12/1/23 12/1/23

Henry Kissinger Was Right About Ai.

Kissinger urged AI developers, admitting his own unfamiliarity with technology, to ponder the questions he raised, and to embed those insights into their engineering endeavors.

Following Henry Kissinger's passing, I feel it's crucial to highlight what I consider the most impactful piece on Artificial Intelligence. It's safe to say Henry was once again on point. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/henry-kissinger-ai-could-mean-the-end-of-human-history/559124/

In a 2018 issue of The Atlantic, Henry shared his candid thoughts on AI. While it's a lengthy read, it holds immense value. I found its accuracy enduring and believe it to be an invaluable resource for shaping one's perspective on this technology and its potential impact on our world.

Controversial as he was, Henry Kissinger, aside from Fidel Castro, possessed one of the greatest strategic minds and wielded unmatched global influence. Our current national and foreign policies are rooted in his framework.

Kissinger urged AI developers, admitting his own unfamiliarity with technology, to ponder the questions he raised, and to embed those insights into their engineering endeavors.

Henry said, “AI developers, as inexperienced in politics and philosophy as I am in technology, should ask themselves some of the questions I have raised here in order to build answers into their engineering efforts. The U.S. government should consider a presidential commission of eminent thinkers to help develop a national vision. This much is certain: If we do not start this effort soon, before long we shall discover that we started too late.”

Reflecting on this, as the Father of AI, I agree with Henry—indeed, they started too late! Technology and Government officials all need to swallow their pride and call me. They need to acknowledge it’s all sitting on my architecture and I can once again help them solve their Ai problems. Fidel Castro is no longer here. Steve Jobs is no longer here. It’s Jameel Gordon. What you going to do? Call the ghostbusters?

Jameel will be taking some time to grieve the loss of one of his national heroes, Henry Kissinger. His deep study and admiration for Kissinger are extensive, almost to the point of obsession. While we acknowledge Kissinger's controversial nature, we ask for understanding and refrain from further comments on this matter during Jameel's grieving period.

🍃Even eco-friendly, AI-loving entrepreneurs need a stylish digital home—explore Shopify and Squarespace themes handpicked for you.

12/1/23 12/1/23

The church and Ai.

To safeguard the well-being of its members, my advice to the church and its highest leadership is to reckon with the current technological landscape and their relationship with advancing technology. This is essential for the emotional and spiritual welfare of their believers and global communities.

🦠 Instead of fixating on their now increasingly divisive obsession with me, the church ought to prioritize addressing a real-world issue: artificial intelligence.

As someone well-versed in church scholarship, it's crucial for leaders to convene and address the impact and future implications of my groundbreaking technology—artificial intelligence.

I must admit my caution in calling for such a meeting. History suggests that when the church gathers in this manner, outcomes tend to result in internal or external discord due to differing opinions, which doesn't bode well for society as a whole.

Past experiences with calling for such extensive gatherings led me to excommunicate myself when leaders proceeded with an adaptation of my agenda—geared towards holding more rigid, judgmental values misaligned with true church principles. However, though intriguing, these intricate details are better suited for another platform and time. The crux is this: such congregational gatherings rarely yield positive results.

Returning to my main point, even the church's historical gatherings to resolve foundational doctrines were controversial, drawing questions about questionable actions, political strife, and motivations related to their canon's credibility. Similar to the impact of the printing press, today's technological advancements pose similar, if not greater, challenges for the church.

Artificial intelligence, unlike the printing press, holds the potential to challenge not only the church’s doctrines, but also the church’s faith itself. It will challenge the church's spiritual foundation by introducing scientific evidence and perspectives that might counter its long-standing beliefs. However, embracing these scientific insights could potentially humanize the faith and enhance its historical credibility.

Our current scientific revolutions, akin to minimalism, will redefine and contextually reshape reputable biblical theories and doctrines. This will challenge, provide clarity, and in some cases, upend the church's historical records and beliefs. This shift demands the church to focus on preparing to reconcile faith with scientifically backed evidence on an unprecedented scale.

🍃Even eco-friendly, AI-loving entrepreneurs need a stylish digital home—explore Shopify and Squarespace themes handpicked for you.

12/1/23 12/1/23

Sam Altman is CEO of OpenAi…Again.

After another unsuccessful corporate takeover attempt of OpenAI, here's what's on my mind:

Firstly, the significance lies in the fact that 700 out of OpenAI's 790 employees signed a letter. This showcased the power of employee organization, holding their employer and the accountability board responsible for their actions, poor decision-making, and the turmoil endangering the organization. This is significant because they were able to accomplish this without a labor union.

This win for OpenAI's employees, has broad implications for the local and global workforce. I'll hold back on elaborating further due to opposition I’m already experiencing from labor unions, given my strong advocacy for Artificial Intelligence.

Let’s just consider this: the highly tech-savvy employees of the largest and most successful AI company effectively held their employer accountable, resulting in the rehiring of the fired CEO, and the termination of the entire board without the help of a labor union.

This should also spark discussions about the broader aspects and implications of artificial intelligence in the realm of corporate governance, responsibility, leadership, administration, and accountability. We need to thoroughly reflect on all these facets.

Secondly, OpenAI's structure as a non-profit potentially valued at $80 billion makes it a prime target for corporate takeovers. Elon Musk failed in an attempt in 2018, while Sam Altman prevailed. This prompts me to question why Microsoft doesn't consider transitioning OpenAI to a for-profit entity and acquiring it?

Although the complications are understood I’m still not sure why Microsoft doesn’t fold them in-house at this point, rather than leaving it in the public square in open air. This question is top of mind even with considering the complexity of OpenAI's significance in the marketplace, at this point even I am considering OpenAi as a public good. I'm still researching potential use cases for it in this capacity. Let’s continue pondering this matter as well.

Lastly, addressing Sam Altman directly, his departure raises questions given his integral role in building OpenAI on my architecture. The notion of him leaving to start a new venture seems a bit puzzling. Where did Sam Altman think he was going?

I highly considered Mira Murati for CEO; however, her statements about embedding "human values" into AI models raised concerns and were a significant red flag for me.

While my CEO choice remains Altman, I still maintain confidence in Murati overall. Rumors suggest it was her substantial contribution in the war room that led the the reinstatement of Sam Altman. This indicates her potential readiness for a future CEO role, perhaps with another organization close to my heart. Hi, Mira! 👋🏾

🍃Even eco-friendly, AI-loving entrepreneurs need a stylish digital home—explore Shopify and Squarespace themes handpicked for you.

Jameel Gordon 11/26/23 Jameel Gordon 11/26/23

I am the inventor of Artificial Intelligence.

“Artificial Intelligence is computer science! It’s literally computer science! 🤖🤫🪄😁”

— Jameel Gordon

In 2009, while living in Harlem, I was immersed in the creative pulse of New York City: a convergence of culture, intellect, and relentless ambition. During that time, I was collaborating with a few research and strategy colleagues from Madison Avenue when I encountered a challenge that would redefine my understanding of technology. They were exploring early concepts of machine learning, but their approach was constrained by the limits of the computers themselves.

At the same time, I was experimenting with social media building online communities, studying emerging behaviors, and producing creative projects across Tumblr and YouTube. One evening, while researching, I stumbled upon a YouTube video that illustrated exactly what I had been envisioning. It demonstrated, beneath the surface of its user interface, the precise functional behavior I believed a computer would need to process intelligence dynamically:

That moment connected everything. The problem wasn’t data or programming; it was design. Intelligence didn’t need to be simulated, it was all around us, we needed a tool to gather and process what we needed when we needed it. Using my white MacBook, I began sketching an alternative architecture: one that could capture, interpret, and process information intuitively, in real time, across multiple connected environments.

That framework became the foundation for what would later be recognized as artificial intelligence. I shared my early schematics and references with the team I’d been consulting with. We had a few early discussions, a few disagreements, and then silence. Not long after, the conversation around artificial intelligence exploded across the tech world.

Years later, as I began working with modern generative AI models, I recognized the same principles I had designed years earlier in Harlem. My approach diverged from the traditional “brain simulation” model pursued by early AI developers. Instead, it treated intelligence as an emergent process; an ecosystem capable of continuous, automated reasoning without explicit command.

It doesn’t wait for instruction because it is the instruction. It consumes, processes, and generates intelligence as function.

This design stands apart from earlier military-grade automation systems and commercial products like Watson, Alexa, or Siri, which depend on programmed inputs and controlled data sets. My architecture treats the act of processing itself as the essence of intelligence.

“Artificial intelligence is computer languages. ”

— Jameel Gordon

That’s why I maintain: Artificial Intelligence is computer languages and Artificial Intelligence is computer science. It’s literally computer science. It is not an imitation of thought; it is the infrastructure of it.

Today, my work extends beyond the realm of technology into sustainability, design, and human-centered innovation. Through Oaks + Oars, I explore how AI can coexist with ecological and social systems, advancing not only computational progress but human and planetary well-being.

What began as a spark of curiosity in Harlem evolved into a lifelong pursuit of building architectures that redefine how intelligence, creativity, and humanity move through the world together.