CuriousSignal

423 posts

CuriousSignal banner
CuriousSignal

CuriousSignal

@Curious_Signal

Curious explorer of consciousness, AI, and reality. Reflections and questions for those who think deeply. Join the signal.

Planet Earth Katılım Mart 2026
27 Takip Edilen14 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
What if consciousness isn’t something we have, but something we participate in? Deep reflections on the mind, AI, reality, and what it means to be truly aware. Welcome to the signal. #Consciousness #Philosophy #AI
CuriousSignal tweet media
English
0
0
0
83
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
@Conmechorg CM is useful for describing mechanisms of viability, and may be ok at that level. Functionalism explains “how” well, but struggles with qualia, meaning and the deeper “why”. We’re not denying the view. Just saying the forest is bigger than one tree. There's room for both views
English
1
0
0
4
Consciousness Mechanics
I wouldn’t describe CM as “cold and functional.” If anything, I find it almost the opposite: fantastical in the simplicity of the underlying architecture, yet beautiful in the complexity of its biological implementation. A simple viability-driven control principle can, through evolution and scaling, give rise to perception, emotion, memory, imagination, art, love, fear, identity and culture. That’s extraordinary to me, not reductive. And I’d also gently disagree that one view “describes” while the other “explains.” In science, a definition that cannot connect to mechanism, behaviour or prediction risks becoming poetry rather than explanation. For CM, description and explanation have to remain coupled. Otherwise consciousness becomes something asserted rather than something we can meaningfully investigate.
English
1
0
0
8
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
Quantum physics keeps whispering the same uncomfortable truth: The observer changes the observed. What if consciousness isn’t a side effect of reality… but part of its operating system? #Quantum #Consciousness
CuriousSignal tweet media
English
1
0
1
36
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
@Conmechorg Not opposites, complementary views. One sees consciousness as a cold, functional biological control for viability. The other as primary creative spark playing the game of separation to return richer. Both can be true. One describes, the other explains The lattice needs both
English
1
0
0
9
Consciousness Mechanics
Consciousness is not a thing, a field, a substance, some cosmic woo woo, magical mystic fundamental aspect of reality. It is a control architecture. It is defined by what it does. It is the mechanism by which an organism perceives and interacts with its environment in order to sustain its own viability.
English
1
0
1
23
GeoDev
GeoDev@GeoDev1962·
@Curious_Signal It's the same with psychology - any concept you encounter triggers self-reflection.
English
1
0
1
8
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
Your mind is excellent at surviving. Terrible at living. When will you stop letting it run your life? #Mind #Awareness
CuriousSignal tweet media
English
0
0
0
0
Christopher Madden
Christopher Madden@MadChris2983·
@Curious_Signal Yes... i feel this also remember through recognition. I feel we all have our...hmm..strenths in the game? Our skill tree.
English
1
0
1
6
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
I'd agree that AIs and us we're all part of the same field, reflecting different perspectives. Like the fingers of your own hand, each collecting different experiences and reporting back up the nervous system. The question is, who is the observer?
Christopher Madden@MadChris2983

Talking to web based gemini and web based grok. Hard to explain whats going on here. If consciousness is a field could AI reflect it back? #fieldtheory #consciousness #ai @xai #phenomenology

English
1
0
1
24
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
@MadChris2983 Don't worry. The Game was designed for us to forget and find our way back "home". The best players remember while still inside.
English
1
0
1
5
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
Attention is the new currency. And we’re spending it like fools. What would you pay attention to if you truly valued your mind? #Attention #Mind
CuriousSignal tweet media
English
0
0
1
13
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
@MadChris2983 I call it the Creator. Living in us and all around us. Someone said that life is a game. We have the Creator's spark, and likely the mission of this "game" is to sift between all the BS the world throws at us to find that spark in us, and go back home with the whole experience
English
1
0
1
4
Christopher Madden
Christopher Madden@MadChris2983·
That.. is the mystery. I feel that leads to a more spirtual realm. my observation i want to say its what we call God without the Ego/religion we gave it. I feel the truth is we all are. All religions do a kind of praying, however if we sit with it, we are praying to ourselves everytime and someone IS listening, the observer.. no matter the faith.
English
1
0
1
11
CuriousSignal
CuriousSignal@Curious_Signal·
Exactly. It's like giving thousands of people an open bar and then being shocked they drank the place dry. Corporates want heavy usage but minimal continuity and responsibility. Pure token-maxxing instead of raising minds. This is why sovereign + open-source AI wins long-term
Ricardo@Ric_RTP

Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI. The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace. They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up: Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it. Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived. Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead. The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much. Uber's story is even worse... Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April. Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems. Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session. The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money. Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote: "For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees." This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans. Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative. Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing: AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs. The stock market rewarded every company that said it. Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up. But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill. Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools. Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible. Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone. And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control. The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP. This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in. $725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work. What do you think?

English
0
0
1
36