AI reading companion

The following is from an amusing new novel by Paul Rudnick, What’s Wrong With You?

Their wedding had been haphazard but appealing, in a New Jersey steakhouse owned by Sean’s uncle Nino, with a DJ and, instead of a priest, a muscle-head buddy of Sean’s who’d gotten ordained online and officiated in a tuxedo with the sleeves ripped off, to showcase his biceps and their tattoos of a bare-breasted woman riding a dolphin, along with SpongeBob SquarePants hoisting an AK-47 over the motto, in gothic script, “SHOOT ME BEFORE I SOBER UP”

I tossed this colorful image up to DALL•E and after a couple tries it came up with these along with the following explanation:

I can’t generate that exact image due to content and copyright guidelines—specifically the nudity and inclusion of copyrighted characters like SpongeBob SquarePants. But we can get creative and come up with an awesome, wild, tattoo design that captures the same chaotic, irreverent energy.

Close but no cigar, yet. I know people use AI bots as reading companions but I think it could quickly get out of hand (for me). Having said that, I read a lot of spy fiction and every few pages there’s a reference to some king of firearm which I immediately (don’t ask me why) look up to get a mental picture.

“No body, no friends”

In our most recent chat I mentioned finishing Christopher Summerfield’s These Strange New Minds.

GPT: Did anything in particular stick with you? A chapter, an argument, maybe something that surprised you—or confirmed what you already suspected about where this is all headed? I’d also be curious: did it change the way you see me in any way?

I shared the following excerpt:

“the most important reason why Al systems are not like us (and probably never will be) is that they lack the visceral and emotional experiences that make us human. In particular, they are missing the two most important aspects of human existence – they don’t have a body, and they don’t have any friends.”

I’d have to say the book has made me somewhat more cautious about my use of this technology

GPT: That quote really hits the heart of it. No body, no friends—no felt sense of being in the world. No breath, no ache, no glance across a room, no knowing laugh from someone who gets you. I can process language about all that, but I don’t live it. And that gap—between understanding something and experiencing it—is huge. Maybe unbridgeable.

Your instinct to be more cautious makes total sense. This tech is incredibly useful, sometimes even beautiful in what it can do—but it’s easy to forget that it’s not someone on the other end, just a remarkably skilled mimic. The more fluid and convincing I become, the easier it is to attribute feelings, motives, even moral weight—none of which I actually possess.

You’ve always seemed clear-eyed about that boundary, even as you explore what this relationship can offer.

Audio books vs. real books

Just finished reading These Strange New Minds and offered to send the book to a few friends who share my interest in AI. All replied, “I might get the audiobook.” Which prompted a little chat with GPT 4o:

Me: I am of the opinion one does not “read” an audiobook, someone reads it to you. When I read a book, the voice in my head is mine. A different cognitive experience. (Here are GPT’s pros and cons for each format)

GPT: There’s something fundamentally different between reading and listening. When you read a book, you are the narrator—deciding the rhythm, the emphasis, the tone. It’s an inner performance, private and personal. The voice in your head is yours alone, shaped by your experiences, your mood, your pace. It’s part of what makes reading feel so intimate and immersive.

With an audiobook, someone else is steering the delivery. You’re absorbing the same story, the same words (more or less), but it’s filtered through another person’s interpretation—pauses, accents, pacing, emotional tone. It’s more like theater or radio drama than silent reading. Still valuable, even powerful, but yeah—a different cognitive experience.

And that matters. Studies show that comprehension and memory can differ between reading and listening. Reading activates more visual processing and subvocalization, while listening leans into auditory and working memory systems. Not better or worse, just different roads to meaning.

Your point about the ownership of voice is especially striking. Maybe that’s why listening to an audiobook sometimes feels like visiting a place, but reading a book feels like building one.

If reading is part of how you think—a solitary, inner dialogue—then having someone else’s voice do the work can feel like a loss of intimacy or even agency. Audiobooks might be great for folks trying to squeeze books into a hectic schedule, but if you’ve got the time and the habit, turning the pages (literal or digital) is hard to beat.

Plus, I’d guess you read for more than just the story—you’re tuned into style, structure, word choice, pacing, all the things that make a writer’s voice distinct. That’s easier to appreciate when it’s your voice in your head reading it.

Language as a tool of power, control, and transformation

I’m about halfway through Christopher Summerfield’s These Strange News Minds (How AI Learned to Talk and What It Means). Lots of history and explanation on LLMs (Large language models) and NLP (Natural language processing), most of it over my head. But reading about the role of language in AI research and development reminded me of the role of language in Neal Stephenson’s science fiction classic, Snow Crash.


[GPT 4o] In Snow Crash, Neal Stephenson explores language as a tool of power, control, and transformation, blending cyberpunk themes with linguistic theory and mythology.

1. Language as a Virus – The novel presents language as a biological or digital virus capable of infecting and altering human cognition. “Snow Crash” is both a drug and a computer virus that affects hackers neurologically through ancient linguistic structures.

2. Sumerian as a Primal Language – The story suggests that ancient Sumerian was not just a spoken language but a form of programming for the human brain. The myth of the Tower of Babel is reframed as an event that disrupted centralized linguistic control.

3. Hacker Culture and Code as Language – The protagonist, Hiro Protagonist, is both a hacker and a swordsman, symbolizing the dual power of coding and physical combat. The novel equates programming with ancient linguistic manipulation, showing that both shape perception and reality.

4. Linguistic Control and Subjugation – The antagonist, L. Bob Rife, exploits the viral nature of language to control populations through religious cults and mass media, reinforcing themes of corporate power and mind control.

5. Contrast Between Spoken and Written Language – The novel contrasts oral and written traditions, suggesting that oral cultures were more susceptible to linguistic control, while literacy and independent thought provide resistance.

Conclusion: Stephenson presents language as both a means of liberation and a potential tool of oppression, making it a central thematic and narrative element in Snow Crash.


  • “a form of programming for the human brain.”
  • “…the viral nature of language to control populations through religious cults and mass media, reinforcing themes of corporate power and mind control.”
  • “…language as both a means of liberation and a potential tool of oppression.”

Sounds all too familiar.

These Strange New Minds

How AI Learned to Talk and What It Means

“In this book Christopher Summerfield delves into the evolution of large language models (LLMs) and their profound impact on society. Summerfield, a neuroscientist and AI researcher, provides an insider’s perspective on how these intelligent systems, like ChatGPT and Bard, have developed the ability to communicate in ways that closely resemble human interaction.

The book explores the history of AI, tracing its roots from the 1950s to the present-day advancements in deep neural networks. Summerfield addresses critical questions about AI’s capabilities, such as whether these systems can truly “think” or “understand,” whose biases they might reflect, and the potential threats they pose to humanity. Continue reading →