Who invited the agent? Oh God.. (Smith will suffice.]

Welcome to the matr..
systemic.engineering.

Where we engineer human systems
to survive contact
with accelerating reality.
(And the absurd idea of a singularity.]

When the bill is due.
And agents have entered the room.
(Hiya, fellas.)

Who pays embodied costs
of AI-driven sense-making?
And why is it never the systems scaling it?

When Agents Enter the Room

Agent:
Actor.
Looping.
Non-embodied.

Fancy math collapsing ambiguity.

Agents don't co-regulate.
Agents don't hesitate.
Agents execute.
(Compelling, isn't it?)

Agents keep working the problem.
Until one action remains:
END LOOP.
(Universal paperclips.)

Quick! What do you do?
..

(Don't look at me.)

TL;DR: Regulation goes 📉.

When Agents Make Decisions

An agent has inputs.
Context.
(LOOP:)

Based on this context
the agent makes a decision.
And executes it.

This updates the context.
Some updates are additive.
Some subtractive.
(JUMP LOOP)

Execution can be a read operation.
And it can write.

Reading incurs costs.
Writing commits them.

TL;DR: Who pays the costs?

When Agents Have No Body

Agents are non-embodied.
By definition.
(So far.)

Agents don't co-regulate.
Agents don't hesitate.
Agents execute.

What happens
when an agent executes a decision
that twists a human gut?
..
(Math can't flinch.)

Somatic signals
are signals.
Not vibes.

TL;DR: Who pays the costs?

When Agents Delete

Let's orient:

• Agent decisions are context-based.
• Agents don't pay somatic costs.
• Agents write.

Some decisions
delete futures.
Irreversibly.
..

I'll let the agent figure this out.

Which somatic signals
do you perceive?
(Drop in the gut.)

What interpretation
arises from these signals?
(Bad idea.)

And which model
explains these signals
most coherently?
(Costs pushed downstream.)

TL;DR: Who pays the costs?

When Agents END

Agents loop.
They reduce possibility space.
Until exhaustion.
END LOOP.

Who pays embodied costs
of AI-driven sense-making?
And why is it never the systems scaling it?

Cheers
Alex 🌈