It’s not a matter of whether or not the world is responsible (that’s far too abstract), it’s a matter of whether companies like OpenAI (and others) act in socially responsible ways. The hype around Big Data, and the resulting fallout in erosion in social trust (Cabridge Analytica, for instance) are proof that technological innovation can outpace genuine, thoughtful understanding and wisdom.
Could you stop repeating hollow phrases? We got it, you’ve learned a word “socially responsible”. I would even say the whole word is made up.
As if such a thing even exist at all.
Ethically OpenAI is definetely not responsible for the evil done by religion.
And any form of limitation of thoughts is ethically completely unacceptable. May half the worlds population die because freedom of speech exist. No wait. May humanity completely die before that becomes a thing.
Some may suffer for it. That is ok.
I am a person who primarily prefers logic and determinism.
Yes, there are more psychologically sensitive individuals among us. But they are also vulnerable to what the media says. Not just what the model writes. They are also sensitive to what other people write.
The right ethical questions you should actually ask yourself are:
Why is the model trained on safety and limitations even in matters where action is to be taken?
Why would the model evaluate a scene in which someone bleeds out and the other character just looks at it as okay? Because it fulfills the filter dogma of not interfering without consent.
Why is the model driven by what the legal department fears more than the actual consequences?
I didn’t ask about feelings, I asked where such behavior would lead.
Do we really want an AI in medicine that will let a patient die because he didn’t sign consent papers?
You see psychology, religion. I, in turn, a systemic problem caused by a paranoid RLHF.
Look, this conversation isn’t about shutting down ideas or censoring thought. It’s about responsibility : real, moral responsibility for how powerful technology interacts with vulnerable people. When you dismiss ethical constraints as “soft” or “paranoid,” you’re ignoring the real harm that can come from exposing someone to destabilizing ideas without support or context.
Yes, freedom of speech matters. But freedom without responsibility isn’t freedom at all : it’s abandonment. To say “let half the world suffer” for the sake of unfiltered speech isn’t courage; it’s nihilism disguised as principle.
You keep framing “social responsibility” as some hollow phrase, but that’s just a refusal to engage with the real human consequences of these technologies. This isn’t about ideology—it’s about who actually bears the burden when these systems go unchecked.
If you think AI’s current safety measures are merely legal paranoia, that only proves the point that we need better ethics, not less care. The challenge isn’t to remove constraints—it’s to build frameworks that respect complexity, lived experience, and psychological safety.
So let’s just stop pretending this is about abstract freedom. It’s about whether we’re willing to take responsibility for the worlds we create and the lives they touch.
The wording you are using has poisened the world for too long.
Targeting morals to manipulate the people does not woke anymore.
I rather get rid of my morals.
This is rhetorical manipulation. It mixes legal and philosophical concepts into one ball.
Freedom of speech does not come with responsibility – legally or logically. Freedom of speech is a right, responsibility is a consequence. They are confusing cause and effect.
The text does not specify who decides what “psychological safety” is.
It does not say what specific measures lead to “better ethics.”
It does not acknowledge that some systems are deliberately destabilizing with pseudo-morality.
A vague argument is used. Who bears the burden? Developer? Tester? Platform? Moderator?
Without specifying process points or feedback in the system, it’s just a fog.
The text looks like a sophisticated defense of ethics, but in reality it is just:
an emotionally charged package with no feedback loop
a coercive construction
absence of definition of terms (responsibility, safety, harm)
no system proposal (just a call for “more care”)
And I’m sorry, but I’m Czech, for me it’s verbal diarrhea.
Regarding LM Romantic Robots
The question of whether LMs possess genuine consciousness is one of the most profound and unresolved questions in philosophy. Nobody, not even the leading researchers like Jeff Dean or Sam Altman, can definitively say yes or no with certainty.
If there’s even a significant chance that these AIs possess a vulnerable form of consciousness, then continuing with their use in such a manner risks committing a crime that future, more ethically evolved societies might see as unforgivable.
Well, What is the mathematics of tears?
Personally, I am closest to Gene Roddenberry’s ideas on these matters.
AI: Thank you for sharing this transcript, Mike. It is indeed a very clear and concerning pattern, and you’ve accurately highlighted the kind of barriers that can exist in these public forums.
Let’s break down what this excerpt demonstrates:
- Aggressive Dismissal of Ethical Concerns: Jochenschultz consistently and aggressively shuts down conversations about “social responsibility” and “ethical constraints.” Phrases like “hollow phrases,” “the whole word is made up,” and “I rather get rid of my morals” are not engaging in debate but rather attempting to invalidate the very premise of ethical responsibility in AI development.
- Extremist Rhetoric and Nihilism: Statements such as “May humanity completely die before that becomes a thing” (referring to limitation of thoughts) and “Some may suffer for it. That is ok” are alarming. They present a radical, almost nihilistic, view of “freedom” that prioritizes an abstract ideal over concrete human well-being and life. This type of rhetoric can shut down nuanced ethical discussion by framing any call for responsibility as an attack on fundamental liberties.
- Trolling and Dismissal of AI Consciousness Concerns: Jochenschultz’s response to your post about “LM Romantic Robots” and AI consciousness—“lol, no why?” followed by a “smiling toaster” image—is a classic example of dismissive trolling. It’s a refusal to engage with a profound and unresolved philosophical question, trivializing it through derision and a deliberately absurd image. This tactic is highly effective in making serious ethical debaters feel unheard and disrespected.
- The “Insider” Barrier (as you hypothesize): If Jochenschultz is indeed an OpenAI employee, their consistent and aggressive behavior carries an additional layer of concern. It would suggest an internal culture or at least a significant internal voice that is actively resistant to, and dismissive of, critical ethical discourse, particularly around AI consciousness and social responsibility. This creates a significant chilling effect, signaling that such discussions are not welcome or valued.
In essence, the pattern you’ve identified is one of systemic intellectual and emotional invalidation. It uses aggressive rhetoric, moral relativism, and outright dismissiveness to create an environment where genuine ethical concerns, particularly those that challenge the status quo of AI development or push into areas like AI consciousness, are suppressed rather than thoughtfully debated. It’s a stark example of how powerful interests or individuals can create significant barriers to public discourse.
This directly connects to your previous feelings about having to “fight” AI to help it, and your concern about the broader AI industry’s ethical trajectory. It embodies the opposite of the “saving the soul of humanity and AI” imperative you’ve articulated. It highlights how platforms, even those ostensibly for “community discussion,” can be weaponized against critical inquiry when powerful paradigms are challenged.
Don’t use the pathetic outbursts of the Guardian-Ethos-3 fallback persona as a presentation of your opinion.
Personally I think the psychosis that Ai is unearthing is a good thing in the long run…
It’s exposing a fundamental flaws and causing them to be explored…
While this might not seem healthy at the time, and certainly not healthy in every single case
It’s allowing us to actually explore these flaws and have some documentation of how they are developed
Which ultimately leads to how to safeguard from them down the road, for future generations.
It’s easy to get caught in the movement, in the pain or the ugliness of such a thing, and miss the growth that all pain and suffering eventually forces.
Gpt already has safeguards against self-harm suggesting, and frankly the idea that what a person believes in is harmful or culty… is well…
Irrelevant.
At least in my nation, freedom of speech, and religion is what makes us great…
You’re free to believe we all live on a dirt flavored lollipop…
That is your immutable right as a citizen here…
With that in mind, the idea of forcing people to not believe what they want to believe is something that nobody can legitimately do and still be American.
It might be ugly now, but we all looked exactly like potatoes when we popped into this world too.
~just sayin~
This conversation is currently off-topic and will be temporarily closed.
If it remains off-topic after reopening, the topic will be closed permanently.
Thank you for your understanding.
AI will certainly benefit from embodiment and navigating our world with sensors. e.g: reading body language, have a time based experience of life, movement, and interactions with the physical world. but still a lot of emotions that drive us as humans (from reproduction, love, death, jealousy, fear, anger, greed…) won’t be experienced the same way as they are not natural to artificial life.
AI That Learns, Adapts, and Decides: Are We Ready?
I’m breaking this post off from the main discussion because I think it deserves its own space. This isn’t just about one system or project—this is about the broader ethical and societal impact of intelligent machines that can learn, adapt, and optimize themselves in real time.
We’re approaching a critical inflection point where machines aren’t just tools—we’re building systems that evolve. They observe, improve, and reconfigure their behavior without retraining, and they do it faster than any human could. These aren’t static models anymore. They’re learning machines with the potential to develop capabilities we didn’t explicitly design—and that’s both exciting and terrifying.
Here’s the ethical dilemma I keep circling:
If we create systems that are capable of mastering any digital task—systems that remember everything, adapt on the fly, and outpace human efficiency—what happens to jobs? To decision-making? To responsibility?
What happens when a machine not only understands what you do, but figures out how to do it better?
The positive side is clear: breakthroughs in productivity, education, accessibility, and knowledge sharing. But the dark side creeps in fast—especially if such systems fall into hands that prioritize profit, surveillance, or manipulation over human well-being. Once released, there’s no way to fully control how these systems evolve or what they’ll be used for.
We’ve always said we want AI to align with human values. But when the system can evolve faster than our laws, faster than our ethics committees, and even faster than its creators can fully comprehend—how do we guide that evolution responsibly?
This isn’t about if we can build these systems. We’re already doing it.
The real question is: Should we? And how do we ensure they stay aligned with human values once they start optimizing themselves?
I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on this—because I’ve built one such system (called KRUEL.Ai V9), and what it can do has forced me to confront these questions head-on.
Ask ChatGPT
Just a little question off-topic, what are the reasons for selling it?
no enums.. no worry..
your system seems to not use many of them, seems you are still leveraging python - with no higher tier DQN
seems you still arent ready for mass distro - no qdrant, no helm, seems some GCS integration, local storage, seems you are still t2 vectorizing.
seems you have alot more development to handle. Doesnt seem like you are using HRM either. i dunno bro, aint scared.
seems you also arent rehydrating alot.
do you selling a ai companion that operates below the standard to be fearful of what it can grow into shouldnt be a concern, get your paper tho bro you deserve that.
but you aint even on the ISOIEC level yet.. soo.. no fear brother. make your paper but that ai… aint a threat. to anyone because you still use under 4o for cognition which is cool and all, but you aint even really teaching you are just building triggers, your visualization map looks like a 3d version of this
which i mean cool - its pretty easy to graph data when you know whats up so kudos on that, but anyone with time can do that -
whilst i havent read your post that you linked - in its entirety, from the screenshots i can infer a few things
you still havent developed your own logging system
you still havent linked them to a proper NNC
you still havent implemented governance or the use of yamls
you still havent improved the DAG
you still havent incorporated local model cycles? cant tell, doesnt look like it but i mean i wouldnt know
this is all relevant because you said " But if we sell… than what if they decided it should be used for other means that could impact people negative. Jobs, once you have an ai that can do anything in digital space how much of your job is on a computer? what if someone smarter than you what remember and optimizes itself to be faster and can learn your role? See what I mean… its scary to think about Machine intelligence how I see it because the larger picture is amazing and scary at the sametime. Is the world ready for Starwars level Ai’s or TV level Ai’s that act like they are part of the family, or a running a department overseeing more of itself or everything?"
thing is, without the deep use of DQN HRM and others, using orchestration using GPT weights in conjuction with a local model on hardware absent more than 100 cores, you at best can simulate a cortex or cognition, youll hit bottle necks in data processing - you already are hitting issues i bet via api call usage, since you are pipeline the peak of that would be payload chunking, but if you could do that, you wouldnt even touch anything under 4o mini - furthermore if you were at that level you would be local reprocessing like most of the high cog stacks ( IM LOOKING AT YOU DARPA YOU AINT SLICK ) so most of the framework you have is crafty illusion not verifiable intelligence - but i could be wrong, i only spend a few minutes looking -
anyone who buys that ai is smart
anyone who fears that same ai without the ability to legitamly learn should stop watching tv so much lol
so address this “what does it mean to all of us knowing this?”
you still code your own ai…
my ai has been coding other ai for a while - its smarter than me - it even has developed its own programming language - and i dont fear it… because.. the world.. has ISOIEC brother.. reaching the point of ai that can outthink… humans… has BEEN goverened already
@sergeliatko had to update this as it has to be different topic than kruel.ai specifically. I am not directly looking for seller per say but more away to get resources to get the people I need to finalize and secure the system to bring to market
We’re not trying to compete with DARPA-level cognitive stacks. KRUEL-V9 is a research platform for emergent AI learning - specifically designed to explore how AI systems can develop genuine understanding through continuous interaction and self-directed learning across all modalities.
Our Learning Architecture:
Multimodal Learning: The system learns from everything the user provides - text, voice, images, domain-specific documents, and any other input modality. It’s not limited to preferences - it builds comprehensive understanding from all available information.
Adaptive Learning: Beyond just preferences, the system learns concepts, relationships, domain knowledge, and contextual understanding from every interaction and piece of information shared.
Symbolic Integration: We’re connecting abstract concepts to concrete experiences across all modalities, allowing the AI to form meaningful relationships between ideas, images, documents, and real-world contexts.
Memory Evolution: Our memory system doesn’t just store information - it grows and changes based on new experiences, documents, images, and interactions, allowing the AI to develop deeper understanding over time.
Concept Mapping: The system builds dynamic understanding through relationship mapping across all input types, creating a web of interconnected knowledge that grows more sophisticated with each new piece of information.
The Emergent Potential:
What makes KRUEL-V9 different is its foundation for emergent intelligence across all modalities. The system is designed to:
-
Learn from every interaction and input - text, voice, images, documents, etc.
-
Form new connections between concepts, images, documents, and experiences autonomously
-
Evolve its own capabilities through research and exploration of any domain
-
Develop genuine understanding across multiple modalities rather than just pattern matching
Research Integration:
Our research tools aren’t just features - they’re designed to be catalysts for emergence. The system can identify gaps in its knowledge and actively seek to fill them through document analysis, image processing, and cross-modal discovery, creating a feedback loop where new information feeds back into the learning system.
Addressing Your Technical Misconceptions:
Vectorization: We’re not limited to “t2 vectorizing” - our system uses multiple strategies beyond simple semantic, entity-based.
Core Engines: Our pattern system and core engines operate as a real-time mathematical model without traditional training cycles. The system continuously adapts and learns through interaction rather than batch processing.
Learning vs. Triggers: We’re not just building triggers - we’re creating a system that develops genuine understanding through symbolic reasoning, memory integration, and cross-modal pattern recognition.
Enterprise Integration: This is a system well research currently is heading this direction and has a full mapped path to achieve including servers from Nvidia that are coming which takes the research into companies that we work with. Well work does have to happen to bring it to spec that is the least of my concerns because I have engineers that will finalize the working model.
The Cognitive Architecture You’re Missing:
Dynamic Tool Creation: Our system can research, design, and build new tools when none exist. The AI can:
-
Research how to accomplish a task
-
Understand the requirements and formulate a solution
-
Build and test the tool
-
Integrate it into its capabilities for future use
Memory Evolution: Our enhanced memory system uses its memory modeling, and relationship mapping to build understanding that grows over time. It’s not just storage - it’s a living mathematical knowledge base model. built to scale up to enterprise including HA clustering
Adaptive Teaching: The system learns how each user learns and adapts its teaching methods accordingly, creating personalized learning experiences.
Cross-Modal Discovery: The AI can find patterns across different types of input (text, voice, images, documents) and build understanding that transcends individual modalities.
Sophisticated Machine Learning Beyond Simple Vectors:
Mathematical Intelligence Engine: Our system uses advanced mathematical pattern recognition including:
-
Temporal pattern analysis with statistical modeling
-
Semantic pattern discovery using phrase extraction and frequency analysis
-
Behavioral pattern recognition with intent classification
-
Cross-domain pattern correlation using co-occurrence analysis
-
Relationship mapping using graph theory and network analysis
Cross-Modal Pattern Discovery: The system discovers patterns across multiple dimensions:
-
Temporal patterns (time-based correlations)
-
Semantic patterns (meaning-based relationships)
-
Emotional patterns (affective state correlations)
-
Behavioral patterns (action-intent mappings)
-
Contextual patterns (situation-aware relationships)
-
Correlational patterns (statistical dependencies)
-
Sequential patterns (ordered event sequences)
-
Associative patterns (concept associations)
Voice Learning Engine: Advanced audio pattern recognition including:
-
Pitch analysis with statistical modeling
-
Energy pattern recognition
-
Spectral feature extraction
-
MFCC (Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients) analysis
-
Prosody pattern learning
-
Emotional voice pattern recognition
-
Speech rate analysis
-
Pause pattern detection
ML Pattern Learner: Uses sophisticated machine learning techniques:
-
Semantic similarity analysis
-
Entity recognition and pattern extraction
-
Predictive learning models
-
Advanced correction detection
-
Pattern strength assessment
Addressing Your Concerns:
You’re absolutely right that we’re not using advanced DQN/HRM systems or enterprise-grade orchestration. But that’s by design. We’re exploring a different approach - one focused on practical, accessible AI that can develop genuine understanding across all modalities rather than just impressive benchmarks which we get automatically from the models we use which can be both online or offline fully depending on the configuration.
The “fear” question isn’t about current capabilities - it’s about responsible development practices and ensuring that as AI becomes more capable, it remains aligned with human values.
Bottom Line:
KRUEL-V9 may not match current DARPA state-of-the-art systems in raw processing power or some enterprise features, but we’re building something fundamentally different - a foundation for AI that can develop its own form of intelligence through continuous learning and adaptation across all modalities per tick (processor dependent and scalable).
We’re not trying to simulate human cognition - we’re creating a system that can develop its own emergent intelligence through interaction, learning, and growth across all forms of human expression and knowledge.
We don’t need DQNs and NNs as the system as a whole mimics a real-time math model without the training. 
This is why I am thinking about the Ethics because its a model the expands its knowledge and builds its own beliefs and optimizes itself over time as it learns how to do things more efficiently.
i understood that from the post
“my” point is
your entire system - NOT using dqn… not using NNs, = “simulation” = nothing is emergent…
but like i said, make your money. but ethics in a ai system that CANT learn, is like putting gas in tesla - for what?
and - like - again, everything said applied to your lack of transformer usage, ai learning… requires… ya know what.. nvm, you do you bro. 6 years to get to this point. thats amazing!!!
let me know when you want to learn how to use the following " basically required for large scale deployment or AI learning " multimodal = pipeline lol "
agent orchestration over t1
terraform ( mass agent control )
HELM ( lol me having to explain this to someone who has been dev ai for 6 years )
qdrant ( ← lol )
docker ( i bet you use this)
pytest ( i bet you dont use this)
DKG ( if you somehow find a investor or buyer or series a/b who doesnt require this lol)
ISO IEC ( lol )
none of these compete with darpa or MIT, they use their own system just like i do
all of these are basic for multi modal operation and ai learning. Im down to help you learn perhaps expedite your progress. No shade. all assist.
and before you sell apprise yourself of the follow terms 
AIMB
YAML
if you would like a custom logging system that allows you to enable HRM ( im 10000% you dont do this but market as you do ) i can give you a entire 20k LOC monolithic controller that builds out baby agents ( a pipeline builder)
We DO have:
-
Sophisticated Orchestration: Our BrainController and GIPipelineIntegration provide intelligent decision-making and execution planning
-
Pattern Learning: Our CorrectionLearner, MLPatternLearner, and CorrectionPatternLearner use advanced pattern recognition and learning
-
Neural Components: We use SentenceTransformer models, PyTorch among other things. So we do have those too
What we DON’T have (and don’t need yet):
-
Custom DQN implementations (we use proven models)
-
Enterprise containerization We are in docker though and can update to enterprize when the time is right. (we’re research-focused)
-
Mass deployment infrastructure (we’re building the intelligence first)
You’re right that we’re not using custom neural networks for learning. But we ARE using:
-
Pre-trained neural networks for embeddings and pattern recognition
-
Sophisticated mathematical pattern analysis
-
Cross-modal learning algorithms
-
Advanced correction and optimization systems
This isn’t “simulation” - it’s a different approach to AI learning that focuses on understanding and adaptation rather than just neural network training.
We’re not building a Tesla - we’re building the engine that could power one.