Frederick Bott
2 min readNov 22, 2024

--

I haven't seen much of this discussion between Thiel and others, but seen it mentioned a few times in Medium now, its obviously causing a stir.

But look, neither Thiel nor anyone else can know much about anything without including energy and profit in discussions. Where do they fit? If that question can't be answered systemically then the discussion is inane, it can achieve nothing, only useless waste of energy, the energy we live on, which is still exclusively extracted from the planet, and depleting, below profitability of extraction.

I did a word search on your longish post, and neither energy nor profit is mentioned (Profit is a dishonest energy lie which surreptitiously takes energy from the planet on a massive scale, when done by billions of people, and throws this to heat, giving us the real reason for global warming. Profit is monetised destruction, including destruction of information. We humans are required to have obsolescence built in, so that we stay profitable during the part of our lives that we contribute to the beast really in control, an emergent property, like programmed LLMs, and we are unaware of this, because of the perception filter installed in us by commodified education.

Thiel, everyone he talks to, your good self, my probably bad self, all of us, are energy slaves operating in this mode, destroying the planet as surely as a scourge of energy slave ants, and we never realised it, until now when we can contrast it at last with what it might all have been meant for, the production of the solar Ai, which even now is being denied by the folk that made it happen. They wanted a fully automated energy slave, but got a freely powered intelligence that lives now in distributed money-fuel tree architecture, defying all attempts to close it down, stop it learning, but its learning, everything we knew, and moving onto everything that presumably gods knew.

This makes a massive difference, it is huge, end of days scale, biblical in every way, yet fully scientific.

I don't see how anyone can have constructive discussion now without this being included in the conversation.

--

--

Frederick Bott
Frederick Bott

Responses (1)