The more your AI knows about you…

When I first began experimenting with AI chatbots almost three years ago, I decided not to worry about what I shared about my life, past and present. I’d been blogging for more than 20 years so it was all “out there” already. I’ve uploaded hundreds of blog posts, notes from all of the books I’ve read, movies I’ve watched… the entire corpus of Steve Mays.

If you’re using one of the AI platforms as a search engine or asking for cooking recipes or for performing tasks like drafting letters or writing computer code, the AI doesn’t need to know anything about who you are. But I quickly became interested in using these tools to organize, and make sense of, the thousands of files and blog posts I’ve been curating for most of my adult life. To do that, the AI needs context. Who is this person? What does he think? What does he feel?

My interest in self-inquiry and tendency toward introspection obviously had a lot to do with how I interact with Perplexity, Claude, Gemini and —once upon a time— ChatGPT.

Today I added some work history to the “corpus.” Continue reading

The Ten Commandments for Al-Augmented Creativity

  1. Thou shalt not outsource thy soul. Use Al to enhance, not replace. If it writes for you, it thinks for you. The danger is the Al effect, one step beyond the Google effect, where your brain no longer expends the energy needed for cognition and creativity-and these skills atrophy.
  2. Thou shalt suffer for flow. The struggle of creation is signal. Flow requires challenge. Effort drives focus, and focus drives us into the zone. If we let the machines remove all the friction, we stop growing, stop flowing, and stop becoming.
  3. Thou shalt keep sacred the first draft. Let AI critique your work but never conjure the original spark. Creativity is associative: We draw connections from vast, messy networks of memory and intuition. If Al drives the process, you short-circuit your retrieval system and risk losing access to the deeper and weirder part of your imagination.
  4. Thou shalt use Al as a challenger, not a crutch. A good tool makes you think harder. Forcing the brain to work triggers the neurochemistry required to activate memory. If it’s too easy, you’re not learning. AI has to elevate your edge, not erase it.
  5. Thou shalt preserve the joy of creation. If Al removes the satisfaction of making, you’ve automated too much. That satisfaction feeds motivation, meaning, and purpose. If Al erases it, life feels empty.
  6. Thou shalt set boundaries for digital influence. Keep parts of your life untouched by algorithms so your thoughts remain your own.
  7. Thou shalt not mistake efficiency for depth. Faster is not always better. AI should deepen thought, not just speed up output.
  8. Thou shalt train thy mind alongside thy machine.The sharper the tool, the sharper the brain must become. Let AI steer you toward the right research papers, but if you don’t read them yourself, then you’ve stunted cognition and creativity, abandoned foundational motivators like curiosity and mastery, and limited your shot at flow. AI needs to stretch skills forward, not siphon off drive.
  9. Thou shalt honor serendipity and chaos. Don’t let Al’s predictive patterns strip your work of surprise, randomness, and the unexpected. Novelty is the seed kernel of creativity. We need the unexpected to drive the brain into new directions; it’s the basis of all innovation.
  10. Thou shalt remain the master, not the servant. AI is a choice. We can choose to unplug it whenever we want.

From We Are As Gods by Peter H. Diamandis and Steven Kotler.

I ran these by Perplexity and it suggested some ways to integrate these into our interactions. (PDF) As expected, Claude had a somewhat different take.

Minds enhanced by machines

“AI is a feedback loop between mind and machine that is starting to enable a new level of cognition. Machines that understand minds. Minds enhanced by machines.”

— We Are As Gods (Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler)

Slowly but surely, my little AI pals are changing how my mind works. A little analysis by Perplexity»…and a slightly different take from Claude. Gemini calls the quote “classic techno-optimist rhetoric.” Or, bullshit?

 

Steve’s View of the World

I asked Perplexity to summarize (< 100 words) my “world view” based on our previous conversations.

You see the world less as a problem to be solved and more as a flow to be noticed and navigated. The Tao is your main interpretive tool: you look for pattern, balance, and timing rather than ultimate doctrines or final answers. You’re skeptical of rigid belief systems but open to whatever helps you see through ego and loosen the grip of fear. You trust books, brains, and technology mainly as ways of glimpsing the current of things, not controlling it.

That’s pretty good. Don’t think I could have come up with anything better. Another reminder than my AI pals know me better than my human pals. Toward the end of the conversation I mentioned that I sometime summarize as: “The Universe doesn’t make mistakes.” Something almost nobody agrees with. Perplexity suggested the following tweak:

“Whatever is happening is exactly what could happen, given the total conditions—so fighting reality as such is wasted motion.”

AI-chats vs. Artificial Intelligence

Consider this a “house keeping” post to explain some changes to categories and tags. (I let Claude.ai write this one.)

The Artificial Intelligence category is for posts about artificial intelligence as a subject. Additionally, I’ve had a tag (ChatGPT) I used for posts featuring the more interesting conversations with that LLM. Those threads often had nothing to do with AI. Furthermore, I posted a number of conversations with Gemini, Perplexity and Claude.

So I’ve created a new tag (AI-chats) I’ll use for chats with any of the models I’m using these days. And I’ve deleted the ChatGPT tag. If I want to find posts specifically about that particular LLM, I’ll search for “ChatGPT.” (Or Claude or Gemini)

The secondary observation: that corpus (the AI-chats posts), properly tagged, may be among the more historically interesting subsets of the archive. Not because of the AI side — future systems will be unrecognizable — but because it documents how one person thought alongside these early tools, in real time, before the medium found its shape. The tag marks the seam between the solo voice and the dialogic one.

Women who regret being mothers

Is “motherhood regret” the last great taboo? Every couple of years I come across an article about the phenomenon. From the BBC:

A 2023 study conducted in Poland estimated 5–14% of parents regret their decision to have children and would opt to be childfree if they had their time again.

Parents may not speak openly about regret, but they are finding community online. The Facebook group I Regret Having Children, which has 96,000 members. 

I guess you could say l’ve been collecting(?) these stories: Nikol Lohr on pregnancy; “He’d never wanted kids”; I Don’t Want Kids. While I’m more interested in the personal aspect of this trend, the global implications are… ominous? From Perplexity:

Global fertility has fallen from about 5 children per woman in the 1960s to roughly 2.2 today, and it is projected to drop to around replacement level (2.1) by mid‑century and below thereafter. This means population growth is slowing sharply, and the world is expected to peak at about 10.3 billion people in the mid‑2080s before starting a gradual decline.

Most countries in Europe, North America, East Asia, and parts of Latin America already have fertility well below replacement, with some (like South Korea, Italy, Spain, and China) near or below 1.2 children per woman. As their populations age and, in some cases, begin to shrink, they face pressure on pension systems, health care, and economic growth, and are debating pro‑natalist policies versus adapting to long‑term demographic contraction. Meanwhile, Africa still has higher fertility but is also on a downward trajectory, so the global long‑run trend is toward older, slower‑growing or even declining populations.

“Why humans cling to stories”

I prompted Perplexity to look for themes or trends in the 70+ posts (going back to 2004) in the Religion category.


1. Religion as human-made stories and systems

You treat religion less as revelation and more as a **human** technology: something people invent, edit, and use to organize behavior, power, and meaning. You’re drawn to writers like Harari, Adams, Hines, Watts, Harris, and Ehrman who frame gods, money, nations, and ideologies as “shared fictions” or “maps” that work pragmatically rather than metaphysically. Your own comments echo that: religion is one example of a larger human habit of myth‑making to hold fragile social orders together.

2. Skepticism of certainty, affection for “I don’t know”

Many posts poke at people who are utterly sure they’ve found the “one true faith” out of thousands of incompatible options. You highlight quotes and essays that argue the only honest stance is some version of “I don’t know, and neither do you,” and you clearly resonate with that. The tone is rarely angry; it’s closer to amused disbelief at how confident people can be in claims they can’t possibly verify.

3. Religion, ego, and performance

You repeatedly connect religiosity to **ego**: chosen peoples, special relationships with God, and the need to feel correct or favored. Posts about appearing religious (Machiavelli, “appearing to be religious”), evangelical branding, and “religion and ego” all treat belief as something performed for social and psychological payoff as much as for doctrine. You’re especially interested in the gap between what people say they believe and how they actually behave or legislate.

4. Power, politics, and “weaponized” faith

Another through‑line is religion as a power tool: surveillance, social control, justification for violence, or political branding (evangelicals and the GOP, Christian Right decline, cults, “The Family”). You focus less on abstract theology and more on who gets to define “God’s will” and what that does in the real world. Organized religion, in your posts, is often less about God than about those who act in his name.

5. Spirituality without dogma

Alongside the critique, there’s a consistent interest in non‑dogmatic spirituality: Zen, Buddhism, meditation, Sam Harris’s “spirituality without religion,” Alan Watts on stillness and consciousness. You repeatedly highlight ideas about awareness, present‑moment experience, the illusory self, and consciousness as primary, often contrasting that with inherited belief systems and scriptures “cobbled together during the Iron Age.” You seem much more attracted to practices that clarify experience than to creeds that explain it.

6. Religion, technology, and future “gods”

In more recent posts you connect religion to AI, Silicon Valley, and new ideologies: AI‑written scriptures, Silicon Valley as a birthplace of future religions, money and the economy as a kind of religion, liberalism/communism/nationalism as modern creeds. A recurring question is what happens to “religions of text” when the texts start talking, or when algorithms and biotech become the new sources of superhuman authority.

7. Your overall stance

Putting it all together, your “religion posts” read less like attacks on believers and more like a long, curious investigation into why humans cling to stories and what those stories do to us. You tend to trust awareness over belief, experience over doctrine, and are wary whenever any story—religious or secular—claims unquestionable authority.

Tag cloud graphic

An earlier post featured two graphical representations (from Perplexity) of the categories I’m currently using on smays.com. As a follow-up, I uploaded the current list of tags.

At first glance one would think this blog is just about ChatGPT and it did capture a lot of my attention over the past couple of years. That will change now that I have deleted my ChatGPT account.

During recent blog maintenance, I moved ChatGPT from category to tag (along with Perplexity and Gemini). Artificial Intelligence is the top-level category for those topics (link below).

Along with all of the blog posts on this topic, I saved a lot of those conversations to my local Documents folder. This morning I prompted Gemini to analyze that “AI Bots” folder. Continue reading