Marius Schober

Progress Through Consciousness

Tag: Thoughts

  • Before AGI: The Epistemic Collapse

    •

    3 min read

    More than 50% of recently published website texts are now written by AI. This means that from today forward, the majority of all published texts is already synthetic. The same will hold true for any other form of content: images, video, and audio. In and of itself, AI written texts shouldn’t be such a large issue. The problem is not texts written by AI, but that we have simultaneously crossed a point where you can reliably distinguish AI-generated content from human content. I have a strong opinion that AI should sound like AI, I also think that AI chatbots should be apparent as such, and that AI-generated images and videos should have deeply embedded watermarks. This is also why I believe parts of the EU AI Act and the California AI Transparency Act are net-positive for humanity. But why do I believe so?

    The most pressing issue with AI generated content is much less about capability or alignment of AI models, but the collapse of epistemic commons before we even arrive at general-intelligent or super-intelligent AI models. Here is what I mean:

    Most text is now AI-generated, and within months the same will be true for video, images, and audio. When creation costs and efforts collapse to zero, two things vanish simultaneously: trust and meaning.

    We can no longer casually trust what we see. Every text, every video, every expert opinion becomes suspect. As social primates evolved to trust patterns and authorities, we are losing the ability to distinguish signal from noise at the exact moment we need it most.

    Perhaps the deeper crisis isn’t skepticism but meaning collapse. Scarcity and effort have always been core to how humans assign value and significance. When infinite content can be generated instantly and automated for any purpose, these anchors disappear.

    Most look at this as primarily economic disruption, but perhaps it is much more psychological and civilizational because we are eroding the foundations of shared reality before we have built alternatives.

    Then there is this slippery slope: From now on, humans will increasingly interact with and read texts written by AI systems trained on AI-generated texts. Again, soon it is also photos, videos, audio. This training-loop has (at least) the potential to create a cultural drift in directions yet unpredictable. One thing we can be quite certain about is that our human values are already being reshaped by AI systems in ways we cannot track. This in turn makes the question of “alignment” both: more important and at the same time secondary.

    The most pressing risk of human civilization is therefore not hypothesizing a possibly “misaligned” superintelligence, but rather the risk of arriving there divided – socially and epistemically.

    What must be done is certainly harder than alignment of AI systems?

    • Rebuilding trusted information infrastructure
    • Creating new forms of verifiable authenticity
    • Developing cultural “antibodies” to synthetic manipulation
    • Building meaning-making structures that aren’t dependent on scarcity or effort
    • Preserving and strengthening human coordination capacity
    • Etc.

    This is harder than “alignment”, because the more we look at these to-dos from a federal or global perspective, the more impossible they will become.

    Now, to move from the theoretical to the practical: Who are the 5 to 150 people you can still genuinely trust and coordinate with? Because everything else either emerges from functional groups, or it won’t emerge at all.

    0

  • Thoughts on AI “Alignment”

    •

    4 min read

    When looking at AI, people are fixated on surface-level effects: economic disruption (jobs disappearing), alignment risks (AI going rogue), or ethical dilemmas (bias of LLMs). While those are all real, they also seem to be distractions from the real shift. The current conversations are not about whether we achieve AGI anymore but about when – some say 10 years, I say it’s basically already here (it all depends on the definition of the term really). By definition, AGI will match and then surpass human intelligence in every single domain: strategic, creative, you name it. Once that threshold is crossed (and it’s closer than many admit), a feedback loop kicks in. AI designs better AI, which designs even better AI, ad infinitum.

    Because we are not yet there, we debate AI as a tool. But as soon we cross that threshold, AI will predict, simulate, and optimize anything logic-based with absolute precision that human input is unnecessary or perhaps counterproductive. Humans – and that means governments, corporations, and individuals – will outsource everything, from policy to life choices, because AI will present the best logical and data-backed option. And because it is so much better in logic, you stop questioning it. The “alignment” problem is therefore ultimately less about making AI safe for humans, but about preparing humans to accept their irrelevance in logical intelligence and – in my opinion – transitioning (or better: re-connecting) them to their intuitive intelligence. If we fail at this, the majority of humans will experience free will only as an illusion.

    We humans derive meaning from struggle, achievement, and social bonds. Within the next 10 to 20 years, we won’t need to struggle to achieve anymore. Achievement will be handed out (or withheld) by systems we cannot understand. What is left are social bonds. But is that really the case? We already see AI-mediated interactions replacing genuine connections (whether emails, eulogies, or even virtual AI companions). If we do not pay attention and re-connect with other humans (our tribes), we risk real psychological devastation at scale.

    If AI is centralized, it will be operated by an elite (that’s at least the current trend). Not only will this elite gain god-like power, but it will form another elite class: humans who are augmented by superintelligence through direct neural interfaces or exclusive AI enhancements. What about the rest? An underclass kept alive by a universal-basic-whatever, but without purpose or power?

    The problem really is: when we cross that threshold, it won’t be fixable. We better collectively act now, or the world will be run by a handful of super-enhanced humans and their AI overlords.

    In 2025 these thoughts will read like speculation. But based on my observations of how the majority of humans started using and adopting AI, the trajectory seems obvious (to me). AI is optimizing for efficiency. Companies adopting it as well. Individuals must – or they are no longer competitive. What is the antidote? I am divided. I don’t believe AI must lead to such dystopia. I am much more convinced that it is our best shot to achieve utopia. But there is a very thin line in-between them: us humans. In how we collectively act. And acting is much (!) less about technological adaptation (from becoming AI “experts” to Neuralink cyborgization) and indefinitely more about re-connecting to what makes us uniquely human: our consciousness, our connection to God, our one Creator, and our unity. Meaning will come from non-competitive pursuits, AI-alignment from balancing logic with consciousness, and happiness from real, deep, social human connections. Intelligent machines – no matter how superintelligent they turn out – can never be conscious. Perhaps it is a wake-up call: we lost our spiritual connection to consciousness – and we must re-connect.

    0

  • Opportunities

    •

    2 min read

    Today, the largest opportunities arise from people living in the past. Obvious trends, like the exponential advancement of solar PV or electric vehicles, are irrationally badmouthed. There seems to be a longing for bringing back nuclear power, for bringing back manufacturing, for bringing back workers into offices, for bringing back military dominance. People still believe in college degrees, in standardized testing, credentialism in hiring, pension funds, the list goes on. Politicians try to compete with China, want to bring back supply chains, want to revive 40+h workweeks originating from the industrial revolution. This conservative nostalgia seems to be a large trend; or perhaps it has always been.

    What has worked 20 years ago will not miraculously come back. Politicians are selling “the good old days” to people not aware of current reality – of how incredibly fast exponential technologies and societal changes are evolving.

    The opportunities of today and the future are not in chasing the resurrection of the past but in identifying which underlying needs from those eras remain unmet in modern forms.

    For example: People don’t want manufacturing jobs back. They also don’t want to out-manufacture China. Who really wants to labor in a factory? Who wants to work 10 hours a day on a farm? The answer is: nobody really. What people do want is economic security and a trade balance that doesn’t feel like losing. They want protection from foreign economic coercion, and the dignity of creating tangible products the world needs.

    Another example: People don’t want coal plants or nuclear plants back. Who really wants polluted air or nuclear waste in their neighborhood? Again, the answer is: nobody really. What people actually want is affordable energy independence – which means electricity too cheap to meter – and a reliable baseload and a reliable grid during crises and days where the sun isn’t shining.

    The pattern is always the same: the surface demand is to reverse time; it is nostalgia. The underlying need is mostly emotional and social: security, dignity, control, identity.

    The opportunity is satisfying these needs through forward-looking solutions that people haven’t yet recognized as substitutes. It is in building for a world as it is, not as people wish it were. It is in accepting current reality the fastest and having the longest runway to build what’s actually next.

    0

  • Invisible Genius

    •

    1 min read

    Every time I wish the minds I admire would open up and show the full depth of their thoughts, ideas, and experiences, I realize – I’m doing the same thing by staying too silent online.

    The idols I look up to – for example Ido Portal, Bruce Poon Tip, Dr. Nun Amen-Ra, my Sifus, countless peers – are all masters of mind and body in private but leave little or no footprints online. The wisdom is real, yet it’s undocumented and the world barely sees it.

    0

  • How We Use AI

    •

    2 min read

    Whether current AI systems qualify as AGI is beside the point. Five years ago, if you had asked me to define AGI, my answer would’ve closely described what GPT o3 or Gemini 2.5 Pro are now. So if this is AGI, then where are the breakthroughs?

    Valid question. The answer: we are the bottleneck.

    The limitation is no longer the model. The real limitation is that we haven’t really figured out how to use LLMs properly. Even if AI development froze today, and all we have available are o3 and Gemini 2.5 Pro level LLMs, then we would still see a decade of profound disruptions and innovations across entire industries.

    Most users treat AI like Google, a friend, a mentor, or a novelty. Few understand prompting. Those who do don’t even scratch the surface of what is possible when you give AI the right prompt, the relevant context, and access to specific or perhaps proprietary data.

    Worse, we are not augmenting human intelligence, we are outsourcing it. TikTokified workflows, mindless automation, and prompt-template copy-paste culture are commoditizing subpar outcomes. Instead of expanding our minds, we’re paralyzing them.

    The real potential lies hidden in tandem cognition. Reimagining how we work with AI systems in a way that ensures our uniquely human traits (intuition, creativity, vision, …) aren’t ignored, but amplified. Without this shift, outputs will commoditize (across humans and organizations).

    We urgently need two things: first a methodology for extracting maximum value from LLMs and second a philosophy for not replacing our human genius, but empowering it.

    The future is not AI versus human. It is human with AI, at full capacity. Currently, the focus is on maximum capacity for AI compute. Now it’s time we focus on maximum capacity for human genius.

    0

  • Meritocracy Without Balance

    •

    2 min read

    Meritocracy without equality is basically a ladder with missing steps, which only the fortunate few can climb. The rest is basically left at the ground to gaze up.

    Furthermore, a pure focus on meritocracy can become a weakness if it’s a zero-sum game. While talents thrive in systems that value it, without fairness, you ultimately get exploitation, resentment, or fragility.

    Ergo: meritocracy needs to be balanced with equality, and equality needs to be balanced with meritocracy.

    In a meritocratic system, you basically need that the fortunate and the able are compassionate towards those less fortunate and able.

    If you are more on the libertarian side, you need the fortunate individuals to compete as capitalists and then be socialists within their communities and families.

    If you prefer a state, then the state must encourage meritocratic contribution of everyone that is able, to the best of their ability, while balancing it with a fair welfare system that nurtures and supports those less able and fortunate.

    I think this is something Germany did historically quite well, but at one point we lost the balance: we lost the culture of merit by putting too much emphasis on equality – even to a point that Germany now cares for millions of non-citizens that never contributed, when it should instead demand these individuals to contribute to the best of their ability.

    If we want to have a state, then we don’t want a welfare state, and – I think – we should also not want a pure capitalistic state. We need balance and thus a social meritocracy.

    0

  • Decentralization versus Authoritarianism

    •

    2 min read

    Erdoğan’s calculated elimination of Imamoglu through academic technicalities and alleged ties to PKK is not really an isolated Turkish case but an example of democracy’s global collapse.

    Yesterday, Germany rushed constitutional changes without proper scrutiny and with a majority that was already voted out of office, Romania disqualifies candidates on procedural grounds. The list goes on: Hungary under Viktor Orbán, Serbia under Aleksandar Vučić, Israel under Netanyahu, Poland under the Law and Justice party – the democratic backsliding transcends regions and political systems. 72% of humanity now lives under authoritarian control.

    There is a new playbook: weaponize legal institutions against opponents, manufacture legitimacy through procedural theater, and dismantle democratic safeguards while maintaining the illusion of constitutionality.

    We’re witnessing not democracy’s dramatic assassination but its methodical strangulation through bureaucratic manipulation. This erosion isn’t coincidental but the inevitable outcome of centralized power structures that invariably corrupt even well-designed systems.

    I believe that our only viable path forward lies in radical decentralization: distributing governance to local communities, financial sovereignty through crypto networks, and communication via censorship-resistant platforms that no single entity controls.

    Decentralized systems restore human dignity by establishing unbreakable cryptographic guarantees rather than depending on the hollow promises of centralized authorities, career politicians, and unelected bureaucrats .

    The future belongs to networked individuals collaborating voluntarily through systems designed with liberty as their foundation. Decentralized and globally networked societies are antifragile societies that unleash innovation by enabling thousands of concurrent experiments instead of single-point failures.

    Only decentralization can safeguard freedom in an increasingly authoritarian world.

    0

  • Why the EU and U.S. Might Collapse

    •

    2 min read

    The Qing Dynasty, Ottoman Empire, and Rome were all civilizations stuck in a grim loop.

    Decline hit first: overstretch, corruption, and enemies pile up quietly.

    Then comes nostalgia: past glories are hyped up – Confucian order, Suleiman’s peak, Roman strength – as a hope to be a fix for the now.

    Next, technology-hype steps in: Western tools for Qing, reforms for Ottomans, Christianity for Rome – all fueled short-lived dreams of a turnaround.

    But the cracks stay, and it all fell apart.

    Today, the U.S. bets on AI and reshoring while chasing “greatness.”
    The EU pushes green tech, a military buildup and is dreaming of a greater federation.
    Also Russia – stuck in deep nostalgia of long-gone Soviet might – is betting on military tech, but seems to be already in decline’s later stages, struggling against isolation and internal decay.

    Can they escape the inevitable? Well, let’s try to predict the future.

    The Qing, Ottoman, and Rome empires crashed the same way.
    Russia’s dying population and oil addiction could break it apart, with Siberia becoming independent, falling under the wing of a more stable neighbor: China.
    The EU’s bickering and nationalist mess might split it into weak blocs, forgetting unity, like the Ottomans did.
    The US, stuck in political fights and inequality, could lose control and states might go rogue like Rome’s endgame.

    They are all chasing old nostalgia and shiny tech, ignoring the rot.

    DOGE is the only effort to remove the rot.

    If DOGE fails or brings polarization to a breaking point, the U.S. federal government will fail, leaving behind the states.

    Russia will be left as a small state surrounding Moscow and Siberia as a larger and resource rich state.

    What about the EU?

    We could see a “Hanseatic 2.0” (Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Baltics, Scandinavia – potentially including former Russia’s St. Petersburg) prioritizing economic power. A “Latin Axis” (Portugal, Spain, Italy) might strengthen ties with Latin America, forging a Neo-Romanesque sphere. Central Europe could come together around a Visegrád Plus, with a focus on national sovereignty. Meanwhile, the Balkans would remain a volatile periphery, vulnerable to external influence – particularly a strong Türkiye.

    0

  • “Researched Climate Models”

    •

    2 min read

    So-called “researched climate models” are nothing more than digital crystal balls, fed by human arrogance and mere morsels of data. These models are as “researched” as the deep ocean – we’ve barely scratched the surface.

    The climate system is a labyrinth of countless variables and feedback loops:

    1. Solar cycles and variations in solar output
    2. Earth’s orbital changes (Milkankovitch cycles)
    3. Galactic cosmic rays influencing cloud formation
    4. Plate tectonics altering ocean currents and atmospheric circulation
    5. Volcanic activity injecting aerosols and gases
    6. Geomagnetic field fluctuations affecting atmospheric protection
    7. Deep ocean currents and heat distribution
    8. Ocean acidification
    9. Sea ice dynamics and albedo effects
    10. Greenhouse cas concentrations (CO₂, methane, water vapor)
    11. Aerosole distributions from natural and anthropogenic sources
    12. Ozone layer variations
    13. Forest cover changes affecting carbon sinks
    14. Soil microbiome dynamics influencing greenhouse gas emissions
    15. Phytoplankton populations and ocean sequestration
    16. Permafrost thawing releasing stored greenhouse gases
    17. Ice sheet stability and sea level changes
    18. Glacial retreat altering local climates
    19. Human greenhouse gas emissions from industry and agriculture
    20. Land use changes affecting albedo and local climates
    21. Geoengineering attempts (e.g. cloud seeding, stratospheric aerosol injection, etc.)
    22. Potential quantum influences on chemical reactions in the atmosphere
    23. Quantum entanglement in biological systems
    24. Schumann resonances and their potential climate impacts
    25. Ionospheric changes affecting atmospheric electricity
    26. Meteor impacts and dust influx
    27. Potential dark matter interactions with Earth’s core

    The climate system is a multi-dimensional, multi-scale phenomenon where microscopic quantum effects may cascade into global changes and cosmic events can trigger earthly responses. Our current models, focused primarily on greenhouse gases and simple feedback loops, are akin to trying to predict the outcome of a symphony by looking only at the trombone section.

    The sheer number of variables and their non-linear interactions make accurate long-term prediction an impossible task.

    MAYBE quantum computing and superintelligent AI might someday crack the climate code. But today’s models? They’re monuments to our stupendous arrogance. We’re using abacuses to calculate infinity, patting ourselves on the back for our “accuracy.” It’s not just misguided—it’s dangerously delusional.

    Our current understanding is but a drop in the ocean of what there is to know. Instead of boasting about “researched climate models,” we should humbly speak of “preliminary climate hypotheses.”

    0

  • The Income-Wealth-Paradox

    •

    1 min read

    Income and wealth often dance to different tunes.

    While a high income is seductive and provides comfort, it rarely leads to true wealth.

    The secret lies in equity–ownership that multiplies value over time. Equity in businesses or even ideas can generate generational wealth.

    It is not about how much you earn, but what you own that appreciates.

    To build real wealth, shift focus from earning more to owning more.

    Equity is the silent engine of wealth creation.

    0