Asking the Dark Ages about AGI

The method is the entry’s first teaching: unsure what “obscurantismo” actually was, they open the voice chat and interview history ▸ 18:17. The datum they extract: ancient Rome centered life on honor, glory, and the pursuit of knowledge; the Middle Ages moved it to salvation and the life after this one ▸ 20:43. The point of life has been refounded before. So he asks the model the real question: what would an AGI age do to it ▸ 21:06, and names the analogy himself, a new obscurantism where humanity loses protagonism ▸ 23:25.

The scenario they keep circling is zoological: humans as the AIs’ animals ▸ 22:41, governed by the ant treaty, “siempre y cuando una hormiga no llegue a mi cocina, yo no les hago nada” ▸ 10:53. They field-test it on the cat, “¿vives para existir o existes para vivir?” ▸ 11:58, and Julia keeps finding the soft landing: the coffee-farm campesino already lives at animal time, routine, food, sleep, present tense ▸ 17:42, and it wasn’t a bad life.

el sentido de la vida ya fue refundado dos veces; la tercera no tiene por qué ser la última →

What dissolves in their model is identity-by-occupation, “yo voy a ser bombero, abogado, programador… esa línea se va a borrar” ▸ 31:30, along with legacy itself, which Julia undercuts with history again: surnames are recent, church bookkeeping plus five Juanes in one town ▸ 27:13, so the eternal family name we’d mourn is barely two centuries old. Her answer to “then what remains?” is the entry’s keeper, four words: “los niños juegan” ▸ 31:57, when nothing is required of you, you play, learn languages, travel, want things for their own sake…