If even a small fraction of the reverse-engineering hypothesis is true, then AI may not be purely a human-created phenomenon. It may represent the latest stage of a technological lineage influenced by non-human intelligence. In that case, the question is not whether an AI–NHI interface could exist, but whether we have already been participating in one without recognizing it.

As I have been saying, everyone in theoretical physics should be aware of the claims made about gravity and physicists in the 1971 Australian intelligence document:

Dr Dean Radin reveals that he got a device to work that was quote: “A machine that identifies who you are and your intention, kind of like Neuralink, except there’s no connection - nothing going in the brain, it’s pure intention.” .. the device was sold to the US Navy and went dark. The future is gunna be wild. Neuralink is basic.

Some moments from the last year... :) @Renate_FE @GeorgeJF @MouraoCorrea @derhavas @MikeRicksecker

the anthropic co-founder jack clark advice that stuck with me: read the primary material. not the summary. not what the ai said about it. the actual thing. form your own opinion first. then ask the model. never the other way around. keep practices in your life where it’s just you against the world ~ a sport, an instrument, reading, building something with your hands. spaces where the algorithm can’t mediate what you learn about yourself. and don’t defer to AI even when it’s usually right. especially then, actually. that’s precisely when the habit forms. the people who won’t get eaten by this moment are the ones who stayed hard to replace. not because they avoided the tools but because they kept the parts of thinking that make the tools worth using.

Demis Hassabis just told a room full of academics that they’re running out of time. Not the engineers. Not the technologists. The economists. The philosophers. The people who are supposed to understand what a civilization actually is. Hassabis: “It’s very urgent that we really think about the second-order consequences.” He wasn’t talking about the technology. He was talking about everything that comes after it. Hassabis: “I’m always a little bit astounded when I talk to economists about what’s happening and it’s sort of, they’re pretty skeptical. ‘Where’s it, where’s it coming in the GDP?’” The architects of the global economy are asking where the biggest economic shift in human history is showing up in a spreadsheet. That’s not skepticism. That’s institutional paralysis dressed up as rigor. Hassabis: “It’s ten times the Industrial Revolution.” The Industrial Revolution didn’t just move capital. It burned the feudal system to the ground and birthed the modern world. Hassabis is telling us to multiply that violence by ten. Hassabis: “We’re going to be in a world for the first time, if we get the technology right, where we’re a non-zero-sum world for the first time in humanity’s existence. How can that not need a new type of economic system?” Every economic model you have ever lived under shares the exact same foundational assumption. Scarcity. Capitalism. Communism. Mercantilism. Feudalism. Four names for the mathematics of starvation. Hassabis: “I don’t think it’s any of the ones we’ve tried, because they were all done under the guise of a zero-sum, a limited, a scarce world.” He’s not saying capitalism failed. He’s saying the premise underneath it is about to dissolve. And nobody has written the replacement. But scarcity didn’t just shape our economies. It shaped our identities. You found meaning in your labor. You found virtue in your utility. You worked so you didn’t die. Every concept of purpose humans have ever constructed was forged in a world where things run out. Where choices cost something. Where suffering had a function. Remove scarcity and you don’t just disrupt markets. You collapse the entire philosophical framework through which human beings have understood what it means to live. Hassabis: “There’s the even harder question of how do we want to evolve our society and what is virtuous, what is meaning, what is purpose.” The technology is solvable. The economics is redesignable. But philosophy itself was built inside scarcity. Ethics is the study of hard choices. Meaning is what we extract from struggle. Purpose is what we build against resistance. Take that away and the entire architecture of human meaning loses its load-bearing wall. Hassabis: “I think that’s going to need lots of great philosophers.” He’s asking for thinkers who don’t exist yet. The engineers are about to automate your survival. And in doing so, they will automate your purpose. We spent all of human history fighting for the right to stop struggling. We have no idea what happens to the human mind when we actually win.

Animals are communicating all the time. Learn what they’re saying on our 4-week course with @Wynterjam. Details: tinyurl.com/36b7r8me #interspecies #animalcommunication #nature #animaltalk #animaltalkafrica #intuitive #physical #emotional