The Man with the Blue & Golden Fun

Introduction

Here, shortly, below, after the intro this bit constitutes, will appear some notes I made not long ago, whilst on a commuter train: a pendeltåg to be exact. This places me, therefore, in Stockholm right now.

It’s a place I’m wanting to make my home. It has been for quite a long while now: a couple of years or so — actually, maybe more. I'm wondering these days if for longer than I can imagine: I’m wondering if it’s a place I always needed to know, even as I had never visited until 2022.

I asked myself this question only this morning, in fact:

“why do i feel at peace when i feel a piece of #sweden beneath my feet?

why?”

On the back of my longitudinal goal to convince really good people — the Swedish I count first and foremost as such a people — that, sliding as I do between a philosophy of the almost metaphysical and a tech of the truly utilitarian and tangible, there are things I am saying ever more cogently these days which cannot, must not, should not be ignored for much longer, I am advocating over and over how to proceed with a tech that serves to make it possible for humanity’s goalposts to be moved just as much as those of the machines:

“Question: why have goalposts for machines been allowed to historically move — yet for humans as a species we are consistently obliged to remain static?

That is, machines can chase us, and in fact that is their purpose — but humanity as a species can never aspire to growing out of its collective past.

It may only resign itself to being caught up with. Only this. Only that.

But who decided this? Who took this decision? Who made out that it must be like this?

And why?”

The notes I’ve made, in all seriousness … on that pendeltåg …

Here, then, some of the notes already alluded to above. In their writing yesterday and the day before, I continue to advocate what I feel must be done to dominate — on behalf of a real democracy — all the multiple domains of war that for decades now have been assailing us, in that space sociology and criminology call “dark figure”.

Without a wider societal recognition or acceptance of those, like myself, who did see what was going on all this time.

Not just no acceptance, either. Sometimes a wilful rejection … a quite purposeful and deliberate rejection.

what i’m proposing:

it's an op sys

the tech is ai, loosely described

then there’s the human side:

you want to extract what people like me can do with their brains

and formularise it so more people can do the same

it will involve assessing people to see the innate nature of their current thinking and then applying some cocktail of brain-changing drugs on top

mine in the end was a happy accident for me

there will be other brains which can work well with my cocktail

and some people who will need different ones

the challenge is that the results may take a year or so to appear

how to resolve this challenge:

we could create some form of digital twins to speed up assessment

that's a useful use-case no one has considered for ai, i’m pretty sure

but now we know that brains plus certain pharma works with people like me, we know where to look for more

and that automagically makes the job much easier

half the challenge is that, always: knowing what to search for in the first place

the intuition validation engine:

people plus tech in equal measure: objects and code etc etc all without priority for one or the other

if not how i painted it exactly, i've described an appropriate hierarchy at the very least

the flatness of it is interesting

because it's precisely NOT what we've done to date

and doing something not done is always fruitful — always

where do we propose to be doing these things:

all the domains of warfare need supporting

so a multi-agency workflow

at least in respect of access and input to the wider project and its workstreams

even if not to influence: OUR job, meantime, is the side of influencing; OUR job being to scope

what we mustn’t do, ever:

cross-pollination to the outside world: this must never happen

we need a wholly hermetic philosophy and culture of business, research and client engagement, even as amongst us in our day-to-day the flow of ideas, innovation, and invention must be as free as possible for any of us to imagine

who won’t, therefore, be in:

guilty parties to date won't change their spots

in their hunger to attract more and more investors, they'll always release into the enemy all the concepts as soon as we create them: it’s the microsoft “leaky” windows op-sys concept from the start, which scoped the shape of a third-party sales function

being the anti-virus manufacturers …

it wasn’t an accident: in all senses, it was viral marketing designed in from its initiation

this cannot happen again; not with us, not in this; just never

the intuition validation tools and secrecy positive/secrecy total weapons we develop will have to remain swords for absolutely as long as possible

this is not sam altman and silicon valley’s greed but alan turing and his colleagues’ good faith, ingenuity, determination, and democratic conviction

we do NOT become shields and repurposed swords within weeks: platforms and libraries which russia and china knock off any second you care to look away

it really CANNOT happen like this: not any more

whose out, then, and why:

for me, those actors i already allude to, (you can surely, by now, guess who), and out of it for the foreseeable too, leaves plenty of big tech to be getting on with

if you feel you need big tech (i don't) … but if you do … well … you can ignore openai, ms, palantir, and musk — and still have a massive lever to make the rest perform your way: in the ways I firmly, where not fiercely, have been proposing

maybe even MORE of a massive lever, precisely BECAUSE we agree, finally, to leave out the aforementioned

why do this … all this way:

it creates an enormous incentive for the rest now left in to behave themselves exactly on our terms, in exchange for delivering the professionalised and secretive ruggedisation of what i am proposing: that is, once near-and medium-term research becomes applicable and practicable in those domains i mentioned earlier

the bletchley park spirit always — step by bloodied step; the musk and altman “build and break fast” never … never, i insist, never

but only b2gov — this must remain a fact of life: only b2gov for secrecy-positive and secrecy-total workstreams

where this leaves our nascent citizen-protection programmes:

citizen-protection programmes will only use “existing tech”, properly implemented

this “existing tech” will be a moving target of course

but never more than that moment's “existing”

this is simply to avoid the “openai-ing” of the intuition and secrecy-related weaponry we begin to deepen: its release onto the wider global landscape for purely selfish and base financial reasoning would be a serious error we cannot ever consent to

… and so to my conclusion:

if you like and need to redefine anything, it's there for you to embrace in some way or not

and if you do ultimately decide to embrace, then on the back of what others wanted this afternoon, one legal and business figure and entity like the guardian newspaper group is acceptable to me; the goal and simple objective being just that no sale or purchase on any open market shall be committed ever

no big tech buying us up to asset strip or just close down

or worse, aiming intentionally to give up the secrets of the state and its citizens to the enemy, before the enemy ended up working it out for themselves, because that’s where the benefit to big tech’s bottom line most lay

this is the key to EVERYTHING that's happened here:

to date, you’ve believed your tech partners' salespeople, because that's how it's been forever

but it doesn't HAVE to be like that forever

and you DON’T have to believe shiny logos from the valley, as they easily and ever so casually play on our popular culture to frighten the pants off us …

instead of, much more intelligently, using a duly arts-based high-level domain expertise; a class of truly original thinking in order to create and imagineer new ways of together fighting, beating and vanquishing — for the long-term — our shared and collective enemies of all liberties”