What if there existed a system—rooted in advanced neuroscience and AI—that could privately monitor human intent? A system that didn’t invade your thoughts for no reason, but quietly, passively scanned for signs of dangerous or criminal intent and acted only when thresholds were met. Imagine a future where: * War...
Introduction: Epistemic status: Speculative and exploratory. This is a thought experiment inspired by complexity theory, emergence, and scale-invariant patterns. I don’t assert these ideas as literal truths, but as lenses to think about life and structure in the universe more broadly. I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how we...
Introduction Natural languages are messy, ambiguous, and often inefficient for transmitting structured ideas. Kamelo is a proposal for a constructed language designed to address these issues by building words from logical, compositional units. This post outlines the foundations of Kamelo—a rule-based, expandable language using fixed character sets and hierarchical categories...
You’re absolutely right to highlight this danger and I think your scenario is not just plausible, but likely without intentional safeguards. History overwhelmingly shows that surveillance tools are first applied to the powerless, and only rarely if ever to those in power. The examples you give (job coercion, religious pressure, parental abuse) are chilling because they follow existing social patterns.
My post isn’t meant to suggest that this kind of system should be built now, or that we can trust it to be used fairly by default. Instead, I’m trying to explore the uncomfortable possibility that such technology might become inevitable not because it’s ideal, but because it emerges out of escalating demand... (read more)
What if there existed a system—rooted in advanced neuroscience and AI—that could privately monitor human intent? A system that didn’t invade your thoughts for no reason, but quietly, passively scanned for signs of dangerous or criminal intent and acted only when thresholds were met.
Imagine a future where:
What could such a system look like—and should it exist?
Let’s imagine the world in 100–200 years, where neuroscience, ethics, and artificial intelligence have evolved enough to support the following... (read 872 more words →)
Thanks for the thoughtful critique — I think you’re absolutely right that evolution by natural selection, as we know it, relies on mechanisms like reproduction, variation, and interaction happening on relatively fast timescales and small spatial scales. Galaxies and planets don’t seem to fit that model: they don’t reproduce, they rarely interact meaningfully, and they change far too slowly for classic Darwinian evolution to work.
But I realize now that I may have been too loose with my use of “life” or “intelligence” in the original post. What I’m really interested in exploring is this:
Are there forms of structure or information-processing at different scales — even planetary or galactic — that could be... (read more)
Introduction:
Epistemic status: Speculative and exploratory. This is a thought experiment inspired by complexity theory, emergence, and scale-invariant patterns. I don’t assert these ideas as literal truths, but as lenses to think about life and structure in the universe more broadly.I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how we define life — and whether that definition might be far too narrow. We tend to look at life through a biological lens: cells, DNA, evolution, intelligence. But what if life — or life-like processes — are not bound by size, form, or even biology at all?
What if life is the natural outcome of structure emerging from randomness — and this process doesn’t just happen... (read 753 more words →)
Yes, It is more difficult to understand arbitrary tree structure but the goal is make the tree more and more logical and less and less arbitrary, we need a perfectly logical tree that could describe every meaning (if possible) or atleast as close as possible. When its more logical it'll be easier to learn and hard to master.
Yesss! Solresol is definitely a spiritual cousin — and you're right, the pentatonic scale connection is super interesting.
Kamelo using 5 phonemes intentionally echoes both:
Solresol mapped syllables to meanings too, but Kamelo’s twist is:
So theoretically:
Hey, Thanks so much for diving into Kamelo, you’ve nailed exactly the kind of questions I’m wrestling with.
You're totally right — grammar is where ambiguity really enters. Right now, Kamelo doesn’t have a fixed grammar yet. But the idea is:
Yes! You can stop mid-encoding. That's a key principle: Kamelo is compressible based on shared context, like how we say "the fruit" instead of "a Rosaceae angiosperm of genus Malus". The idea is to transmit enough meaning for the moment, and go deeper... (read more)
Introduction
Natural languages are messy, ambiguous, and often inefficient for transmitting structured ideas. Kamelo is a proposal for a constructed language designed to address these issues by building words from logical, compositional units. This post outlines the foundations of Kamelo—a rule-based, expandable language using fixed character sets and hierarchical categories to represent meaning with minimal ambiguity or memorization.
Kamelo is not intended to replace natural languages but rather to serve as a meta-language: a bridge for logical communication between humans, AIs, and across cultures, especially in low-bandwidth or assistive contexts. This proposal is relevant to LessWrong’s audience as it touches on rationality, AI alignment, and communication efficiency.
Motivation and Design Goals
Haha, I get why it might sound like that but no, this isn’t Claude making a quiet pitch for AI overlordship.
This is a human wrestling with a future that feels increasingly likely:
A world where mind-reading tech or something close exists, and the people who control it aren’t exactly known for their restraint or moral clarity.
If anything, this post is a preemptive “oh no” not a blueprint for AI governance, but a thought experiment asking:
“How bad could this get if we don’t talk about it early?”
And is there any version of it that doesn’t default to dystopia?
So, definitely not a bid for AI rule. More like a “can we please not sleepwalk into this with no rules” plea.