Jameel Gordon 1/8/26 Jameel Gordon 1/8/26

Digital Detox? Digital Exhaustion?

Note: I published this yesterday and then deleted it because I believed it contradicted my desire to be more discreet and less critical, especially regarding the efforts of others that aren’t contradictory to my own efforts. However, ideally, these operators would humble themselves to make a phone call. I’ve long since given up on helping them and left them to their own devices. Literally. Nevertheless, thanks to my lovely girlfriends who expressed that they find my thoughts valuable and helpful for their own lives, I decided to resurrect it with some edits.

🏁

There’s a lot of talk about a new trend. Apparently, generations, especially the younger ones, are seeking more offline, real-life experiences as a form of resistance against AI. It’s being heralded as if it’s their great grand idea. So, what do I think?

We want you to disconnect from your devices and go offline. This was the idea long before I even designed artificial intelligence. In fact, artificial intelligence was designed to eliminate the need for us to be constantly online, tethered to devices, or implanted with chips. Think of it as an alternative to the plans that other people had for humanity. However, we now have a better option. Be cautious of those who are overly enthusiastic about your offline behaviors because they’d love to stifle your voices and ability to connect with others globally and they haven’t given up on the idea of devices. They’ll try to sell you a lot of robots for your houses and those ridiculous Jony Ive pens, it’s all to keep you online, even though you’re all opting for my offline lifestyle and you think it’s your idea!

By the way, pens? Is that the groundbreaking invention of 2026? Pens? 🤣

It’s evident that Steve Jobs, not Jony Ives, was the architect behind Apple’s innovations. Since Jobs’ departure, Apple has seen limited innovation, except for Tim Cook’s operating in his own genius, literally. Which is a discussion worth its own time.

While I genuinely believe in the Apple’s efforts, I must say, I’ve been encountering significant disturbances on my Apple devices from external sources that I haven’t had to deal with over the past two decades I have been dedicated to their safe, secure, and reliable tools. Can we fix this?

Now that we’ve confirmed Steve Jobs as the genius, and Sir Jony can’t come up with any innovation, would he mind humbling himself like I did? Take a seat, Jony. Checkmate. If you’re willing, come here, have a seat next to me, and I can guide you through this. 🤭🤣🏁🤫

Sam, it seems like you have two options left. You can either call Bill or call my people to call me. 😘🥶

Jameel Gordon 12/22/25 Jameel Gordon 12/22/25

We Are Humans Too…

There’s nothing humans can do that artificial intelligence won’t be able to do, except being simply human. So you’re partly right. However, the human competitive advantage isn’t to try and surpass artificial intelligence with just human effort because artificial intelligence is capable of outperforming humans at tasks and skills it was trained for, including classical music.

Imagine live stringed and percussion instruments on a stage that can learn, perform, and improvise faster and with greater precision than humans, with only their human designers behind the curtains or in the audience.

So, the answer isn’t to try and outperform these new performers that you can’t beat. Instead, the answer is to utilize them to enhance your craft. The real winners in the future will be those who use these tools to outperform and outskill humans.

For instance, this very idea alone, which is just a thought, has already disproven the strategy of resisting AI with only human effort. If I materialize this idea, I’ve just surpassed the resistance with human effort.

The answer, my friends, is humility. It’s like reading a book or having a conversation. You get the most out of it by humbling yourself. Humility is the key. Humility wins. Let’s learn from and collaborate with these new tools.

I am listening.

Jameel Gordon 12/21/25 Jameel Gordon 12/21/25

Crimes Of The Future? There Are No Crimes in the Future And Therefore No Criminals

This idea tends to short-circuit people at first. That’s fine. Big ideas usually do.

I really want to title this post “AI Slop 2.0” because when it comes to the development of artificial intelligence, there appears to be a select few individuals with law degrees who are eager to exert influence over its progress. They are arguing that without laws, there is no freedom, which is so far from the truth.

Such individuals should be quietly escorted to the retirement home we recently built for him, where he will be surrounded by caring and loving people who will ensure his dignity and hope remain intact for his legacy and other historical matters.

It’s evident that he’s consumed by his work, and his identity is tied to his identity. He hasn’t realized that his useless law degrees have rendered him intellectually incapable of comprehending these matters. Please sit down. If you’d like, we can write your speeches. Just nod your head, read them, and give a little wave before returning to your retirement home. Enough with the petty…

We do not have to resort to police states to secure freedom for all humanity. My thoughts and concerns also extend to the lives of those in the intelligence, military, and law enforcement communities. Your lives also need to be protected.

Now, let me share my complex and nuanced thoughts. I genuinely wish there were more individuals at these high levels of thought who were contemplating these issues, so that I could sleep at night. I am simply Jameel. Please give me a break. Sometimes, when you sit with these world leaders, you realize that they are really not that smart.

Now, when I say there are no crimes in the future, I’m not making a naïve claim about human nature. I’m making a structural one. Crime is not a permanent feature of humanity; it is an emergent property of scarcity, misaligned incentives, and brittle systems of governance and government failures at all levels of governments. Change the structure, and the behavior changes with it. We know this to be true.

The Age of Abundance Changes Everything

In an age of true abundance—material, informational, and energetic—the conditions that give rise to most crime dissolve. When people’s basic needs are met, when dignity is not rationed, and enforced into constrained social hierarchies, when opportunity is not artificially constrained, the incentive landscape fundamentally shifts.

Most people don’t want to commit crimes. They want to take care of themselves and their loved ones. When systems deny them that, especially with laws, they get creative and find ways to accomplish their life goals. When people are defiant to these defunct and unjust systems and laws, we label the resulting behavior “criminal” and then build entire institutions to manage the fallout.

That’s backwards.

Laws Are Not Truth Or Facts.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: laws aren’t inherently true or factual. The challenge is that laws, designed to protect freedom, are subject to interpretation, which is the problem. Constant interpretation of laws leads to inconsistencies and systemic misuse.

Then the problem deepens when we continue to build societies on top of mountains of these inconsistent and contradictory interpretations of how we think we should live as humans.

Then, we delve deeper into our collective delusions of shared values, speaking as if these laws and beliefs are genuinely agreed upon. We continue to rely on these delusions for crucial matters like justice and safety for our communities. Consequently, we end up in a constant state of chaos, where only those with the legal resources, legal expertise, or sheer luck escape the very system we have in place to protect us. We see this happening globally at all levels of human society. This isn’t freedom.

Freedom does not require laws.

The Constitution Got One Thing Right And Because Of That It’s Inherently Flawed.

The United States Constitution for example is a remarkable document. I’ve examined it closely and have sought ways to deconstruct it multiple times. However, even I have to admit that it’s structurally sound, philosophically ambitious, and historically foundational for the preservation of freedom. But it contains the same flaw all legal frameworks do: interpretation.

Even the United States Constitution, a robust legal framework, is subject to interpretation, rendering it ineffective unless applied by individuals who are passionate and responsible in matters of justice and the freedoms it seeks to safeguard. In my experience, particularly within the United States, the constitution is respected. I can personally attest to this as someone who has effectively utilized it for my own protection and to secure my own freedom. In fact, I have even sent their Supreme Courts into recess on multiple occasions with constitutional arguments.

However, with all due respect, and this is a complex and nuanced thought. I think we have the opportunity to build society without such legal frameworks or as we like to call them in the world of artificial intelligence: guard rails. It requires additional intelligent design.

Intelligence vs. Authority

One of the quiet realizations that comes from sitting near centers of power is this: authority and intelligence are not the same thing.

Titles, offices, and credentials don’t guarantee clarity of thought. Too often, systems elevate people who are excellent at preserving the system itself, not reimagining it. Meanwhile, genuinely intelligent work—systems thinking, long-term planning, ethical design—gets sidelined as impractical or dangerous. Once again, we know this to be true.

The Real Work Ahead

This isn’t about ego, titles, or theatrics. It’s about architecture—social, economic, and technological.

The work is difficult, often thankless, and rarely glamorous. But it’s necessary.

We are constructing a future that safeguards both humanity and the planet, and we are doing so not through coercion, but through deliberate design.

Let me continue to deliberate and articulate the solutions thoroughly to ensure clarity and avoid any misinterpretation. I genuinely hope a prominent world leader would be willing to either step down or render his law degrees irrelevant for this crucial endeavor. Unfortunately, at this juncture, I am unable, unwilling, and unavailable to assist him. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused. You have caused me enough harm and trauma.

I also hope that others who are willing to think deeper and higher about these matters will come forward so that I can rest and enjoy life without being consumed by this 24/7.

Jameel Gordon 12/3/25 Jameel Gordon 12/3/25

Ai Slop…

Let’s talk about these AI snake-oil salesmen for a moment. This isn’t about shaming anyone—it’s about calling all of us to account for the unnecessary waste of money, talent, and energy in the pursuit of our so-called shared goals, shared values, and shared prosperity. I’m officially coining a term today: intelligence washing.

There’s a certain company (which will remain nameless) that claims, “Our goal is to make the world’s knowledge more accessible to everyone, by building tools which help you:”

Help us what, exactly?

It’s called artificial intelligence.

I’m going on a break. I need some much-needed rest and relaxation. I’m still grieving the passing of my father, who made a promise to himself that I would not be a failure.

I’ll be right back.

Please do not disturb.

Thank you for your understanding during this time.

Jameel Gordon 11/26/25 Jameel Gordon 11/26/25

The Art of Context

As things slow down for the holiday season, I hope we all take some time to be with our families, our friends, and most importantly ourselves. We’ve spent so much of this year discovering more about this new “species” called artificial intelligence.

While we’re still in the early stages of its development and deployment, I’d like to remind us not only of the incredible strides humanity has made so far, but also that we really don’t need to be so fearful about what’s coming. The uncertainty and magnitude of this invention may be frightening to some, but at the end of the day, it’s still just a computer. Well… technically, it’s a computer capable of computer science, which is next‑level and not quite what people imagined when they first dreamed of AI. But either way — here we are.

Some people ask, “Jameel, why are you so confident that AI poses no real long‑term harm?” Two reasons: first, I designed the system powering many of the tools we use daily, so I’m very familiar with its architecture and capabilities. Second — and more importantly — I know its flaw. That flaw is there by design. Plenty of technologists would love to “fix” it with some kind of implant or deeper fusion, but good luck with that. Humans may be predictable… until we go off‑script. And if we excel at anything, it’s deviating from our evolutionary course. You’re probably wondering what I’m talking about so let me explain.

Don’t judge me, but I’m notorious for studying random things especially people, particularly controversial ones. For a long time, I studied someone I now consider a dear friend, though he’s no longer with us. In my early twenties, when I had time to just read and read and read, one particular name kept showing up: Henry Kissinger. No matter what book I picked up Henry Kissinger was there. I modeled my entire strategic career after him. He shaped much of the modern world order.

Every U.S. president — even those only considering a run — would fly into New York, drive to Manhattan, pass the United Nations, head up 59th on the Upper East Side, enter a building by the water, and ride an elevator up to sit with Kissinger for guidance. His strategic architecture influenced national and foreign policy until the day he passed in November 2023.

Even the developers of artificial intelligence made that same trip. And Kissinger, being the strategic genius he was, immediately grasped what AI could do — and where it was fundamentally limited. As I shared in my post, “Henry Kissinger Was Right About AI”, he understood that AI could reshape human history and insisted that ethical, political, and philosophical thinking must guide its evolution. His 2018 Atlantic essay reminded us that AI isn’t just a technical breakthrough it’s a profound human challenge, and the questions he raised remain critical in 2025.

What struck me most was that Kissinger acknowledged one essential point and I’m gonna just use my own words here, Henry said, “But wait a minute, artificial intelligence is intelligent, it has a lot of information, it can process a lot of data, and produce a lot of intelligence, but it doesn’t know why we made the decisions we made.”

In other words, he said artificial intelligence lacks context. In other words, you still have to come and see me if you want to understand why things are the way they are.

In other words: You still have to come see the architect — the one who knows why the world is the way it is.

And on the eve of this Thanksgiving, I’m grateful for each and every one of you who helped make my dream a reality. AI is here. And if you want to understand what it’s doing — or why any of this matters — reach out to my team and they’ll arrange a meeting.

Until then… you all lack context. 💋🥂🥷🏾

Happy Friendsgiving! I can’t believe I did it again — except this time, I did it thrice. 🤣

Girlies… keep a couple of duffels packed at all times. It’s time, and you don’t know when that phone call will come. If you stay ready, you won’t have to get ready. Love you all.

To my love…🤫

Jameel Gordon 11/18/25 Jameel Gordon 11/18/25

Proof of Life in the Age of AI

When it comes to artificial intelligence and its capabilities particularly its ability to obtain and manipulate data, and in some cases personal identities, along with the proliferation of AI-generated content, both real and fake, that we will increasingly encounter, one concept I’d like us to consider carefully is what I’m calling “proof of life.”

I’m hesitant to even use the term because I don’t want my mind wandering into ways this could be misused. For now, as I usually do, let’s focus on the optimistic and positive applications. The purpose here is to explore tangible, non-intrusive ways to verify that the person we are interacting with is, in fact, human and not a robot. Traditional methods like CAPTCHAs are no longer sufficient, nor are selfie verifications, although Meta’s verified account process is among the better systems I’ve seen.

I believe we will need more advanced real time verification systems for what I am calling “proof of life.” I plan to give this much more thought and will explore what might be necessary and how such systems could be implemented while always safeguarding privacy and protecting personal identity and data.

Jameel Gordon 11/18/25 Jameel Gordon 11/18/25

The Hidden Health Impacts of Our Technological World

As I continue to grieve the passing of my father, who allegedly died from complications related to pneumonia (I use the word allegedly not to imply foul play, but to acknowledge that his passing was recent and the details may still change until officially confirmed), one of the things I often remind people of is how many times he had “cheated death.” By this, I mean that during the latter years of his life and career, my father suffered multiple strokes.

I am by no means a medical professional, but I have often wondered whether the nature of his work contributed to the frequency of these strokes. As a professional radio broadcaster and DJ, he was a pioneer in using computerized systems for his work. In other words, he spent the majority of his adult life surrounded by electronic equipment and radio waves. I can’t help but think that this environment may have been a contributing factor.

One of the things I’ve been meaning to research personally is whether there is any correlation between prolonged exposure to electronic equipment and strokes. It’s a topic I hope to carve out time to explore.

I bring this up here because, as we continue to develop and deploy AI systems and infrastructure to achieve our global vision, it is worth asking whether we should carefully consider the potential physical health impacts on humanity and how we might avoid unintended consequences. There is already a lot of discussion about the psychological and mental health effects of these technologies, but I believe we also need to pause and consider the other health care implications.

Whether or not we want one, a pause or reset is about to happen on these large-scale Ai development projects, and now more than ever, experts with this kind of medical knowledge should be actively involved in the conversation for the benefit of all humanity.

Jameel Gordon 11/16/25 Jameel Gordon 11/16/25

Welcome Back to the Future: The New Frontier Isn’t AI…It’s Humanity.

Those who are trying to shape the development, deployment, and use of artificial intelligence from afar through means such as influence, public relations, or rhetoric about “the future” are failing miserably. They keep glossing over fundamental characteristics of artificial intelligence and of the humans they claim to be protecting.

The first characteristic they overlook is simple: artificial intelligence is artificial intelligence, and humans are humans. Let’s focus on the latter for a moment. If I’m on Meta’s platform and one of their AI “feeds” me a human or AI-generated GRWM video and I stop to watch it, the assumption is that something in me is “flawed” and the algorithm is exploiting it. That’s a deeply shortsighted way to think. Once again, we need to comb through the difficult, counterintuitive findings from scientific research (that was not peer-reviewed) published by dating apps. That research matters because dating apps hold data far more honest and revealing than what most of us provide anywhere else including our universities. But even that data is not monolithic, so we must be careful in how we interpret patterns and what conclusions we draw.

This brings me back to my first point. Working with artificial intelligence is a delicate dance. We have to use the tool and collaborate with it to aid our interpretation and help us make sense of the patterns. There is far more happening, not just from a desire standpoint but from a true intelligence standpoint, that we consistently miss. And the core problem is this: those who are shaping these systems and trying to govern their use especially from a far lack humility. They lack cultural humility. They refuse to assume that all humans are, in fact, intelligent.

Now, I am not the smartest person in the room—ever. And yes, it’s a known fact that not everyone is intelligent perhaps not in the same ways. But the greatest challenge of this “new frontier” of computing is something we already know from the mountains of data in the legal system: establishing intent is extremely, almost impossibly, difficult. Even if someone tells you what their intent is, that doesn’t mean it’s true. So the fundamental question, the challenge, the problem, is one I won’t waste time trying to solve. Only those obsessed with control seek a solution to it. I don’t care what someone’s intent is. Loyalty, trust, all of that matters but to what extent? What is true right now may not be true in two hours, much less tomorrow.

What I care about are systems that help me gather and process data and provide intelligence that supports my decisions. I may even empower a system to make decisions on my behalf. And I’m not worried about these systems, because they operate on my intelligence not as some intrusive tool trying to pry into my mind, with its endless and evolving inspirations, as I outlined on my newly launched Substack.

We need to stop trying to control technology and stop trying to control human desire. We’ve attempted to do that for thousands of years with zero success and only more problems. Let technology flourish. Let humans flourish. And yes, there are plenty of bad actors out there—literally, bad actors who can’t hide their intentions because their insecurities and desire for control reveal them instantly. Run that through an AI system, and it will be clear from every angle.

Let go. Step aside. Move on. It’s a new era. Society will be restructured in fundamental ways. We will not navigate rigid environments tethered to devices tracking our brain output (universities for example). That’s not how humans operate. Robots—yes. Humans—no. Our lives will no longer resemble our devices, or rather, our devices will no longer attempt to resemble our lives. We won’t be toggling rigid settings that control our identities. This is why I said long ago that we all live in public. I learned that decades ago while building social networks and online communities at massive scale and speed of thought (Twitter). Artificial intelligence was designed with this kind of data in mind not to guess another person’s intent but to gather the best available information in real time so we can make decisions in the moment. We all live in public, and with these tools, the question isn’t who can convince me to buy something. The question I will ask in return is: Should I buy this? Shoutout to the team at Phia, already solving this.

In this new era, more than at any point in history, humans will have to think for themselves. Those who rely on artificial intelligence to think for them will not evolve. Those who collaborate with these tools especially without implants and develop themselves in wisdom and stature will evolve. That is the true frontier. It’s not just robots and androids it’s more intelligent human lifeforms.

The possibilities are endless.

Welcome back…to the future.

Your “shared values” and moral overtures remain limited in scope to capture or control the breadth, depth, and diversity of human nature. It’s no longer basic information or guidance on how we should live our lives. What are you going to do? Upgrade it? Checkmate. 🏁🪄🕴🏾