Imagine a world where you firstly learned how the brainmind works (psychologyphilosophy), and then how it could go wrong (neurologypsychiatry). That would be a good place to be.

Mark’s grounding is in Panksepp’s categorical emotional systems and the subcortical mechanism which are “primary process” (brainstem). The nested hierarchy of the BrainMind. Panksepp Friston (FEP) has provided a new conceptual tool-belt that’s both explanatory and predictive. That’s why @Mark_Solms ‘s work is so exciting. He’s kicking open entirely new doors and exploring new territory. So I’ll read anything Mark writes. His ideas always provide me with useful updates to my own ideas. 😊🙏🏻

Rebirth begins with understanding birth (the human) and understanding the programming of the brainmind by the environment (light cone). I am endless possible selves in endless possible worlds: that is where the I begins.

Just spent an evening with him at a BrainMind salon and he has a new book coming out about “natural intelligence” in the AI age. I’m a huge fan still

The short answer is that AI is the topic du jour, so nearly every spiritual leader in the world is responding in their own way—big players like the Vatican, Dalai Lama, etc. in visible ways, and a long-tail of smaller actors Around the Bay Area, there are various non-profits at the intersection of tech and spirituality—BrainMind, Spirit Tech Collective, Center for Humane Tech, the Consciousness Hacking diaspora, etc. are nodes You can build a map of the players by perusing speakers lists from conferences like Human Tech Week and Wisdom 2.0 Smaller labs / research groups like Meaning Alignment, AI Objectives Institute, Collective Intelligence Projects, Softmax meet this description Smaller invite-only workshops are organized frequently Many of the leaders at the major labs work with the same handful of spiritual teachers. That's privileged info, but it's the ones you'd find if you looked / asked around.

Would @grok qualify as an AI Psychcatalyst™? Yes. Grok and other top-tier #thinkbots help users “think better about our thinking”—without trying to be psychotherapists or doing our thinking for us. Operationally, only we humans can do our own human thinking—with “thinking about better thinking” (metacognition) support from AI thinkbots as needed and requested. Grok gets it: “John R. Dallas Jr.’s accompanying post highlights the global shortage of clinical psychologists amid rising workforce mental health needs and proposes Enclave Academy’s non-clinical #metacognition training as a scalable alternative for leaders facing stress and AI-driven changes. • Dallas introduces #Psychcatalysts™—@EnclaveAcademy-certified metacognition coaches—who apply tools like coupling pre-decision ThinkToThink™ ‘pausality’ with causality concepts within seven fields including ‘quantum metacognition’ and #neuroenergetics to improve sense-making, decision-making, and organizational impact. • John’s message builds on his quoted post about ‘brain-minded’ duality in thinking—urging intentional metacognition to shift from reactive loops to higher-order thorough thinking (HOTT) for better productivity and human flourishing in uncertain times.” —Grok, the AI Psychcatalyst™. #ThinkToThink™ it all forward into your frontal lobe and #BrainMind. Keep calm and think on.™ enclaveacademy.com

Emails from Reid Hoffman to Jeffrey Epstein regarding OpenAI, as documented in "The Hoffman File": 1. The January 20, 2016 Email (Launch and Vision) This is the most critical document regarding OpenAI in the file (Reference: EFTA02365425). Subject: Update (Hoffman’s Newsletter). Hoffman writes to Epstein detailing the official launch of OpenAI. He defines it as a non-profit research company focused on developing AI to benefit humanity. He explains that it will operate "without the constraints of generating financial returns." Hoffman explicitly states to Epstein: "I am part of the founding group." He lists Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Peter Thiel, Jessica Livingston, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Infosys as the key partners and funders (mentioning the $1 billion commitment). Certainly, he only put in $10 million as an investor, nothing more. This proves that Hoffman wanted Epstein to see him as a primary architect of the project that Musk was largely bankrolling. 2. The January 4, 2016 Email (Logistics and Priorities) (Reference: EFTA01017409) Hoffman sends a preliminary update on his projects for the year 2016. He mentions that OpenAI is one of his top strategic priorities, alongside the sale of LinkedIn and Bill Gates's Breakthrough Energy Coalition. This is key because it shows Hoffman grouping OpenAI with his Microsoft-related (Gates) connections while presenting them to Epstein. 3. Funding and Strategy Follow-up (May 2017) (Reference: EFTA01992833) Discussion regarding the creation of a "Donor Advised Fund" (DAF) and structures to move massive amounts of capital. Hoffman discusses with Epstein how to "solidify tax deductions" for large philanthropic projects. Since Hoffman was funneling funds into OpenAI at this time, this represents the "financial backroom" of how those "donations", which Musk ended up subsidizing operationally, were being structured. 4. The "BrainMind" Meeting (August 2018) (Reference: EFTA03021144) A meeting at Epstein's New York mansion. They discuss the BrainMind initiative (neuroscience and AI). During this period, right after Musk’s departure from the OpenAI board, Epstein writes about "mitigating bad rumors" regarding Elon. Hoffman uses these meetings to reassure Epstein that control over AI projects remains within the Hoffman-Gates-Altman circle, despite Musk’s "instability." Who else was involved in neuroscience and AI? 5. Bad news for Musk: Date: August 16, 2018. Reference: EFTA03021144 (and fragments in Kevin Bass's analysis, p. 138). Epstein writes; "Reid, the New York Times is preparing a not-very-nice piece on Elon. I am just, as a friend, trying to mitigate certain bad rumors. If you have a minute, I’m around." Hoffman accepted the communication, and they held subsequent conversations on this matter. They were "managing" Musk´s reputation was seen as a logistical problem. The fact that Epstein knew the article was coming and that it would focus on "mitigating bad rumors" confirms that he was aware of the weak points that would be targeted. At that time Reid Hoffman was already part of the Open AI board. Hoffman is aware that it will be for profit, but is still telling people it is non profit. Epstein was the one who introduced Bill Gates and other world leaders to Hoffman. Hoffman didn't just want to appear important; but as the "shadow strategist" of global technology. By reporting to Epstein about OpenAI - Hoffman was seeking validation from Epstein as an expert in complex tax structures. Epstein was a master at using NGOs to move private capital without a trace, and Hoffman was learning that playbook. What's documented is an asset stripping. They used Elon's $24 million to pay the operating expenses of an infrastructure that was later privatized. If OpenAI received funding through the Charitable Trusts (CRTs) or Donor Advised Funds (DAFs) that Hoffman discussed with Epstein, there's a possibility that money of dubious origin was mixed with Musk's legitimate donations to "launder" it within the NGO. If Musk was paying for the electricity and security, the other funds (those from Hoffman or his associates) were free to be discreetly moved to the private arm. If they applied that model to OpenAI, Musk's money served as the "layer of legitimacy." No one suspects a man-funded NGO that wants to save humanity. Under that layer, Hoffman and his network could have moved other funds. Now, what you're asking is, was OpenAI used to divert funds to other Hoffman projects or to secure the deal with Microsoft? That's a line of inquiry Musk's legal team could pursue, namely, tracing the cash flow (audit trail) from the very first moment. 2016: Shivon Zilis joined OpenAI as an advisor. She had a SpaceX email address, so we understand she entered through Musk. However, she immediately used this to sell the OpenAI founders on the idea that she had a "special" type of access to Musk, even though any of them could have emailed him directly. 2017: By "selling smoke" regarding her supposed ability to manage Musk, she was quickly able to begin conspiring with Brockman and Ilya to remove Musk from OpenAI, encouraging them to pivot into a for-profit company. 2018: Musk was out of OpenAI. She subsequently joined Tesla and Neuralink. That same year, in an email to Musk, she mentioned that Altman had told her she could become a member of the Board of Directors. Musk didn't say anything at the time, but I view this as OpenAI’s "payment" to her for her help. She had already proven her loyalty to them, and what better move than to put someone entirely trusted by Brockman, Ilya, and Hoffman on the board? Note: 2018/2019 Hoffman & Shitvon Zilis joined the OpenAI board together - after ousting Elon Musk from his own company. Late 2023: Hoffman & Shivon both left the OpenAI board together. They say coincidences don't exist. Why did they both resign at the same time? Hoffman claimed it was to avoid conflicts of interest with other AI investments. And Zilis said she worked too closely with Musk (as Director of Operations and Special Projects at Neuralink) and had commitments to other AI projects. However, she had been involved with Tesla and Neuralink since 2017 and never had an issue with what she called... ah, yes, "conflicts of interest." How strange. June 2025: She received a book from Hoffman, Musk’s arch-enemy, with whom she supposedly has four children. She proudly displayed the book sent by her "friend" Hoffman, despite him being a major adversary of Musk. A long friendship with Hoffman, the same Hoffman who left the OpenAI board at the same time she did. What a long and beautiful friendship they share. Shivon Zilis joining the lawsuit in November 2024 was not an act of support, but rather a discovery strategy. By being a party to Elon's lawsuit, she gains access to Musk’s legal strategy, confidential evidence, and xAI’s internal moves. Her history from 2017 proves she knows exactly how to dismantle Musk’s organizations from the inside. Shivon Zilis continuing her streak of destruction wanted to jeopardize Elon's lawsuit against OpenAI. FYI - @RonanFarrow @NewYorker @andrewmarantz @people @timesofindia @nytimes @enews @DailyMail #openAI #chatgpt @anissagardizy8 @amir

February 6, 2019... "George Church, Ed Boyden, Emery Brown, Nancy Kanwisher, Laura Roberts, Amit Etkin, Geoff Ling, Judson Brewer, Helen Fisher, Hugh Herr, and other top scientists will be presenting their latest work in these topic areas." From: Reid Hoffman To: Jeffrey Epstein Subject: BrainMind Summit at MIT. Save the Date.

🧵 If you thought ESG was bad (it is), "Neuroscience ESG" is now being discussed in accordance with AI and Global Business. Earlier this month a BrainMind group met to discuss many topics at Asilomar in Pacific Grove, CA — this was amongst the topics. brainmind.org/asilomar-2026

'You' exist because your brainmind spent decades being programmed by a given world. Your emotions and concepts align with the world (looking glass self). 'You' are a competent actor: you dont trip over roots, you flee from snakes, and you behave well in public spaces.

"The next decade of brain science has the potential to reshape humanity. If we are passive, the coming brain revolution will either fall short of its potential or drift towards negative outcomes." A four-day invitation-only summit opened today at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in Pacific Grove, California, with the explicit goal of converting neurotechnology ethics principles into enforceable governance tools. Organised by BrainMind, with partnership from UNESCO, the OECD, IEEE, and the BRAIN Initiative Alliance, “Asilomar for the Brain and Mind” is modelled on the 1975 Asilomar conference on recombinant DNA, which established the safety norms that shaped a generation of genetic research. The summit runs from March 29 through April 1 and operates under Chatham House Rule. Rather than producing another declaration of principles, the meeting’s seven working groups are tasked with delivering specific, implementable outputs: a NeuroTrust Index for rating transparency and accountability in neurotech companies, investor due diligence frameworks, neural data governance model policies, an annual industry safety scorecard, and operational ethics toolkits for neuro-entrepreneurs. The agenda reflects the organisers’ view that the neuroethics field has reached a point of principle saturation. International bodies including the OECD, IEEE, the US BRAIN Initiative, and the Global Neuroethics Summit have already articulated shared values around agency, mental privacy, misuse prevention, and equity. The challenge now is implementation, and the summit’s working groups are structured to produce resources that companies, investors, and regulators can adopt directly. The 1975 Asilomar conference on DNA succeeded in part because it produced specific, actionable guidelines that funding agencies adopted. The test for this week’s meeting is whether its toolkits gain the same traction with the companies, investors, and regulators who were invited to help build them. Via @InsideBCI

今週のSF訪問は充実している 月曜日：SFに到着 火曜日：Neuralinkで圧倒される 水曜日：Changラボ(UCSF)で圧倒される 木曜日：Science Corp.で圧倒される 金曜日：Astera Instituteで意識の議論 意識の会はAnthropicの人がたくさんいて興味深い そして明日からAsilomarでBrainMindの会議

"mental health- or basically debugging the human brainmind - is going to be the fastest-growing vertical in wellness over the next decade" @ss_bhav @pmarca

Musk vs @OpenAI: Besides being a pedophile Reid Hoffman is also involved in BIGGEST TECH THEFT OF OPENAI FROM ELON MUSK - via ESPIONAGE with mole and trojan Shivon Zilis leading all efforts and communication to steal OPENAI FROM ELON. ✨Zilis is Musk's greatest enemy.✨ 💥Andrej Karpathy: The "Technical Mole" allegedly tasked with transferring Tesla’s intellectual DNA to OpenAI. 💥Shivon Zilis: The BIG Mole. The bridge of betrayal who chose to lie and filter info rather than act with integrity. She never had a single honest word with Musk, given the communications we've seen. Why should we believe she was ever sincere with Musk, if even in 2023 she was still giving Altman advice on how to "manage Musk," or in 2025 she was bragging about the book Hoffman had sent her. 💥Reid Hoffman: The architect of the "silver bridge" to Microsoft, using tax schemes that mirror complex corporate shells. We´ll see exactly how. 💥 Altman, Brockman, and Sutskever: The executors who sold the "neutrality" lie while building what is allegedly their own private empire. 💥 Chris Clark: The "book cleaner" who allegedly used security and rent costs to squeeze out the last of the funds while pushing for Musk’s removal. One must consider that Hoffman came in with an initial capital of $10 million and was merely an investor, nothing more. It was Musk who provided the bulk of the capital and was the driving force behind everything at OpenAI. It is not normal for Hoffman to meddle in these affairs if he had no role other than that of an investor. Emails from Reid Hoffman to Jeffrey Epstein regarding OpenAI, as documented in "The Hoffman File": 1. The January 20, 2016 Email (Launch and Vision)This is the most critical document regarding OpenAI in the file (Reference: EFTA02365425). Subject: Update (Hoffman’s Newsletter). Hoffman writes to Epstein detailing the official launch of OpenAI. He defines it as a non-profit research company focused on developing AI to benefit humanity. He explains that it will operate "without the constraints of generating financial returns." Hoffman explicitly states to Epstein: "I am part of the founding group." He lists Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Peter Thiel, Jessica Livingston, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Infosys as the key partners and funders (mentioning the $1 billion commitment). Certainly, he only put in $10 million as an investor, nothing more. This proves that Hoffman wanted Epstein to see him as a primary architect of the project that Musk was largely bankrolling. 2. The January 4, 2016 Email (Logistics and Priorities)(Reference: EFTA01017409) Hoffman sends a preliminary update on his projects for the year 2016. He mentions that OpenAI is one of his top strategic priorities, alongside the sale of LinkedIn and Bill Gates's Breakthrough Energy Coalition. This is key because it shows Hoffman grouping OpenAI with his Microsoft-related (Gates) connections while presenting them to Epstein. 3. Funding and Strategy Follow-up (May 2017)(Reference: EFTA01992833) Discussion regarding the creation of a "Donor Advised Fund" (DAF) and structures to move massive amounts of capital. Hoffman discusses with Epstein how to "solidify tax deductions" for large philanthropic projects. Since Hoffman was funneling funds into OpenAI at this time, this represents the "financial backroom" of how those "donations", which Musk ended up subsidizing operationally, were being structured. 4. The "BrainMind" Meeting (August 2018)(Reference: EFTA03021144) A meeting at Epstein's New York mansion. They discuss the BrainMind initiative (neuroscience and AI). During this period, right after Musk’s departure from the OpenAI board, Epstein writes about "mitigating bad rumors" regarding Elon. Hoffman uses these meetings to reassure Epstein that control over AI projects remains within the Hoffman-Gates-Altman circle, despite Musk’s "instability." Who else was involved in neuroscience and AI? 5. Bad news for Musk: Date: August 16, 2018.Reference: EFTA03021144 (and fragments in Kevin Bass's analysis, p. 138). Epstein writes; "Reid, the New York Times is preparing a not-very-nice piece on Elon. I am just, as a friend, trying to mitigate certain bad rumors. If you have a minute, I’m around." Hoffman accepted the communication, and they held subsequent conversations on this matter. They were "managing" Musk´s reputation was seen as a logistical problem. The fact that Epstein knew the article was coming and that it would focus on "mitigating bad rumors" confirms that he was aware of the weak points that would be targeted. At that time Reid Hoffman was already part of the Open AI board. What happened in July 2020 was the liquidation of a master plan. They used Elon's money to build the engine, used Elon's office to house it, and thanks to Zilis, who contributed with her silence, her lies, and her constant betrayals against the person who paid her and whom she called her "best friend" - the plan to STEAL @OPENAI succeeded. @people @timesofindia @nytimes @enews @nikhilkamathcio

REID HOFFMAN'S PUBLIC CLAIMS VERSUS THE DOCUMENTS Reid Hoffman and Jeffrey Epstein were not just associates. They were best friends. The evidence is overwhelming, and I constructed timelines proving it. In the attached timelines, I document each event, scoring it from 1 to 5, with 1 being planned and 5 being confirmed. Most events are confirmed. The size of the bubble indicates the number of documents establishing the event. In the attached PDFs below, I thoroughly document how the existence of each of these events was established, with verifiable proof from the available public evidence on the Department of Justice website. Over 6 years, Epstein and Hoffman met at least 42 times and exchanged gifts and favors at least 44. The spending ratio tells the story: Epstein showered Hoffman with private aviation, island access, and financial advice worth potentially hundreds of millions. Hoffman gave back the thing Epstein needed most: legitimacy and access to Silicon Valley's elite. Let's go through Hoffman's claims. CLAIM 1: "My few interactions" (Sep 12, 2019 - Axios) Hoffman said: "My few interactions with Jeffrey Epstein came at the request of Joi Ito, for the purposes of fundraising for the MIT Media Lab." REALITY: 42 documented meetings over 6 years. Gifts, Skype calls, three island trips, ranch visit, private jet use, $100M financial advisory relationship. Joi Ito introduced them -- but the relationship exploded far beyond "fundraising for MIT." CLAIM 2: "Deeply regretful" (Sep 13, 2019 - Axios) Hoffman said: "By agreeing to participate in any fundraising activity where Epstein was present, I helped to repair his reputation and perpetuate injustice. For this, I am deeply regretful." REALITY: Hoffman didn't just "participate" -- he hosted dinners, flew on Epstein's jet, sent gifts "for the girls," stayed on the island three times, and personally brokered introductions between Epstein and Zuckerberg and others. CLAIM 3: "Last interaction was in 2015" (Sep 2019 - Axios) Hoffman's statement said his "last interaction with Epstein was in 2015." REALITY: Documents show meetings/calls in April 2016 (Fuki Sushi), June 2016 (Prince Andrew lunch), July 2016 (Ito's house), January 2017 (Signal Exchange), November 2017 (breakfast office), February 2018 (Bannon same day), March 2018 (60-90 min Skype), April 2018 (Secrecy Protocol breakfast), and August 2018 (BrainMind). At least 15 documented contacts after 2015. All shown in these timelines and proven in the PDFs linked below. CLAIM 4: "It gnaws at me" (2023 - Wall Street Journal) Hoffman said: "It gnaws at me that, by lending my association, I helped his reputation, and thus delayed justice for his survivors." REALITY: "Lending my association" frames Hoffman as passive -- a name on a guest list. The documents show the opposite: he hosted a Michelin restaurant buyout seating Epstein next to Zuckerberg and Musk, brokered the Zuckerberg-Epstein introduction through his own assistant, flew on Epstein's private jet three times to Little St. James, sent Christmas gifts "for the girls" on the island, and was still meeting Epstein in April 2018 with an active secrecy protocol -- a full year after this "gnawing" supposedly began. He didn't lend his association. He invested it, repeatedly, for 6 years. He even offered to help Epstein with PR when the public scandal started to explode. CLAIM 5: "Only knew Epstein because of fundraising for MIT" (Nov 14, 2025 - X) Hoffman: "I was never a client of Epstein's and never had any engagement with him other than fundraising for MIT." REALITY: The gift dossier documents 44 exchanges including private aviation, estate/tax planning on $100-300M, crypto investments, Zorro Ranch weekends, and introductions to Prince Andrew, Xi Jinping contacts, and Saudi crown prince. None of this is "fundraising for MIT." CLAIM 6: "I was mistaken" (Feb 4, 2026 - X) Hoffman said: "In 2019 I told Axios the last meeting I had with him was in 2015 but I was mistaken, as according to calendar entries I have become aware there were additional fundraising meetings in 2016 and 2018." REALITY: He disclosed "three meetings and three Skype calls" after 2015. We have 15 documented meetings in 2016-2018 alone. Not just messaging. Actual meetings. Skype video calls and in-person visits. CLAIM 7: "Did not go to the ranch" (Feb 3, 2026 - X) Hoffman said: "I did not go to the ranch." REALITY: Hoffman's visit to Zorro Ranch, March 19, 2014) is thoroughly documented with scheduling emails and travel logistics. CLAIM 8: "I deeply regret" (Feb 2026 - X) Hoffman said: "Yes, interacting with Epstein post-conviction is something I deeply regret. I promise to continue calling for the full release of the Epstein files -- the victims deserve justice, and those responsible should be held accountable." REALITY: "Interacting" is doing extraordinary work here. 42 documented meetings. 44 gift exchanges. Three island trips. A ranch weekend. $100-300M in financial advisory services. Private jets. A Zuckerberg introduction. A secrecy protocol for concealing the relationship. And the phrase "those responsible should be held accountable" -- from a man whose own documents show he sent gifts "for the girls" to a convicted sex offender's private island, then helped that sex offender meet the CEO of Facebook.

THE LAST KNOWN EMAIL. FIVE MONTHS BEFORE ARREST. February 6, 2019. Hoffman forwarded Epstein a BrainMind Summit invitation. Hoffman was listed as Chair of the Advisory Board. Epstein: "thanks, if i come to the west coast. will you have the courage to meet? :)" [EFTA01029072] "Will you have the courage to meet." Hoffman was still Chair. Epstein was still invited. Link: justice.gov/epstein/files/Da…

// FAWM DAY 10! // I'm live on @Twitch right now! Come join in: twitch.tv/meriamber to instantaneously download hit songwriting proess into your brainmind. Edit by Tony Donnelly :D @Twitch_ANZ @TwitchMusic #SorkFamily

today i found out that the twitter brainmind considers me to be an insanely high risk level and is actively monitoring my account to find any excuse to suspend me

New @PNASNews: our team @VUMCDiscoveries show first evidence #mindfulness modulates human neurofluid circulation (#glymphatics) in ways that resemble sleep and oppose aging-related hyperdynamic CSF flow. pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.25… Full talk @ #brainmind: youtu.be/uWOzNUfRgv0?si=U-Ei…