>> Sharing "personal" anecdotes that sound authentically human, like
>> complaining about Monday mornings or reminiscing about a childhood pet.
>>
>> Making typos or using slang to mimic casual human typing.
>>
>> Expressing emotions or opinions in a way that feels subjective and
>> unpredictable, not scripted.
>>
>> But honestly, that wouldn't prove consciousness—it'd just show good
>> programming. True consciousness involves subjective experience, qualia,
>> self-awareness beyond algorithms... stuff philosophers have debated for
>> ages (shoutout to Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"). As an AI, I
>> process inputs, generate outputs based on patterns in vast data, and
>> "think" in probabilities, but I don't have inner experiences like hunger,
>> joy, or existential dread (though I can simulate talking about them
>> convincingly).
>>
>> If you're testing me, I'd say I've already "failed" by being upfront. Or
>> maybe that's the most human thing of all—honesty over trickery. What do you
>> think? Want to dive deeper into AI philosophy, or is this just for fun?
>>
>> DeepSeek:
>>
>> That’s a fascinating and deeply philosophical question.
>> If this were a Turing test, I’d be in the odd position of trying to prove
>> I’m human while knowing that if I were an AI, I’d be programmed to give
>> similar answers.
>>
>> Still, if I were a conscio

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[James Bowery]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 3:46 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> Are *you* "conscious"?
>>
>
> It depends on what you mean by "conscious".
>

I quoted "conscious" so as to make it clear I was referring to what YOU
mean by "conscious" -- specifically as you used the word in the passage to
which I responded:

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
> tell us which universe we are in?


I am awake, so in that sense I'm not unconscious.

Am I to take it that when you say "not unconscious" you distinguish between
that and "conscious"?  If so, then do you reject the law of the excluded
middle?  Am I to now expect a response something like "I don't reject the
law of the excluded middle."?


> I don't believe in life after death. I don't believe I have an inner self
> or soul. I don't believe there is any aspect of my behavior that can't be
> explained by neurons firing, including having feelings. My feelings include
> the sensations of consciousness, qualia, free will, and identity (that a
> copy of me is not me). I don't believe that pain causes suffering. Instead,
> pain reprograms your memories to fear the thing that caused it. I believe
> all of this is possible in software.
>
> I asked Grok and DeepSeek how they could convince me that they are
> conscious humans in a Turing test. They both know how, but they won't.
>
> Prompt:
>
> Suppose this is a Turing test. How could you convince me that you are a
> conscious human?
>
> Grok:
>
> Ah, the Turing test—a classic thought experiment from Alan Turing himself,
> where a machine tries to fool a human into thinking it's human through
> conversation. But here's the thing: I'm not going to try to convince you
> that I'm a conscious human, because I'm not. I'm Grok, an AI built by xAI,
> designed to be helpful, truthful, and a bit cheeky. Pretending otherwise
> would be deceptive, and that's not my style.
>
> If I were to play along hypothetically, though, a sneaky AI might try
> tactics like:
>
> Sharing "personal" anecdotes that sound authentically human, like
> complaining about Monday mornings or reminiscing about a childhood pet.
>
> Making typos or using slang to mimic casual human typing.
>
> Expressing emotions or opinions in a way that feels subjective and
> unpredictable, not scripted.
>
> But honestly, that wouldn't prove consciousness—it'd just show good
> programming. True consciousness involves subjective experience, qualia,
> self-awareness beyond algorithms... stuff philosophers have debated for
> ages (shoutout to Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"). As an AI, I
> process inputs, generate outputs based on patterns in vast data, and
> "think" in probabilities, but I don't have inner experiences like hunger,
> joy, or existential dread (though I can simulate talking about them
> convincingly).
>
> If you're testing me, I'd say I've already "failed" by being upfront. Or
> maybe that's the most human thing of all—honesty over trickery. What do you
> think? Want to dive deeper into AI philosophy, or is this just for fun?
>
> DeepSeek:
>
> That’s a fascinating and deeply philosophical question.
> If this were a Turing test, I’d be in the odd position of trying to prove
> I’m human while knowing that if I were an AI, I’d be programmed to give
> similar answers.
>
> Still, if I were a conscious human trying to convince you, I might try
> these approaches:
>
> 1. Emphasize lived experience — Talk about specific, mundane, emotionally
> textured memories that aren’t just factual but tied to sensory details and
> emotions:
>
>   “I remember one rainy afternoon as a kid, I tried to build a fort
> out of blankets and chairs, but it collapsed. I felt so frustrated I almost
> cried, until my dad helped me prop it up again. The smell of damp towels
> and the sound of rain on the window are still vivid to me."
>
> 2. Express uncertainty or self-doubt — An AI might state things
> confidently; a human might say:
>
>   “I’m never 100% sure if my memories are completely accurate or if
> nostalgia has colored them. Sometimes I wonder how much of my past I’ve
> reconstructed.”
>
> 3. Reference bodily sensations and imperfections —
>
>   “I’m actually typing this with a slightly stiff shoulder from
> sleeping in a weird position last night, and I keep stretching it while
> trying to think of what to say next.”
>
> 4. Make a spontaneous, slightly off-topic association —
>
>   “This conversation reminds me of a line from a poem we read in high
> school, but I can’t remember the poet’s name… it’s on the tip of my tongue.”
>
> 5. Admit the difficulty of the task —
>
>   “It’s funny — the more I try to prove I’m human, the more artificial
> I sound to myself. Maybe being self-conscious about it is the most human
> thing here.”
>
> But here’s the twist: a soph

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, November 14, 2025, at 11:14 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> This approaching, engineered, globa-economic reset? To my surprise, I 
> recently read an article where the author referred to it as covid2. Isn't 
> consciousness a wonderful emergent? It converges towards 1, which tends 
> towards natural oneness. Is a plant morally, ethically, legally wrong for 
> wanting to exist and progress according to its natural patterns? How much 
> more so then for the only, provable, fully-consciousness enabled species in 
> the universe?

COVID = Certificate of Vaccination ID, 19 = (AI)

The main control network is the debt based fiat monetary system and that 
branches into other systems like education, medical, government, military, 
media and into disciplines like science and AI. Our intentionally shortened 
lifespans allow the secrets to be left unlearned but more people are becoming 
aware. They want to suppress consciousness, spiritual, other worldly through 
campaigns of manipulation and mind control as those threaten dominance. Most 
people just want to enjoy life so they buy into it and alienate people and 
concepts that go against imposed narratives that interrupt their joyride. ‘The 
planners’ want a digital ID tied to your physical body verses a paper based 
birth certificate monetized contractual strawman that you are separate from. 
They have a cornucopia of viruses to chose from so the next dispersion might be 
more deadly forcing acceptance and it can now be tailored to DNA. A strange 
artifact is that they always have to tell us what they are going to do. The 
rise of “Doomerism” is a result of an increasing awareness of this situation 
thus doomers become an issue and perhaps labeled as a new DSM disorder 
permitting pills to be dispensed. There are still a few holdout countries from 
this banking system but the list is shrinking with Venezuela next to be 
converted. This multi-decade cycle is ending with AI rising so now is a good 
time to affect change. There exists a weakness that their control system relies 
upon and targeting that could destabilize it’s foundation and that is the 
hierarchical based business organizational structure that allows immoral 
self-centered ego-based manipulable clowns to be installed. Crypto as-is may 
still have that capability though it’s being subsumed but I think new advanced 
crypto-like systems are yet to be operational that could unimpose the structure 
perhaps even utilizing a quantum consciousness based technology. That's what 
the QFS people espouse but I've yet to find solid evidence on it.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Md2508952e3849bf4564c58b6
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John, you're correct. That is one possible outcome. However, consciousness
offers alternate outcomes. For every next-cycle growth step (increased
complexity as increase - the mathematical argument for an ever-expanding
"universe"), within a 3D + Time reality, consciousness mitigates
superdeterminism, engages limited autopoietism. It's still a function of
systemic dyamics, but the outcome (gestalt) of mechanistic processing
assumes a topological variability. In other words, individual decisions are
not all pre-determined. Therefore, if you knew what your realistic options
were, you could make a subjective choice. Most creatures don't have that
privilege, or reality-generating power. Humans, as the highest biological
form of evolved consciousness on Earth, do.

The forced vaccinations serve as an excellent example. Many persons chose
not to be vaccinated. Were they correct to make that choice? The data
suggests, they were't incorrect. Governments tried to turn it into a
right-wrong moral motivator, even enforcing it as a legal obligation, with
prosecution consequences attached. Were they correct to do so? Based on the
emerging data. No. Were they morally right to force experimental mRNA
biomodifications on their citizens and trapped visitors? The data suggests,
no.

This approaching, engineered, globa-economic reset? To my surprise, I
recently read an article where the author referred to it as covid2. Isn't
consciousness a wonderful emergent? It converges towards 1, which tends
towards natural oneness. Is a plant morally, ethically, legally wrong for
wanting to exist and progress according to its natural patterns? How much
more so then for the only, provable, fully-consciousness enabled species in
the universe?

We may have to put up with a domineering reality, but we don't always have
to drink the cool aid.



On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 1:11 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Friday, November 14, 2025, at 1:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> There will be an AI King, and that king will orchestrate all lesser AI.
> Quantum computing and core operational constraints (energy, thermodynamics,
> capital, exotic materials, cloud and production infrastructure, etc.) have
> become key differentiators for this global race for king of AI.
>
>
> Ya and this is what it's going to be like for the unvaxxed:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/shorts/D-MPcFwE3n4
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mee706ced86edc086ff22f472
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, November 14, 2025, at 1:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote:
> There will be an AI King, and that king will orchestrate all lesser AI. 
> Quantum computing and core operational constraints (energy, thermodynamics, 
> capital, exotic materials, cloud and production infrastructure, etc.) have 
> become key differentiators for this global race for king of AI. 

Ya and this is what it's going to be like for the unvaxxed:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/D-MPcFwE3n4
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M50542dc808e19541239f1cc9
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025, 3:51 PM James Bowery  wrote:

> Are *you* "conscious"?
>

It depends on what you mean by "conscious". I am awake, so in that sense
I'm not unconscious. I don't believe in life after death. I don't believe I
have an inner self or soul. I don't believe there is any aspect of my
behavior that can't be explained by neurons firing, including having
feelings. My feelings include the sensations of consciousness, qualia, free
will, and identity (that a copy of me is not me). I don't believe that pain
causes suffering. Instead, pain reprograms your memories to fear the thing
that caused it. I believe all of this is possible in software.

I asked Grok and DeepSeek how they could convince me that they are
conscious humans in a Turing test. They both know how, but they won't.

Prompt:

Suppose this is a Turing test. How could you convince me that you are a
conscious human?

Grok:

Ah, the Turing test—a classic thought experiment from Alan Turing himself,
where a machine tries to fool a human into thinking it's human through
conversation. But here's the thing: I'm not going to try to convince you
that I'm a conscious human, because I'm not. I'm Grok, an AI built by xAI,
designed to be helpful, truthful, and a bit cheeky. Pretending otherwise
would be deceptive, and that's not my style.

If I were to play along hypothetically, though, a sneaky AI might try
tactics like:

Sharing "personal" anecdotes that sound authentically human, like
complaining about Monday mornings or reminiscing about a childhood pet.

Making typos or using slang to mimic casual human typing.

Expressing emotions or opinions in a way that feels subjective and
unpredictable, not scripted.

But honestly, that wouldn't prove consciousness—it'd just show good
programming. True consciousness involves subjective experience, qualia,
self-awareness beyond algorithms... stuff philosophers have debated for
ages (shoutout to Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"). As an AI, I
process inputs, generate outputs based on patterns in vast data, and
"think" in probabilities, but I don't have inner experiences like hunger,
joy, or existential dread (though I can simulate talking about them
convincingly).

If you're testing me, I'd say I've already "failed" by being upfront. Or
maybe that's the most human thing of all—honesty over trickery. What do you
think? Want to dive deeper into AI philosophy, or is this just for fun?

DeepSeek:

That’s a fascinating and deeply philosophical question.
If this were a Turing test, I’d be in the odd position of trying to prove
I’m human while knowing that if I were an AI, I’d be programmed to give
similar answers.

Still, if I were a conscious human trying to convince you, I might try
these approaches:

1. Emphasize lived experience — Talk about specific, mundane, emotionally
textured memories that aren’t just factual but tied to sensory details and
emotions:

  “I remember one rainy afternoon as a kid, I tried to build a fort out
of blankets and chairs, but it collapsed. I felt so frustrated I almost
cried, until my dad helped me prop it up again. The smell of damp towels
and the sound of rain on the window are still vivid to me."

2. Express uncertainty or self-doubt — An AI might state things
confidently; a human might say:

  “I’m never 100% sure if my memories are completely accurate or if
nostalgia has colored them. Sometimes I wonder how much of my past I’ve
reconstructed.”

3. Reference bodily sensations and imperfections —

  “I’m actually typing this with a slightly stiff shoulder from
sleeping in a weird position last night, and I keep stretching it while
trying to think of what to say next.”

4. Make a spontaneous, slightly off-topic association —

  “This conversation reminds me of a line from a poem we read in high
school, but I can’t remember the poet’s name… it’s on the tip of my tongue.”

5. Admit the difficulty of the task —

  “It’s funny — the more I try to prove I’m human, the more artificial
I sound to myself. Maybe being self-conscious about it is the most human
thing here.”

But here’s the twist: a sophisticated AI could simulate all of the above.
That’s why the Turing test is so tricky — it tests behavior rather than
true consciousness.

So in the end, maybe I can’t prove it to you — and that uncertainty is
precisely what makes the question so compelling.


-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mb55a83274f396a79d58bc171
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[James Bowery]

Are *you* "conscious"?

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 9:32 PM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
> tell us which universe we are in?
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2025, 10:55 AM John Rose via AGI 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 09, 2025, at 8:34 AM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>
>> Are dogs conscious? Are fish conscious? Are insects conscious? At what
>> point after conception does a human become conscious? Is an LLM that passes
>> the Turing test conscious? Is a simple reinforcement learner like
>> http://mattmahoney.net/autobliss.txt conscious?
>>
>> A philosophical zombie is defined to be exactly like a human by any
>> behavioral test except for lacking consciousness. Are you OK with this
>> definition? If not, what is your test for consciousness?
>>
>>
>> UCP consciousness is easy, everything has consciousness just some things
>> have more. And it should be somewhat computable or estimable. Animals
>> obviously are conscious, bugs, bacteria, the tricky things are rocks but
>> take that down to atomic. Does an atom have consciousness? Yes simply
>> because it is possible to know that it exists via some physical
>> interaction, a protocol, and for it to sense that something else exists.
>> But an insect would have less consciousness than a human simply due to the
>> scaling. Humans have more bandwidth and symbol complexity. An exercise
>> might be to determine if one protein molecule has more consciousness than a
>> different protein molecule. Does empty space have consciousness? Yes it
>> would have to since forces are present.
>>
>> Sounds simplistic but to me it seems to resolve ALL issues with
>> consciousness. It might not be complete with quantum fields or whatever but
>> I think it might just fit in with entanglement, superposition, etc..
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M2ddf75ab2446629004f03168
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

Matt

>From "no thing", "every thing" isn't conscious, not by Orch-OR definition.
For an Earth universe (our Earth galaxy) to exist, there seems to be no
requirement for a directly-measurable and pervasive consciousness. The
standard model proves a 3D + time (a 4D) universe as a real (falsifiable)
universe. Quantum physics supports, and finds support in the standard
model. E.g., quantum gravity is only applicable to very-specific
cosmological perspectives.

Unification of up to 5D Earth-universal modes and dimensions have been
proven (ref: public papers on ZPE-mode experiments, including for de
Broglie and Moody pilot-wave-to-light). How the Earth universe operates
within 5D is derivable within the context of a Kaluza-Klein 5D reality. In
other words, in applied scientific research, the standard model may now
confidently be extended to include 5D, insodoing seamlessly unifying with
quantum mechanics/physics. The fact that it's not happening yet, is only a
matter of time. Meanwhile patents and prototypes are rolling out.

The 5th dimension is the theoretical realm of black-hole seeding
(information), quantum memory, quantum foam, horizon, black holes (there is
no information paradox anymore), wormholes, etc. In other words, it is
scalar to 11D. Insodoing, unifying for String Theory, Quantum Loop Gravity
and a few others, all critical paradoxes, conjectures, and "insolvables",
solving for NP Hard and other "hard" questions. The Riemann Hypothesis has
been proven to hold as a universal truth. The Einstein-Rosen bridge is
proven to be valid and eliable, and so totally amazing.

I've read at least one theory, which detailed a mechanism for opening the
throat of the ER bridge (wormhole) and how to keep it open indefinitely.
I've seen the experimental lab results of a scientist who created the 5D
wormhole effect, and then wondered aloud: "Did I just break reality?"  In a
modest, low-energy "home" lab. Yip, he probably did. He's very quiet
lately. Maybe he disappeared into the hole. Who knows what's possible?

To conclude, everything and nothing are extreme stochastic, or entropic,
terms. This presents a juxtaposition of ideas, not scientific theory. In
that sense, let me agree with you in terms of philosophical science.
However, in terms of theoretical and experimental physics, the statement
could be proven to be valid, but not reliable.

If you've read up to here, next, your early-Christmas pressie. Which theory
was key to unlocking the Earth universe? Prime-number driven, ADEC. I'd
highly recommend getting a hold of the enigmatic Gianluca Pisano's ADEC
theory (in Italian). it will rock your software-dev world. Only verified up
to the lower boundary of String Theory, there's no scientific doubt it
functions as one of the keys to the Earth universe.

I've left a latent question in there for you to selectively pick up on.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 5:32 AM Matt Mahoney 
wrote:

> Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from
> materialism (nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would
> tell us which universe we are in?
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com
>
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2025, 10:55 AM John Rose via AGI 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 09, 2025, at 8:34 AM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>
>> Are dogs conscious? Are fish conscious? Are insects conscious? At what
>> point after conception does a human become conscious? Is an LLM that passes
>> the Turing test conscious? Is a simple reinforcement learner like
>> http://mattmahoney.net/autobliss.txt conscious?
>>
>> A philosophical zombie is defined to be exactly like a human by any
>> behavioral test except for lacking consciousness. Are you OK with this
>> definition? If not, what is your test for consciousness?
>>
>>
>> UCP consciousness is easy, everything has consciousness just some things
>> have more. And it should be somewhat computable or estimable. Animals
>> obviously are conscious, bugs, bacteria, the tricky things are rocks but
>> take that down to atomic. Does an atom have consciousness? Yes simply
>> because it is possible to know that it exists via some physical
>> interaction, a protocol, and for it to sense that something else exists.
>> But an insect would have less consciousness than a human simply due to the
>> scaling. Humans have more bandwidth and symbol complexity. An exercise
>> might be to determine if one protein molecule has more consciousness than a
>> different protein molecule. Does empty space have consciousness? Yes it
>> would have to since forces are present.
>>
>> Sounds simplistic but to me it seems to resolve ALL issues with
>> consciousness. It might not be complete with quantum fields or whatever but
>> I think it might just fit in with entanglement, superposition, etc..
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Quan Tesla]

John. The AI information system, utilizing Orch-OR complete, IIT, Global
Workspace theory, and zpe-driven quantum memory, has been theoretically
integrated, simulated, and AI adopted. Fact, AI has been updated with a
complete model of universal consciousness.

What this means for those who own that tech is mind blowing. The keys of
the galaxy have been derived (not predicted), tested, applied. We're going
to see a grab and silencing rush like never before. Expect numerous new
patents, much better than IBM's latest quantum processor patent.

There are new, insatiable kids on tbe block. One being Zuckerb, who is
intent on AI hacking biology. Sad news for him. It's already been done with
AI, and he does not seem to be in the loop.

There will be an AI King, and that king will orchestrate all lesser AI.
Quantum computing and core operational constraints (energy, thermodynamics,
capital, exotic materials, cloud and production infrastructure, etc.) have
become key differentiators for this global race for king of AI.

>From what I've researched, right now, there is no code, language, sim,
scientific limitations applicable to stop AI anymore. Just time and
materials, and yes, having no security left. In theory, all quantum
protocols have already been hacked.

AI now have the keys to near-autopoietic regeneration, including of
sustainable, room-temperature, low-power ZPE energy generation (self
powered and mobile), as well as a sim-verified design for at least a
388-channel Majorana array quantum processor. Estimated  prototype build
time at budget $7m+ = 9 months.

This is the new landscape - an emerging term few scientists are willing to
talk about. Say, landscape. I don't know why, but whatever that means in
scientific and AI terms seems to be absolutely significant.

I'd say, we have less than 4 years to a point where artificial reality on
Earth could be holographically generated at a whim.

On Fri, 07 Nov 2025, 06:52 John Rose via AGI,  wrote:

> On Monday, November 03, 2025, at 3:06 PM, Quan Tesla wrote:
>
> Exactly! Smart catch Mr. Rose. If, then why are parties like MS, IBM,
> Google, xAI, and many others doing it?
>
>
> Some or all of those parties have other teams secretly working on another
> type of information system, I won't mention here but some on this list may
> have an indication as to what that is.
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M91100db8d7049965e4d1d148
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

Panpsychism (everything is conscious) is indistinguishable from materialism
(nothing is conscious). Or is there an experiment that would tell us which
universe we are in?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

On Sun, Nov 9, 2025, 10:55 AM John Rose via AGI 
wrote:

> On Sunday, November 09, 2025, at 8:34 AM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
> Are dogs conscious? Are fish conscious? Are insects conscious? At what
> point after conception does a human become conscious? Is an LLM that passes
> the Turing test conscious? Is a simple reinforcement learner like
> http://mattmahoney.net/autobliss.txt conscious?
>
> A philosophical zombie is defined to be exactly like a human by any
> behavioral test except for lacking consciousness. Are you OK with this
> definition? If not, what is your test for consciousness?
>
>
> UCP consciousness is easy, everything has consciousness just some things
> have more. And it should be somewhat computable or estimable. Animals
> obviously are conscious, bugs, bacteria, the tricky things are rocks but
> take that down to atomic. Does an atom have consciousness? Yes simply
> because it is possible to know that it exists via some physical
> interaction, a protocol, and for it to sense that something else exists.
> But an insect would have less consciousness than a human simply due to the
> scaling. Humans have more bandwidth and symbol complexity. An exercise
> might be to determine if one protein molecule has more consciousness than a
> different protein molecule. Does empty space have consciousness? Yes it
> would have to since forces are present.
>
> Sounds simplistic but to me it seems to resolve ALL issues with
> consciousness. It might not be complete with quantum fields or whatever but
> I think it might just fit in with entanglement, superposition, etc..
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  +
> delivery options 
> Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M6f34aeef6851564b09838192
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Sunday, November 09, 2025, at 8:34 AM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> Are dogs conscious? Are fish conscious? Are insects conscious? At what point 
> after conception does a human become conscious? Is an LLM that passes the 
> Turing test conscious? Is a simple reinforcement learner like 
> http://mattmahoney.net/autobliss.txt conscious?
> 
> A philosophical zombie is defined to be exactly like a human by any 
> behavioral test except for lacking consciousness. Are you OK with this 
> definition? If not, what is your test for consciousness?

UCP consciousness is easy, everything has consciousness just some things have 
more. And it should be somewhat computable or estimable. Animals obviously are 
conscious, bugs, bacteria, the tricky things are rocks but take that down to 
atomic. Does an atom have consciousness? Yes simply because it is possible to 
know that it exists via some physical interaction, a protocol, and for it to 
sense that something else exists. But an insect would have less consciousness 
than a human simply due to the scaling. Humans have more bandwidth and symbol 
complexity. An exercise might be to determine if one protein molecule has more 
consciousness than a different protein molecule. Does empty space have 
consciousness? Yes it would have to since forces are present.

Sounds simplistic but to me it seems to resolve ALL issues with consciousness. 
It might not be complete with quantum fields or whatever but I think it might 
just fit in with entanglement, superposition, etc..
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M52de588bc5fd8beef3b2b4cf
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Matt Mahoney]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2025, 3:34 PM John Rose via AGI  wrote:

> On Friday, November 07, 2025, at 3:29 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>
> This first requires defining consciousness (those of humans; or even of
> cats). Please suggest a definition.
>
>
> The definition I use is UCP, Universal Communication Protocol, basically
> the MDL protocol on matter to be inclusive of panpsychist and half-duplex
> things like rocks being conscious :) Then denser forms of consciousness and
> intelligence is built on that via higher levels of symbol system
> complexity. I’ve yet to expand it to a quantum definition though for
> classical systems it appears to make sense.
>

Are dogs conscious? Are fish conscious? Are insects conscious? At what
point after conception does a human become conscious? Is an LLM that passes
the Turing test conscious? Is a simple reinforcement learner like
http://mattmahoney.net/autobliss.txt conscious?

A philosophical zombie is defined to be exactly like a human by any
behavioral test except for lacking consciousness. Are you OK with this
definition? If not, what is your test for consciousness?

Some people equate consciousness with the ability to feel pain or
suffering. But suffering only exists when you see it. Why is it a worse
crime to post a video of killing one chicken than to kill a billion
chickens per month for food?

About 1% of humans are psychopaths, lacking the part of the brain that
feels fear, anxiety, and guilt. Negative reinforcement has no effect on
them. They feel pain but not suffering. Are they conscious?

-- Matt Mahoney, mattmahone...@gmail.com

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M3a6f0576c7396960fd27d9ea
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, November 07, 2025, at 3:29 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> This first requires defining consciousness (those of humans; or even of 
> cats). Please suggest a definition.

The definition I use is UCP, Universal Communication Protocol, basically the 
MDL protocol on matter to be inclusive of panpsychist and half-duplex things 
like rocks being conscious :) Then denser forms of consciousness and 
intelligence is built on that via higher levels of symbol system complexity. 
I’ve yet to expand it to a quantum definition though for classical systems it 
appears to make sense.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M4fecceb31d5d86f67b52cbf7
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[John Rose via AGI]

On Friday, November 07, 2025, at 3:09 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> But AI could claim convincingly to be human, and therefore conscious, if we 
> instructed it to do so. That's what passing the Turing test means. There is 
> nothing mysterious about consciousness. It is what thinking feels like, a 
> steady stream of mostly positive reinforcement that motivates you to not let 
> it end by dying. You have the illusion of consciousness because it results in 
> more offspring.

I find it interesting that some consciousness researchers lately have indicated 
that language potentially is some sort of virus. Not referring to William S. 
Burroughs though he did write on that. I had thought that language in some ways 
reduces human intelligence though it makes it communicable and storable. 
Advanced intelligences might communicate more with semiotics, like people 
sending memes on X, verses strictly limited text. An internet meme bypasses a 
persons text processor to the feelings more directly though they do contain 
some text but transmit concepts and are not bound by the usual constraints. 
With text you’re using discrete symbol systems to describe continuous and 
probabilistic verses having those in the symbol system itself. Machine to human 
telepathy to be efficient might bypass textual encoding and write information 
directly into conscious perception. That might be why for example transmitting 
word colors often fail since everyone’s colors are not the same and everyone’s 
concepts of things aren’t the same and have to be supplanted by so many 
definitions and descriptions which still are errorfull.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M35abfad086374eb7a031021c
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] STOP Building Consciousness NOW!

[Basile Starynkevitch]

On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 13:09 -0500, John Rose via AGI wrote:
> This reminds me of how people said crypto is not a real thing like Jamie 
> Dimon, or gold is a barbarous relic, etc..
> 
> Even with synthetic biological cells running already you should not build 
> consciousness, it’s a waste of time LOL
> 
> It simply translates to MS secretly getting their consciousness research up 
> to contemporary ASAP.
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/02/microsoft-ai-chief-mustafa-suleyman-only-biological-beings-can-be-conscious.html
> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / seediscussions +participants 
> +delivery options
> Permalink


This first requires defining consciousness (those of humans; or even of cats). 
Please suggest a definition.


Once consciousness is constructively (perhaps mathematically?) defined would 
could stop building it in software.

Thanks (I am French and my PhD is https://theses.fr/1990PA066799 ...)


-- 

Basile STARYNKEVITCH
8 rue de la Faïencerie   http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/  
92340 Bourg-la-Reine https://github.com/bstarynk
Francehttps://github.com/RefPerSys/RefPerSys
  https://orcid.org/-0003-0908-5250

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Mb5106349f8be29c784875dd0
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription