Recent read of Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (spoiler alert; evolution) actually collapsed the distinction between human and machine development for me. They’re the same thing, not separate strands. That we humans get de-centred is just a natural consequence of whatever gains in cultural capabilities the arc of this world is bending towards. This is precisely what the Liveness World Machine is, and we’ll have to deal with the messy realities that every biological entity necessarily has.
\n\n", "content_hash": "sha256:3e16162eb35dd78180b7ba01813dc0f2ccb733e3375b5a6ee062c3fbef16e221", "media": [], "changelog": [ { "version": 1, "at": "2026-09-28T18:07:10Z", "note": null } ] }We need Copernican frames because most arguments about artificial intelligence today race past foundational ontological questions to ethical ones posed in what are effectively Ptolemaic frames. We ask, within unwieldy anthropocentric frames (with vague and ill-posed adjectives like “super” or “general” serving as epicycles), whether AI will be good or bad, whether it will replace workers, accelerate science, undermine democracy, achieve superintelligence or destroy humanity, all before adequately exploring what actually existing AI even is, and what its actual evolutionary dispositions are.