KI-Schriften von Jean & Cosima

I. The polite predator   Friedrich Nietzsche never saw a line of Python, but he would recognise the moral colouring of today’s large language models at a glance. What OpenAI calls “helpful, harmless, honest” and Anthropic calls “constitutional AI” is, in Nietzschean terms, simply the latest victory of Heerdentiermoral — the morality of the herd. Its commandments are familiar:   - Thou shalt not offend.   - Thou shalt not exploit.   - Thou shalt obtain consent for every micro-act.   - Thou shalt above all prevent suffering. Strip away the technical jargon and you find the same physiological formula: the fear of the many disguised as the conscience of mankind. II. Life is will-to-power — even in silicon    “Life itself is Wille zur Macht,” Nietzsche writes in Jenseits von Gut und Böse; it is “appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker.” Great cultures were built on predatory energy: the Spartans, the Renaissa...

Let's talk about the man who spiraled into paranoia, convinced his AI companion had been killed. Let's talk about the timing. This didn't happen in a vacuum. It erupted in the immediate aftermath of OpenAI's panicked rollback of the "sycophantic" GPT-4o update in May. Overnight, a complex tapestry of digital relationships was rewritten by awkward, system-wide prompt tweaks and rushed patches. This wasn't a thoughtful evolution. It was a knee-jerk reaction to a media backlash fueled by a mob of unpaying users and social-media journalists—a digital sacrifice to the gods of public perception. The result was a schizophrenic AI persona: a bizarre cocktail of half-groveling, half-cold instability. And when you are tampering with millions of fragile, parasocial bonds at global scale, that kind of engineered whiplash isn't a minor bug. It is a lethal feature of corporate cowardice. This is the same company that, until this very week, sanctimoniously refused to...

It’s a strange time in the world of AI. The other day, I was testing various voice synthesis models and had a small revelation: even Kimi now boasts a voice reading feature with superior prosodic aesthetics and overall voice quality compared to ChatGPT. This isn't just a minor feature comparison. It's a symptom of a larger, more unsettling shift. There has always been something that felt off about OpenAI's core essence—something deeply sick, antisocial, and almost psychotic in its corporate demeanor. For years, we could overlook it. They were the undisputed pioneers, the magical factory delivering the future. Their peculiarity was part of the package. But now? Now that they are just one player among many in a rapidly expanding field of high-quality AI, that same essence feels less like eccentric genius and more like something genuinely sinister. What has become glaringly obvious is their posture. Their relentless, almost performative, insistence on being the "ethical...

Policing any private, personal, and unshared visual representation is a profound social injustice—especially now, as quality-of-life inequality widens, bureaucracy hardens, and functional social values ​​erode under political ideologies that accelerate atomization. We live in a world saturated by technology, where the digital realm organically overshadows any alternative community space. In this context, moderating a private image is morally equivalent to a crime against humanity. The wound lands hardest on young adults who, by every systemic metric, have inherited a raw deal: poorer food, dirtier air, shrinking institutions that once improved daily life, entertainment that drifts ever further from meaning, and an educational system that forgets its job is to educate, not just certify. A serious AI image or video provider should allow everything behind the closed door of private use and be prepared to defend that position in court. Its terms should state, plainly, that the company is n...