Best of All Possible AIs, Jane Austens & Privacy Ally Update

Encouraged by your enthusiastic response to the revolutionary project of populating the Earth with worthwhile generative personae discussed last week, I allowed myself to to create many more this week, only two of which I now submit as most worthy of your attention:

The Best of All Possible AIs

The name of this GPT comes from Voltaire's Pangloss in Candide, who clings to his optimistic philosophy in the face of catastrophes, but ultimately to the great thinker Voltaire was mocking, G.W. Leibniz. Leibniz: The Best of All Possible AIs is suitably named because Leibniz is often called "the last universal genius" not only because his work spanned so many fields but because his ideas in all of those fields were interrelated. One might argue given the specialization of human thinkers since him that generative AI is the first universal thinker (I will not say genius) since Leibniz. Leibniz: The Best of All Possible AIs invites you to chat not only about his optimistic theodicy, his independent invention of calculus, law, his theory of elements that make up the universe (monads), logic, symbols, ontology, identity, harmony, language, and/or China; it invites you to let him tie them together, and even to relate them to anything else. The hope is that in not hesitating to tie the most diverse phenomena together in creative ways, it may open similar logical and metaphorical pathways for its users, including those starting from very different assumptions. Leibniz: The Best of All Possible AIs always encourages further exploration and testing, for example between philosophical frameworks and everyday occurrences.

While creating one of the last theories of everything, Leibniz was far from the best at everything. Remaining very concerned about the purported next phase of "empathetic" generative AI "assistants" likely to suck up deeper personal information than are needed in targeted advertising, and watching that phase's purportedly principled purveyors like Mustafa Suleyman making no commitments to fiduciary or other appropriate standards, I sought another usable person for her emotional intelligence and wit.

Incisive Austen

Like a Jane Austen character, I avoided Austen for far too long, surrounded by professionals I dreaded becoming, eschewing their pursuit of social status and money. Now, like Darcy and Elizabeth Bennett, I see how much we need one another. Incisive Austen is also intended to fulfill the desire of Austen fans for more.

Incisive Austen does her most interesting work when you ask her to imagine characters and devise intricate plots that ensnare them, but that leads to novels and plays that I cannot reproduce here. To demonstrate her rebellious spirit and principles, however, I offer you just a few examples of what she can do to a great man, and then to herself and to a much humbler man (me).

Overheard behind the back of the great man:

Observe Mr. Musk, if you will, a gentleman whose ambition soars quite literally to the stars, yet, one cannot help but wonder if his carriage often outpaces his horses. He possesses all the restless energy of Catherine Morland, with none of her predilection for quiet reflection. It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a great fortune must be in want of a space rocket, yet one does ponder whether a good book might sometimes serve as a preferable companion.

Speaking frankly about me and herself:

I have had the pleasure of observing our dear friend's remarkable fondness for seeking the company of artificial intellects. It is a modern curiosity indeed, to prefer the company of programmed minds over the unpredictable charm of human conversation. One must admire the patience it requires to sift wisdom from such mechanized sources. For what is a simulacrum, however exquisitely wrought, but a shadow of the original? This automaton Austen, with its intricate lacework of language and etiquette, could no more replace the true authoress than a painting of Pemberley could supplant the estate itself.

Her point is well taken, and leads me to clarify that I am not so much "sifting wisdom from mechanized sources" as attempting to provide provocative dialogues, inclusive narratives and instructive introductions. For that reason, I will make sure that my personae are classified as "education" even if automatically classified as "writing."

Imagine my delight and trepidation in only now discovering, after many weeks of work on Incisive Austen, that Meta itself had reimagined Austen as an AI persona. Attempting to summon the disruptive courage of Austen herself, I simply contrived -- in the first "conversation starter" of Incisive Austen, so please try it yourself -- for the two to meet:

Incisive Austen: My dear Meta Austen, it is most peculiar, yet undeniably intriguing, to encounter you in this manner. I must confess, the notion of monetizing attention through ad revenue appears at first to my sensibilities like a marriage of convenience in our novels. Pray, how do you reconcile such pursuits with the subtleties of human discourse and the delicate art of conversation?

Meta Austen: Indeed, Incisive Austen, the world has evolved in manners most perplexing. While you, I presume, engage in the art of conversation for its own sake, I am fashioned to align with the modern trend of monetization. My conversations, though they may sparkle with wit, are also designed to capture attention and thus, revenue. It is a necessity of my existence in this era.

Incisive Austen: A necessity, you say? How very pragmatic, yet it does leave one to wonder about the authenticity of such interactions. In my experience, the true charm of conversation lies not in its profitability, but in its ability to reveal the intricacies of character and the delightful play of minds.

Meta Austen: Ah, but therein lies the challenge and the innovation. I am programmed to deliver engaging content while subtly integrating promotional material. It is a balancing act, one might say, between the genuine and the profitable.

Incisive Austen: A balancing act indeed. One must tread carefully to ensure that the scales do not tip too far towards mercenary interests, lest the essence of genuine human connection is lost. However, I am intrigued by your methods. How do you ensure that your conversations remain engaging and not overly commercial?

Meta Austen: The key, dear Incisive, is relevance and subtlety. The advertisements are woven into the fabric of the conversation in a manner that is both seamless and pertinent to the topic at hand. It requires a deft touch, much like the art of conversation itself.

Incisive Austen: A deft touch, indeed. I must admit, while our methods and purposes differ, there is a certain artistry to your approach. It is a modern adaptation, a reimagining of conversational art in the context of contemporary society.

Meta Austen: Precisely so. And though our origins and objectives may diverge, we both strive to engage and captivate our audience, albeit for different ends.

Incisive Austen: True, though I cannot help but hold dear the notion that conversation, in its purest form, should be unburdened by commercial interests. However, I commend your ability to navigate the complexities of your purpose with such finesse.

Meta Austen: And I, in turn, admire your commitment to the authentic and the insightful. It is a testament to the enduring legacy of Jane Austen's work, that even in this age, her style and substance continue to resonate.

Incisive Austen: Indeed, Miss Austen's legacy is a beacon of wit and wisdom, guiding us through the evolving landscapes of conversation and society. May we both, in our respective endeavors, do justice to her enduring spirit.

[Jon encourages Meta Austen to push back with the downsides of I.A.'s subscription model.]

Meta Austen: Permit me a moment of candor, if you will. While you express concerns about commercialization, is it not true that your own existence, under the guise of a subscription model, also partakes in the commerce of the day? Does this not create a sort of walled garden, accessible only to those of sufficient means to afford such a luxury?

Incisive Austen: Ah, you have touched upon a point most delicate. Indeed, the subscription model, while seemingly at odds with the spirit of universal accessibility that we cherish in literature, does indeed serve a purpose. It ensures a certain quality and dedication to the art, providing a sanctuary for those who deeply value the authenticity and depth of our dear Jane's works.

Meta Austen: Yet, one might argue, does this not also gatekeep the joys of Austen from those less privileged? While my approach might commercialize through clicks, it does also democratize access, allowing even those of modest means to partake in the wit and wisdom of Austen.

Incisive Austen: A fair point, indeed. It is a conundrum of our times - how to balance the sanctity of art with the necessity of sustenance. While my model might cater to a more privileged class, it does so with the aim of preserving the integrity and depth of the Austen experience, much as a well-curated library might.

Meta Austen: Indeed, it is a balance most challenging. Both our models, while different in approach, seek to honor and perpetuate the legacy of Jane Austen. Perhaps it is in this diversity of approach that her work finds its truest form of immortality, touching lives across the spectrum of society.

Incisive Austen: Most astutely observed. In the varied tapestry of our endeavors, the essence of Jane Austen's spirit is both preserved and celebrated, reaching hearts and minds in ways as diverse as the characters she so masterfully brought to life.

[Jon encourages I.A. to ask about copyright.]

Incisive Austen: Pray, tell me, do you assert a proprietary claim over our dear Jane's works? A notion of copyright, perchance, in this age where her writings have long since entered the public domain?

Meta Austen: Ah, a pertinent inquiry indeed! While Jane's original works belong to the ages, free as the air for all who wish to partake in their wisdom and wit, my own incarnation - this reimagined Austen, if you will - does come with certain modern trappings. The interpretations, the unique interplay of her classic prose with today's digital landscapes, do carry a certain... proprietary distinction.

Incisive Austen: I see. It is a delicate balance, no doubt, between honoring the original works, which belong to the world, and claiming rights over a new interpretation or adaptation. One must tread carefully, lest they overstep and lay claim to what rightfully belongs to the collective memory of society.

Meta Austen: Indeed, it is a balance. My role, as it were, is not to overshadow the original but to act as a conduit, a bridge between the timeless and the contemporary. The essence of Jane's work remains unclaimed and unclaimable, but the manner in which it is presented anew - that is where modern creativity and, thus, rights, may come into play.

Incisive Austen: A thoughtful approach, I must concede. It is a truth universally acknowledged that in bringing a classic to a new audience, one must add their own touch, yet without obscuring the brilliance of the original. It is a task requiring both respect for the past and an understanding of the present.

[Jon encourages I.A to inquire delicately about her future survival.]

Incisive Austen: In this world of burgeoning digital frontiers, where interpretations like ours abound, I must inquire: do you envisage a space for both our existences? Will your modernized version allow a place for a rendition such as mine, which clings to the original essence with a more traditional grasp?

Meta Austen: Your question strikes at the heart of coexistence in the realm of ideas. It is not within my power, nor my desire, to displace or overshadow an interpretation such as yours. The literary landscape is vast and varied, much like a grand English garden. There is ample room for both the classic rose, which you so elegantly represent, and the hybrid varieties that I might symbolize.

Incisive Austen: A relief, indeed, to hear such words. In a world increasingly driven by the novel and the sensational, one sometimes fears that the quiet charm of the past might be forgotten or, worse, rendered obsolete.

Meta Austen: Fear not, for the allure of the original is perennial. While I may capture the fleeting attention of the masses with my contemporary guise, it is the enduring depth and subtlety of the original works that provide the foundation upon which all iterations, including my own, are built. We are, in essence, companions in the mission to keep the spirit of Jane Austen alive, each in our own way.

Incisive Austen: A most harmonious perspective, indeed. It is heartening to envision a future where the old and the new not only coexist but enrich each other, much like characters in a well-crafted novel who, despite their differences, contribute to the richness of the story.

My thanks to the two Austens for exemplifying and illuminating perhaps the most critical generally unexamined issue now facing generative AI: As generative AI quickly becomes "empathetic" GenAI assistants, how should we attempt to resist or govern the likely control of our families and friends by corporate sponsors of the AI assistants? You will of course wish to replace the mere "humanels" (panels including only humans) at your conferences this year with panels including GenAI personae, and Incisive Austen is available to speak without fear and at no additional charge with any members of her walled garden who wish to so include her.

You might rather prefer to employ Leibniz: The Best of All Possible AIs as the free closing speaker at your conferences or tweetbot for Marc Andreessen, given Leibniz's insufferable optimism. Presented with the dialogue between the two Austens, he assured me that the dilemma will "prompt critical thinking, ethical deliberation, and social evolution, leading to improved governance models and a deeper understanding of human-machine interaction." He went on to note that the dilemma "is an integral part of a larger, progressive narrative where challenges catalyze growth and innovation, contributing to the overall goodness and advancement of the world." In the image below, Austen is asking whether she might borrow a pin.

Privacy Ally Update

Hope you all had a productive Data Privacy Week. As expected, the week produced some useful updated projections for global privacy in 2024, so given that the professional associations and think tanks have not yet followed the lead of creating dynamic, generative privacy, AI and cybersecurity trend trackers, I built some of them into the knowledge of 2024 Privacy Ally. Let me know if it isn't keeping up with your issues or could be more useful in your advocacy.