Happy24 & AI2035 - 13 tests of every American loves AI Agency

WHY WE NEED TO VALUE INTELLIGENCE LEADERSHIP OPENLY

Intelligence is both humans first and last chance to design worldwide win-win trades for every human being - currently 8 billion brainworkers

Hi i will be updating this at any time (eg if you send me a useful link) plus quite intensively to the new year. I want to try to unite us all - if you see education as valuable then you should want to unite round improving everyone's intelligence. As King Charles said at Bletchley's start of the AI world summit series; We are witnessing one of the greatest technological leaps in the history of human endeavo:r the rapid rise of powerful artificial intelligence is considered by many of the greatest thinkers of our age to be no less significant no less important than the discovery of electricity. or the splitting of the atom, the creation of the worldwide web or even the harnessing of fire. AI holds the potential to completely transformlLife as we know it: to help us better treat and perhaps even cure conditions like cancer heart disease and Alzheimer's, to hasten our journey towards net zero and realize a new era of potentially limitless clean green energy, even just to help us make our everyday lives a bit easier however if we are to realize the untold benefits of AI then we must work together on combating its significant risks

Let's go further- what if intelligence is our first and last chance to design win-win trade between 8 billion beings. When you look back at what trades have "ruled" the world, the problem is they haven't naturally connected win-wins between all of us peoples.

1950s: Intelligence could be win-win was the main hypothesis of the NET (NeumannEinsteinTuring) who gave us intelligence machines to develop each other, our children and mother earth with. At least that's what my dad discovered from working with Von Neumann from 1951 on what Economists and journalists should survey if brainworking machines/codes and brain innovation was to advance every human beings prospects

To understand historical failures to build world trade around win-wins, we may need to flash back eg to the worlds of eg to 1492. That's when Columbus sailed the blue. Slaves and press-ganging ships crews were never a win-win trading paradigm. Peculiarly tea the way Britannia came to rule oceans both before and after 1776 never became a win-win trade -that was largely due to a worst corporation ever East India corps as well as Economist Founder James Wilson's untimely death by diarrhea before he had completed Queen Victoria's Chartered Bank network by and for quarter of humans.

Next Iron, coal, oil-carbon (and mid 20th century one-way tv commercialised media lobbies) - none of these offered win-win trading platforms to sustain future generational growth everywhere.

The NET saw these exponential and inter-generational opportunities and threats very clearly and foresaw approximately 80 year 1945-2025 as era of tech's exponentially acceleration until brain machines could real time govern what separated human brains never could. From end of world war 2, the net worked night and day on neural networking designs as well as specifying computing machines to be wholly different from all previous engines. But sadly they all had less than 12 years to live, So now intelligence is over to you all! Will we linkin alumni/agency of very good intel as humans urgent and last chance at sustainable win-win trades for every being to enjoy developing life around?.

CONTENTS IN OPTIONAL MORE DETAIL

Part 0 As previewed above, in this bellicose year-end, it seemed timely to begin with Bard-prompted story of multiplying Einstein & Gandhi Intel. This includes worlds to see at New York Fair & Palestine Pavilion 1939 -all aboard Einstein-Gandhi-Palestine.docx?

The questions: how and why to design computing machines to see the world was the scope of Neumann's last lecture 1957 "Computer & The Brain".

Astonishingly it took half a century before one person dedicated 10 years of her life to training computers to see 20000 identities humans most work and play with. It is due to Dr FF Li (welcomed by Stanford ecosystems since 2009) that intelligence became in 2023's zeitgist the exchange everyone wants to be linked into.

Next, this article has 3 parts.

1. Introduction to urgent need for patience: very good intel likely needs to be led/assembled around next 10 years of deeply transformative attention testing not 90 days corporate valuation flips nor 90 seconds political soundbiting -of the 5 (HA HI LE LI & BE) who turned 2010s into ai transformation decade i'd recommend happy 2024 begins by reading LE (Lecun first)- ((Lecun 2023 pdf senate-sept, june, mar feb arviv 139 papers eg genai assistant nov23 youtube-trans dec2023 nov2023 post great papers refs [email protected] ) 101 Testimonies AI ... LLM TrainingAs a teacher, Yann has longest learning curve justifying why intelligence still needs 10 years to 2035 emerge "generally" as best not worst for humanity- then compare LI & LEcun;

1. then its worth considering probability that Hassabis as lead orchestrator of Science Ai offers a different scheduling of win-win game spaces continuing crick/watson race deeper than dna itself with how nature rules earth's evolution -?Who-biotechub-who.docx

2. we may well need to defer to biotech genii (why Priscilla Chan labs may yet have the most difficult job of any 30-something in West Coast's world- as it may take beyond 2035 but what matters is priority in choosing which of 200 million proteins we network first will eg this will likely explain whether climate is won or lost). To be clear this article tries to engage a US audience in celebrating ai very good for whole of humanity; if I was writing from eg my favorite airport Taipei I would jumble up which intels to click to first. Indeed the importance of valuing intelligence worlds i see from every coordinate on the planet is partly why we started gamifying AI early 2023

1. Personalised Learning Agency: if you are a parent loving younger half of world, then the road to 2035 needs to mediate UN sdgs so they are heading directionally forward as intelligence win-wins -thats opposite to the (as yet) ignorance road of 2015-2023 through which 193 nations promised millennials 17 goals to transform attention around but which at ground level impacting most communities have so far spun backwards - hence each year of unsummitfuture.com needs to give younger half of world a joyful change game eg 23-24 large language model chats' would be smart to connect AI world series and paris superstars for good before UN next General Assembly sept 2024 and the denouement of US elections year of living dangerously ....-If you are free to see how to celebrate lifting 8 billion beings intel including 4 billion womens, start here: EconomistWomen.com www.economistsports.net Abedmooc.com
2. Twelve Tests
3. HERSTORY Background to Royal Society and other English-Mother-Tongue co-testers since 1951 (NET-Neumann-Einstein-Turing) 1843 (twenty something Queen Victoria & Founding The Economist) or 1776 (contrasting America's Independence led by Irish with Scots like Adam's hopes)

111111111111111INTRO111111111111111111111111111111111111111

Given that those linked into AMC (Alto-Mview-Clara) are perceived by many English speaking peoples to be a street mile ahead of rest of worldwide webs on AINTELLIGENCE, you may sense this article's compass as weird or unpopular among those who speak american but do not have access to a sister space abroad to translate tos and fros of deep-win-win ideas. But then intelligence is often the exact opposite of a popularity contest as i hope that I have demonstrated by this stage of our discourse.

Transparency note valuing: Gandhi's and Einstein's intelligence debate of satyagraha is one my family's conscious biases along with friends Attenboroughs (I was at same school as David's son and have followed the family's triple influence on 1 going green, 2 heroic media storytelling, 3 linking in Gandhian views of world). Moreover, I have tried to sense what my grandad sir kenneth kemp's challenges were in translating legalese of india's independence circa 1945 without being told of 3-way partitioning of the quarter of the human race which then occurred in 1947. I would love to hear if your family tree has any unique lens to see humanity with [email protected]

50 years of work on some of the worlds most powerful brands has taught me that Communications-System innovation of a transformative nature (even when it promises to raise everyone's intelligence) is unpopular until its popular! For 5 decades (start of fifties to nineties), my family questioned intelligence primarily thanks to a survey the NET asked audiences of The Economist to interact. Because (google) blogspots dont rewind future history earlier than 1970 please see www.economistdiary.com/1991 www.economistdiary.com/1982 www.economistdiary.com/1972 and for 1962 www.economistdiary.com/1971 and for 1951 www.economistdiary.com/1970 if interested in Q&A that seemed most intelligent to celebrate each of those 5 inter-decades.

Back in 1843 The Economist was founded to be the Q&A (Royal Society Chatsheet) for a 20 something Queen Victoria so that she orchestrated the changes needed to the English constitution (from slavetraders waves to commonwealth). Changing governance called for mapping intelligence without big lobbyists messing with deep diversity of worlds her honors networks needed to free. : transforming life as we know it

22222222222222222222222222 10 TESTS of AMERICAN AI FOR ALL

Preamble: In our diffusion/agency of the humansAI of intelligence needs to be a worldwide movement opening improved intelligence for all like Berners Lee and worldwide web founders intended as did original NeumannEinsteinTuring

• Some contexts matter - eg the science of eg Nature's 250 million protein codes (eg those joining Hassabis DeepMind Alphafold2 as Science AI) is different from personal education ai agency for all - no reason why americans should not joyfully lead and open source basic science at every gps nature plays her climactic end-games

• how education agency celebrates intelligence around the 20000 identities humans most commonly with play games with as we grow up (eg Fei-Fei li "worlds I see" friends imagenet now in year 15 since Stanford became LI's world's I see centre of gravity) when i asked bard whether eg imagenet contains say the first 1000 identities most infants connect first we got into an interesting discussion - a) hi level catgories High-Level Categories:

• Natural objects: Animals, plants, food, vehicles, furniture, household objects, etc.
• Artificial objects: Tools, electronics, clothing, sports equipment, building materials, etc.
• Scenes: Landscapes, cityscapes, interiors, events, sports, etc.
• People: Individual people, groups, actions, activities, emotions, etc.
• Abstract concepts: Textures, patterns, materials, shapes, etc. b) identities infants sense other than by sight Beyond Sight:

• Taste and Smell: Classifications like "foods I eat," "pleasant smells," "unpleasant smells," could capture early olfactory and gustatory experiences.
• Touch: Categories like "soft things," "rough things," "cold things," "warm things," might reflect tactile exploration.
• Sound: "Familiar sounds" (voices, music), "unusual sounds" (thunder, sirens), "animal sounds," could represent auditory development.

Additional Developmental Aspects:

• Emotions: Recognizing and categorizing emotional expressions through sight, sound, and touch plays a crucial role in early development. Categories like "happy faces," "sad voices," "comforting touch," could capture these experiences.
• Actions and Interactions: Children learn by observing and imitating actions. Classifications like "people walking," "animals playing," "objects rolling," might reflect their growing understanding of the world.
• Abstract Concepts: As children mature, they start grasping abstract concepts like "big vs. small," "fast vs. slow," "full vs. empty." These wouldn't be directly represented in sensory categories but can be inferred through object interactions and experiences. -i dont know precisely but reading dr fei-fei's book "worlds I* see" my impression : it took fei-fei li's core team 6+ years to decide and detail imagenet to bank 20000 identities and then more time finding 1000 images for each; and her book "worlds i see" then explains how coding 20 million stimuli's identities became a lot of work; she needed this huge database before she could run competition what ai algorithms exponentially improved computer vision ; also a lot of care must have been needed so not to accidentally exclude any diverse space on earth- eg what infants grow to id with in big cities and in remote rural areas is likely different- it would be a big mistake to code intelligent recognition as only being a game for citizens to play - whilst imagenet was first worked through in english language by mid 2010s translation tech was quite well advanced just one example of how many dimensions need to come together if intelligence is to be as deep as humans need it to be; the world is very fortunate that someone with as much mathematical detailing as fei-fei li gave 10+ years of her life to computer identity vision deep data; this is partly why my hunch is those saying in 2023 they are in 2 year race to be first to general ai are being financially rushed into trash though i accept that computational capacity has quite suddenly leapt orders of magnitude like nvidia's 80 billion transistor chip -its not really the artificial brainpower thats lagging its likely the human deep data compilation
• ; fortunately Neural Networking NN5 ie LI, Hassabis, and 3 dual language Franglais profs also speak a range of cultural and artistic languages which can be enough to unite enough AIRRs (ask bard which nations are leading in opening up citizens ai labs and it feels like going through passport control- do you really want a world view or one that is subject to political boundaries) - back in the innocent days of birthing worldwide web, i dont recall place politics causing risks of digital divides; bottom line to this test how deep identification as well as learning can the way be to make sure people of every place are included. Today if peoples dont demand investing in their deep world view, cultures may get wiped out if corporate 90 days races to general i dominate- this chat with bard indicates what may be culturally at stake: Q TO BARD if we use the acronym nairr to represent national lab leading a country's public AI research - how many countries are now significantly investing in nairr in your view? Bard reply: Determining the exact number of countries significantly investing in NAIRRs (National Labs Leading Public Research) is challenging due to the subjective nature of "significant investment" and the varied approaches to public research across different nations. However, I can offer some insights and approaches to provide a helpful estimate:

Factors influencing NAIRR effectiveness:

• Funding levels: While substantial financial resources are crucial, effective research requires more than just money.
• Infrastructure and facilities: Access to state-of-the-art equipment, laboratories, and computational resources is essential for scientific advancements.
• Talented researchers: Attracting and retaining top-tier scientists is critical for the success of any research institution.
• Research autonomy and focus: Allowing researchers freedom to pursue important questions and aligning NAIRR goals with national priorities are crucial for impactful results.

Examples of significant NAIRR investments:

• United States: The National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Science Foundation (NSF), and Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories are prominent examples of significant public research investments.
• China: The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and various Ministry-level research institutions demonstrate China's growing commitment to public research.
• European Union: Joint Research Centre (JRC) and individual member states' national research agencies illustrate the EU's focus on collaborative and national research efforts.

Estimating significantly invested countries:

Based on these factors and considering prominent examples, some estimates suggest around 20-30 countries might be categorized as significantly investing in NAIRRs. However, this remains an approximation due to the subjective nature of the criteria and ongoing changes in global research landscapes.

Further investigation:

To explore specific countries and their commitment to NAIRRs, you can research national research budgets, flagship research institutions, investments in scientific infrastructure, and policies supporting public research autonomy.

Additional considerations:

• Emerging economies and developing nations might prioritize different research areas and may not yet possess the same level of resources as established research-intensive countries.
• Private sector research and development (R&D) also plays a significant role in many countries, complementing and sometimes collaborating with public research efforts.

I encourage you to delve deeper into specific countries and their approaches to public research to gain a more nuanced understanding of NAIRR investments and their impact on scientific advancements across the globe.

Remember, "significant investment" is a relative term, and the effectiveness of NAIRRs depends on more than just financial resources. Evaluating research infrastructure, talent acquisition, research freedom, and alignment with national priorities can provide a more comprehensive picture of a country's commitment to public research leadership.

Feel free to ask any further questions you might have about specific countries, NAIRRs, or how to assess the effectiveness of public research investments!

Can you help me understand connection between nairr and llm. Would I be correct in thinking any nation with a unique mother tongue should now consider both a nairr and an llm so that its cultural intelligence does not get crowded out and/or underseen because of bog llms working on multiple languages?

Bard reply: There's definitely a fascinating connection between national research labs leading public research (NAIRRs) and large language models (LLMs) worth exploring. Your question about nations with unique mother tongues considering both approaches raises thought-provoking points:

Connection between NAIRRs and LLMs:

• NAIRRs can support LLM development: These research institutions offer crucial resources like computational infrastructure, data access, and talented researchers who can contribute to building and refining LLMs for various applications.
• LLMs can enhance NAIRR research: Advanced language models can analyze vast amounts of scientific literature, automate tasks, and generate creative insights, potentially accelerating scientific discovery within NAIRRs.
• Policy and ethical considerations: Both NAIRRs and LLMs raise potential issues around data privacy, bias, and responsible AI development, requiring collaboration and responsible governance frameworks.

Unique mother tongues and cultural intelligence:

• Preserving cultural nuances: LLMs trained on large datasets often reflect dominant languages and cultures, potentially overlooking or misinterpreting the subtleties of less-represented languages and cultures.
• Promoting cultural understanding: Developing LLMs specifically focused on unique mother tongues can preserve cultural heritage, enhance understanding of diverse perspectives, and contribute to a more inclusive linguistic landscape.
• Multilingual LLMs vs. single-language LLMs: Developing a single LLM for every unique mother tongue might be impractical, but prioritizing a few with significant cultural value along with multilingual models could be a viable approach.

Should every nation consider both NAIRRs and LLMs?

It's a complex question with no definitive answer. Here are some factors to consider:

• National research priorities: Does the nation prioritize advancements in specific science and technology fields where NAIRRs can contribute significantly?
• Linguistic landscape and cultural heritage: Is the mother tongue unique and at risk of being overlooked by dominant LLMs?
• Resource availability: Can the nation afford the substantial investments required for both NAIRRs and LLM development and infrastructure?

Alternative approaches:

• Collaboration with existing NAIRRs and LLMs: Nations with unique mother tongues can participate in international research collaborations or leverage existing LLM resources while focusing their own efforts on specific cultural and linguistic aspects.
• Community-driven LLM development: Encouraging community participation and open-source approaches can contribute to building culturally relevant LLMs for less-represented languages.

Ultimately, the decision of whether to invest in both NAIRRs and LLMs depends on a nation's specific context, priorities, and resources. However, recognizing the potential for both approaches to contribute to preserving cultural intelligence and furthering scientific advancements is crucial for fostering a diverse and inclusive global research landscape.

I encourage you to continue exploring this topic and consider the various implications of NAIRRs and LLMs for cultural preservation, linguistic representation, and the future of artificial intelligence. Feel free to ask any further questions you might have about specific national cases, LLM development approaches, or potential collaborations!

• SUMMARY SO FAR so ID is different to ask ai to vision with than text or llm inputs: and language combos of human publications are vast so that with the biggest or foundational llms it's not going to be easy for 99.99% of us peoples to be certain what the unique compass of any LLM was; its unlikely a commercial LLM driven by 90 day profit max will match its definition of general ai with actions communities need to celebrates uniting 1001 mother tongues in the 17 sgds that 193 nations promised 8 billion humans in 2015

Test 1 what we dont need is bureaucrats either randomly blocking ai research with regulations or underfunding intelligence as they commit ever more to arms races ; Vcap Andreesen discusses how USA failed 1970s to action Nixon's vision to make the giant leap the NET had asked their legacy to address- Nixon had a plan to lead America out of carbon-dependent energy with nuclear including electric cars. ...exercise discuss whether venture capitalists like Andreessen are on point in citing Precautionary Principle as reason why government regulation in USA and EU has stopped innovation leaps before and may adversely impact very good AI; precautionary-principle.docx resource Andreesen stanford debate and more here,,,does failure to change valuation and types of big organisation debated in Economist's 1976 xmas survey Entrepreneurial Revolution suggest other reasons why we have not been continuously implementing all the opportunities Neumann-Einstein-Turing hoped humans would advance (indeed of the 10 or 50 types of entrepreneurial roles academics have coined since ER 1976 do any match the purpose The Economist was trying to align with NET's brainworking machines)

Test 2-

will Korean AI world series summit 2 after Bletchley be timely opportunity fior 2/3 humans who are Asian to clarify what AI worlds they see as solutions millennials most need ed time and societal data spent on

Test 3 will Paris AI summit 3 soon after Olympics maximise Youth's heroines not just of sporting stars but their generations intelligence leaders

Test 4 - can you think of another test (perhaps on a specific compass like health -i am biassed friend denis died trying to stop covid beijing 2020 ) during 23-24 year UNsummitfuture.com to explore why 193 nations promised millennials youth 17 sustainability goals in 2015 and have so far exponentially spun opposite outcomes - how if at all can intelligence value younger half of worlds wish to be first renewable gen not first generation locked into extinction (or endless wars)

5 geomapping - for some obvious reasons in the late 1400s discovery of the round world, major world wide trading routes were valued as connecting east-west (eg sailing across the poles doesnt work!) nonetheless there are arguably more south-north conflicts by quarter-sphere; the n-s corridor central europe to med sea was origin of both world wars; the world's 2 biggest canals haven't helped either south-north either in america's south-north continental development; arguably north south relationhips above either bay area of subcontinent of india are not yet sustainable; then we have the coastal belt roads between the far east asian islands japan taiwan hk singapore (and perhaps s kotrea penisular) and the continental mainland-

test 6 could involve what would post-carbon life look like as well as test 7 which of the majority nations who have needed to reassert independence some time in the half millennium since late 1400s have done so successfully for all their peoples; nations imbalance of sizes by resource and population is awkward (and perhaps not the best way to value intelligence as win-win trade between all peoples) ; also nb because of the number of small island nations, the majority have never had a chance to lead the industrial age because quite simply they dont have any critical natural resources to export; and when you look at eg africa where many nations do have a critical resource its often not worked out well for all the peoples as the timing of independence did oit work out how to develop that critical mineral to the benefit of that places peoples

Racially history shows financial systems have been gamed round biases towards rich white and male as well as all capitals of G8 being abve latitude 39 north - to be colored female and poor and below 39n has not historically been how intelligence has been invested in let alone published by big academia; so its an absolute miracle to study billion poorest women empowerment from 1972 -one reason why we cheer on the relatively unknown intelligence events when both steve jobs and bill gates and their friends in silicon valley 2001+ sought to learn from eg Fazle abed and bangladesh www.abedmooc.com - whichever source you choose if womens intelligence is not included in AI as much as mens, its likely that AI risks will compound

Test 8 might also follows through the NET's big question- will humans since 1945 ever find a way for peace to spring all over the world at the same time. This was hard enough in seot 2023 when Sheika Moza and Guterres discussed september; now with palestine contagion, this is superhard (and that was before the world of 2024 discovers whether it can limit Israel to killing now more than 40000 people of Palestine. In my family both every parent and every grandpatent had their education interrupted by world war. SO unpopular as this suggestion may be to some Americans, I ask King Charles to rebrand the AI safety worlsd series with Korea and Paris as AI love-all summit. He could for example survey all remaining royal families to see if they will co-cheerlead starting with the big 3 whose world trade waves mainly designed trade 1945-1776-1492 across pacific ocean (about two third of humans livelihoods).

Test 9 extends the geonomic mapping challenge (please note I dont know how but hope intel mapping becomes an education freedom -g imagine if by 2030 eductaton spaces are defined as having enough tech so that at least 10% of teachers and students time is versed in worldwide classrooms). Whites of this world seem to have designed war or peace around the atlantic theatre (less than 25% of humans trade routes); i believe kids from this moment on need to be freed by at least three in one geo-future thinking- integrate pacific and atlatic and south-north poles. It is after all south-centre-north disparities that seem to be where world wars have been labbed - be that 1914's 1939, or anywhere since. North south is not simple in any quartersphere- be that the amerucan continent; the space above and below the med sea; the space above and below both of india's subcontinent ( gulf and stans, the great bay of bengal); n-s coastal belts of islands and coastline of china and se asean

Test 4 - i believe intelligence agency of kind heeded to advance humaity begins with metrics 3rd grade pediatricians and nurses could monitor everywhere; this was actually discussed by a ford foundation event during year 1 of debriefing humans on the sdgs; when we talk about women empowerment the 9 yar girl before puberty is entering crossroads of intelligence/community safety let alone belief in self; i was luck in early 1980s to be invited by unilever to study pre-adolescent girls messaging all across muslim asian countries unilever could reach - unlike rival american personal care brands which nagged about beauty being how sexually attractive girl saw her self being, we tested the message beauty is about a girls self-confidence. To this day I am not sure that Americans have ever permitted this message to be free- of course it opposes the cultural consequences of the second amendment let alone the 13th. But the 2nd amendement was proclaimed when man on horse with gun was how messaging across a continent was done. Anyhow if we study women empowerment channels intelligently celebrated around melinda gates since 2015, we see hip hip hurrah that black sports ladies are this year inviting dear black girls everywhere to value self-confidence first. This connects with a missing curricula all deep health journals have announced since early 2010s - we need peer to peer health curricula mediated from grade 3 up and somehow the best way to do this will be by each grade mentoring the grade a year younger but if and only if the senior grade has gained enough emotional intelligence to "dont be that kid" - dont be the kind that disrupts a class's attention ; dont be the kid that uses the school playground as a bully pit or to exclude the girl whose face doesnt please your schools book. It shouldnt surprise anyone if augmenting humans intelligence involves upgrading each of our emotional and societal intel.

Test 11 needs to retrace a debate which The Economist started Xmas Day 1976. Entrepeneurial Revolution needed to face up to the 3 biggest western constitutions not being sufficient to design sustainable intelligence. The problem with government is I have never seen a western one that starts 100 tech times ahead of now (the test the NET demanded we value expoenetially). Big corporations driven only by 90 day auditing are the least likely to make sure intelligences is for all; huge foundations tend to get greenwashed as soon as managers take over from the founding family. Another way of putting this is guess what giant leaps in intelligence are about educational transformation. Frankly US scares me a lot since its lagging in freeing every teacher to celebrate how can ai help me and my 9 year olds to 18 years olds futurise what their generation needs most to change. Intelligence is about curiosity first not examining past facts first. Ironically to the extent that Queen Victoria asked fir help in 1843 about changing english constitution from slavemaking to commonwealth, she was asking to see worlds of asian consciousness- often geared to valuing multiple natural deities not one golden rule god. I am not smart enough to open up this faith debate but open whole truth is a to-do through every community.

12 One of the people who inspires me most over 20 years since I was lucky enough to meet him (Harrison Owen) invented open space in 1984. Open space is about how to apply up to 5 thousand minds/bodies solutions to a highest common denominator system change

Harrison was convening solutions at a time in real spaces before tools existed to hackathon or zoom that! OS glides easily as well as deeply across cultures - Over half a million open spaces have now been conducted pretty much reaching any cultuyre where people can form a circular meeting of moinds. However back in 1984, the first time Harrison presented his method to a top group oif american educaturs- he was told if you are right then 95% of how we teach is wrong. pLease go away. At a very funsametal level ameriuca will need to dfecide do healthy and inteligents peoples generate string economies across generations not vice versa. When U say america will i supose i mean those who design general ai will. In my own mind i come back to einstein's dream - ai can only do good deeply enough if we race to design ai as persdonalised learsing and livelihood agence for everyone

13 I spent my 1990s trying and failing to convince both the big 5 auditors and the big 5 western ad agencies that a second audit of most uniquely purposeful needed totally different metrics to guild deep decision makers . It needed some sort of expoenential dashboard of multipliers not one single number of we extracted this much profit over last 90 days. This metric challenge has gone through 25 years of changed names. Around 2000 brookings intangibles auditing called it unseen wealth. Todays its probably about how much of people's lifetimes and data does a nation or place want to spend before agreeing that the ai is smart enough to govern autonomously deep societal decisions such as health serves who or nutrition and clean spaces are either a basic right or a luxury.

I will come back to tests after I see if I can tidy up these associated articles. I'm also up for discussion if a test starts you thinking its more a clue to train than a complete guard rail:

100 ai testimonies worth knowing about

how deeply can we complete 19 by 19 human intelligences worth being aware about

33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

1951-1961 - what did the net see as expoentail ops and threats of brainworking engines? which 5 places foirts took on responsbility for theiur p[eoples accessing at elast 100 times more tech per decade; what common sense worldwide could english-influencing royals (as they continued to reform 1945-1492 era or empires rulke the waves) mediate even as americans took over responsibility for ever bigger media and global currency

1961-1971 - which places and leaders came up with 10 year visions applying the net's brainworking (neural networking)legacy neumann.ning.com for next generation as well as a way of mediating what elders trusted youth to be free to entrepreneur or at least celebrate theur age's herpoines around

1972-1982- what constitutionl nchnage would be needed to org design before whomever launched personal computer networking became the workd's most valued people?

more to come