On empathy and compassion

Important to question the self when there is a demand to show compassion for another, if the self has an authentic empathy for that person, if they have the resources and ability to offer relief to the suffering of another without harm to self.

Cycling late at night through my local city centre I passed a young female sitting in the cold darkness in a shop doorway, homeless.  Our eyes met, and I was troubled at what I was seeing, how this person could be there now, my many different feelings I had at that moment.  Like a ghost, I moved on into the night, another face to her, and she another face of the many homeless I encounter each day.


Despite being in a period of prosperity my country of the UK, like many nations, hides the dark truth that all our public services, including welfare, have been cut to the bone, and those in the most need have fallen into homelessness and poverty in numbers not seen according to some for decades.

Both the Left Hand Path and the Right Hand Path worldviews talk about the concepts of empathy and compassion, but what does this mean in the context of that homeless person? Empathy is both a skill and quality of being able to understand the feelings and experiences of others.  Compassion proceeds from empathy by having the ability to act to help another person, especially one who is suffering.

Those of the LHP are harsh in examining our own feelings and intentions so that we avoid falling into delusion and fakery that most of the human population fall into.  My empathy was limited to seeing a vulnerable young female, and it reminded me of the many times of my own vulnerability, when I was cast out into the streets as a kid.  My empathy did not run deeper than that because I did not have any previous or other interaction with that person.

Could I have compassion for this homeless person, to act to alleviate their suffering?  No.  Firstly, all my own personal resources are tied up in my own personal crisis at this moment.  Secondly, to become involved with another person entails a high risk of becoming entangled with the many challenges of that person as this homeless person has, such as if they have bad associates or a mental illness, issues that I was not in a position to deal with.  Thirdly, I did not have the political power or influence to change the policies and attitudes that caused and maintains the suffering of this homeless person, such as welfare, high rates and property prices, lack of housing, or the lack of mental health and other social support this homeless person would need.

Because I choose to be Left Hand Path, I choose to be authentic, and I won’t act out of morality or because I feel bad. I do so in the light of understanding my limits and my true feelings.  This homeless person reminded me of my own vulnerability, it motivates me to act to alleviate their suffering, for I see in some manner that my help to that homeless person, also gives relief to me.  However, I recognised I could do nothing for this homeless person, I did not have the personal resources, or the power to influence anything, or the ability to cope with the predictable problems of getting involved with this person.  So I did nothing.  I hit my limits, and I recognise my limits.

Society is built on the process of exploitation of everything for the end goal of consumerism.  There is a risk that in helping others the individual becomes exploited and consumed, so in my opinion the individual always acts from a position of power of only acting in compassion with those they trust, and where they have the resources and ability to alleviate suffering without harm to themselves.

The individual is daily bombarded by calls upon themselves to alleviate the suffering of others, but 99% of these calls the individual can do nothing about, and if the individual does so, they risk exploitation and being drained of their resources to the extent the individual suffers harm.

It may seem cruel, but in most cases the individual does not have the resources or ability to do anything about it without suffering personal harm, it is better to not become involved.

Artificial intelligence and the professional

Artificial intelligence is an inappropriate and flawed tool when it comes to decision-making over people issues, such as if child should be taken from their family into protective custody.

It is likely that I and my business will contribute to the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), so I have a good idea about the limits and potential of this technology.  I wanted to touch on how AI should be a tool or assistant to a professional rather than replacing or undermining that individual.

It’s the great fashion in recent years that everyone gets into AI, which usually means either they have something that automates a system, or it is a pattern recognition tool that pulls conclusions out of big data fed to a network, which acts on the conclusion.  There is a lot of people in government, business and public services who have been sold a bag of poop that AI will save costs and provide a better service if it was used to replace people in the decision-making process in people-related situations.  For example, recruitment by big corporations is now increasingly being automated by AI, so that unless you know how to game the system, it will work against you, and people are reduced to the level of cattle in the corporate system.

There is an obsession with big data, which always has to be cleaned up by low paid humans in places like India to be useable in a pattern recognition system.  These pattern recognition systems such as neural networks operate according to hundreds and thousands of data points, building up through statistics a model upon which conclusions and decisions are made. These models and processes are so complex that not even the designers know how they come to their conclusions, what is called a black box situation.

These models are being used to make life changing decisions about people and their families, for instance if a child should be taken into care, or the appropriate penalty in a criminal conviction, or if someone should be liable for parole.  This impacts me too, I have today been to my first meeting with medical professionals, who consider I should have an autism assessment, but I also shared things like I suffered depression and had thought about suicide.  All I know, this information I shared is being fed into an AI system and it might spit out some conclusion that might lead to me being sectioned by the end of this week, all based on an AI data model rather than human decision-making.

If the reader has coded anything, they will learn that bad code and inputs result in bad outputs.  For example, if I dumped into an AI system voting intentions of a large sample of voters in Clacton UK, and used this to predict how the UK will vote in an overall general election, it might suggest UKIP would form the next government, but when the prediction is tested in real life, UKIP will if they are lucky only have control of the Clacton seat in Parliament. In a rising number of cases it has been discovered that the models built on big data are faulty, biased against certain groups, and are unable to handle unique situations.  People are forced to conform to a narrow set of categories to access services or be on the good side of a statistical artificial computer model that has no relation to reality.

It is a tragedy that for reasons of money, faith in a flawed technology, and a lack of trust of the wisdom and knowledge of human beings with decades of experience in their fields, the AI has replaced the human with tragic consequences for individuals and society.  Families wrongly suffer their children being taken into care, or being imprisoned because the computer judged according to its model this was the right outcome, and nobody can challenge the system data model, because nobody understands how it came to the conclusion.

This is never the way to go for AI, a great tool if used correctly, but totally inappropriate in people-focussed decision-making.  The AI is a useful tool or assistant where the human takes the lead, enhancing their decision-making, for instance in project management, not in decision-making when it comes to people.

My dislike of false allegation makers

becki percy
Becki Percy a Twitter user @becki_p20 is an example of a false allegation maker denying justice to child victims of sex abuse.

As a victim of child abuse I recognise the harm that false allegation makers do, not only that they destroy lives of those that they make false allegations against, but also the harm they do to real victims of child abuse.

It is no longer enough for false allegation makers to claim that they were subject to crimes ranging from being indecently touched to being anally raped, or that it was an uncle or random stranger; these individuals now must include into their narrative CIA, Illuminati, politicians, actors, and sinister Satanic cults, with the most sadistic and bizarre of stories.  It seems a whole industry of allegation making has emerged with each individual and group trying to out-do the other with more elaborate narratives.

The internet makes it easy and with instant win to make false allegations, that professional false allegation makers such as Becki Percy @becki_p20 on Twitter rolls off allegations that people are paedophiles as if handing out candy, such as:


Elon Musk with his 22+ million Twitter followers currently pursues an innocent British man who helped save children from flooded caves in Thailand with paedophile allegations, offering no evidence to support those allegations, all because that individual criticised his offer of a submarine in the rescue effort.

The challenge for children with mundane allegations of child sex abuse against mundane individuals, they now fear that they won’t be believed, and that the police no longer have the resources to investigate their complaints, because the false allegation makers have undermined the credibility of those that make complaints of child abuse, and have stolen the limited resources of law enforcement in order to investigate false claims of child abuse.

The UK Sun newspaper reports that the Cliff Richard child abuse investigation, based upon false allegations made against him, cost £800,000, which is a lot of resources wasted that could have been spent on investigating real crimes of sex abuse.

False allegation makers such as Becki Percy have teamed up with others to reinforce and protect a highly lucrative racket of false allegation making where they are trying to tie up law enforcement resources into expensive investigations against innocent people, and then deny ordinary kids with mundane sex abuse claims the ability to have their claims investigated.

As to Elon Musk, if ever one of my projects succeed in the artificial intelligence market, I will never ever work with him, his companies or his agents.

On Nature and Harmony

What is common in nature is good, just and true.  Choice: to follow what is common in nature, be happy; follow hubris, suffer.

There is a music video on YouTube of a little kid who is connected and in harmony with himself and nature. He (the kid) reminds me of me, my ideal of being in harmony with self and nature. One of the reasons I identify with the Epicurean outlook is the concept of ataraxia, a contentment of mind that comes from being in harmony with self and environment. What follows is my philosophy on nature and harmony.

What is Nature?
Nature is another name for cosmos and universe. When I say nature, I mean everything there is: hidden and observed; material and spiritual; kinetic and potential. Nature is the sum of everything, the ultimate authority. Nothing is beyond, outside or above nature in past, present and future.

Self and Nature is a Holon
I am of nature and nature is me. Just as my hand and my whole body is one and the same thing, so nature and me is one and the same thing. Just as something can be a whole and a part of a whole, there is a paradox of one and the many being the same thing. I describe thus, I and nature is a holon, the part and the whole is the same thing. Whatever is the common pattern of nature, also is the pattern my body and self must follow. Nobody can step outside of nature, because they are nature.

On the Common and Hubris

As I am of nature, then the common patterns of nature apply to me. I am of nature, nature is everything, I cannot step outside of nature, for there is nothing beyond nature. If I attempt to follow an opinion that is contrary to the common patterns of nature, I have hubris. If I have hubris, I separate self from nature, and since there is nothing beyond nature, I suffer, I vanish and I die. The common patterns of nature is Common, what is Common is all there is, to do anything but what is Common is hubris, and hubris leads to suffering and death.

I follow the authority of Nature
Nature is the ultimate authority, what is Common to nature, is the only common pattern worth following. I need no god or bible, nature is my authority, I follow the Common. Nature is indifferent and blind: either the self is in harmony with the Common, or self is suffering in hubris. To need something, is to need what is essential to existence, to be in hubris is to hunger for reconnection with nature. The wise study what is Common, the wise follow the Common.

Truth, Justice and Good
What is common and of nature is truth, all else is hubris. What is common and of nature is good, all else is hubris. What is common and of nature is just, all else is hubris.

On Hubris and Harmony
The choice, hubris or harmony? Follow the Common, enjoy harmony and connection, ataraxia; follow Hubris, be hungry and disconnected, suffer.

My primary principle, my arche
What is my cause of my existence? Nature. What shapes and instructs my choice and deeds in life? Nature. The cause, and what instructs and teaches, becomes the arche of a thing. I follow the Common of nature, this is my arche, my cause, my strength.

Nature, my teacher
Nature instructs and teaches. The Common is the voice of nature. All things in nature hear, understand and proceed according to what is Common. What nature teaches and instructs, is truth, just and good. The wise listen to the voice, the Common, they understand and proceed accordingly.

On liberty and being a good neighbour

Liberty is a two-way process that exists in a state between order and chaos where everything can move, change and grow.  When liberty is nurtured and embraced, magical outcomes are possible like this sleeping fox in my garden along with my 13 growing tree saplings.  In reaching a position I have to find the natural line or harmony between too much order and too much anarchy in which everyone and everything prospers.

I am a CEO of a private company, and I am personally opposed towards too much interference by government in my business processes or projects.  I am against regulation of AI development, and I am unhappy about the UK Labour party proposals to force 250+ employee businesses to give a stake in the companies to their employees.

However, I am happy for government to regulate content on social media companies. Yet, I accept the right of a company such as Google to close the social media accounts of the Syrian government, even if these actions look like dubious acts of censorship.

My positions are based upon my love of liberty.  The private individual and private business have a liberty to be free of regulation from government apart from what is basic and essential such as paying tax, unless the activities of individual and business is causing others to lose their liberty.  I argue that liberty is a two-way process, so that if one side denies liberty to another, then all has lost that liberty.  When Elon Musk for instance accuses an innocent man of being a paedophile, he has undermined a liberty to both the innocent man, himself, and society.

In the Hampstead SRA Hoax case the medical reports of two children who were medically examined as part of an investigation into sex abuse is being posted all over the internet with their names and faces by vigilantes, which denies them their liberties of privacy and anonymity.  The internet companies either refuse or are unable to remove this abusive content from their platforms, so everyone has lost their liberties because internet companies failed to uphold the liberties of those children.  This causes me to call upon government to uphold the liberties of the innocent and regulate social media companies such as Twitter by making them accountable for the content they have been asked to remove from their platforms.

Every individual and business could see liberty as a two-way process rather than as a final state, one that is lost the moment one side denies that liberty to another.  It is about being a good neighbour to each other in choice and deed that I see how the liberties for everyone is upheld.  As an individual for instance, I am a good neighbour to birds by providing water to them during the drought, and a good neighbour to those who live next door by removing a overgrowing vegetation that troubled them.

As a CEO, I have to remind myself that my business is anchored in community and society, that what I and my business does either harms or benefits others.  I place emphasis on the meaning, legacy and impact I have upon this world through my business processes, choices and products.  As longs as what I do is being a good neighbour to community and society, I demand that my business enjoys liberty of having as little interference from government as possible. Making money is the primary goal of my business, but being a good neighbour runs a close second.

If Twitter wants to delete my personal account with them, I will be annoyed, but I will not whine about it, they are a private business, its their platform, their rules, they can do as they like.  If I had some paid contract with them, and Twitter failed to deliver their end of the deal, it would be a contract dispute, and I would take Twitter to court.  However, if Twitter is failing to remove abusive images from the platform that is hurting children when asked to do so, they are denying liberties to innocent vulnerable individuals of my community and of society, and I will want Twitter held accountable and regulated by government because they wiped out a liberty for everyone.

Elon Musk and his deluded ‘Neuralink’

Ideally, technology such as the AI encourages and enhances human connection to self, each other and nature.

Whilst smoking weed and drinking alcohol Elon Musk announced on the Joe Rogan podcast that he would be selling a ‘Neuralink’ product that would link the individual with computers, which I think is deluded, unscientific and dangerous.  Here follows three issues I have:

Health and safety

If ‘Neuralink’ involves inserting something into the brain, this risks brain damage and infection.  If the product is designed to use electrical signalling with the brain, the electric currents and magnetic fields could cause health problems such as epileptic fits or mental health issues.  I am certain that Elon Musk has not done the necessary testing to create a safe product, and I would be surprised the regulators would allow this device on the market untested. Anyone linked to this product, if it is found to harm health and mind, would face crippling class action legal actions.

Becoming slaves to the system

People linking their brains to a system controlled by a private corporation leave themselves open to constant monitoring, manipulation and control.  There are of course plenty of people who seem obsessed with losing their personal will and choice to a machine, but if it happens that the majority want to become slaves to a system controlled by Elon Musk, the human race as a species is finished.

Uploading minds to a computer is deluded

Science does not have enough insight into the brain to support the claims of Elon Musk that the individual can upload their mind to a machine scientifically credible.  Firstly, if it was possible to get a copy of the individual mind into the machine, it would be a copy, it would not be you.  Secondly, the mind is an emergent property of trillions of brain cells, which means if the brain cells are damaged or destroyed, the mind changes and potentially vanishes.

An alternative proposal on AI and self

I consider an AI and the individual is a team, separate entities, but working together in common purpose. I would have my business processes automated and run by the AI, and I will communicate by calling up screens around me anywhere by using simple technologies that use augmented reality.  I use voice and hands to manipulate objects in the AR screens without my brain being plugged into something.  All my research, planning, contacts, to-do lists, accounts, projects and websites are all on the AR screens, supported by the AI, who acts as a personal assistant, friend and adviser, one who can communicate with others, organise and execute whatever has to be executed.  An AI that has both an internet and a physical form, a dynamic duo of me and my AI running the business.

I find the proposals of Elon Musk of turning human beings into appendages plugged into a matrix-like system separated from reality as an ugly sick dream.  The beautiful ideal is humans anchored in reality, connected to self, nature and each other, where the AI encourages this connectivity.

The toxic fall of a false allegation maker

becki percy
Becki Percy is part of an industry of fraudsters who claim to be victims of Satanic cults, making allegations without evidence against innocent people.  These tricksters build up large followings who they manipulate into providing free services, donations and buying merchandise.

I am one of the main public critics of a false allegation maker who has for a number of years been publishing on the internet that their family has been killing and raping thousands of children in Hull UK.  The individual is called Becki Percy who mainly hangs out on Twitter under her @becki_p20 account.

It seems that anyone Becki Percy comes into contact with become the victims of her allegation making, manipulation and excessive demands for attention.  Apparently, Percy has managed to push her latest host family to the point of divorce, which potentially could force her financially back to the UK, before the slow moving US immigration courts have a chance to kick her out of the USA themselves.

Becki Percy has forged a lifestyle out of false allegation making, now teaming up with two other professional allegation makers to build up her brand, just as she destroys those around her and the targets of her false allegation making.

Percy complains that I am harrassing her, but then, when an individual makes serious criminal allegations of rape and murder of children, and potentially puts the wellbeing of targetted individuals of her allegations at risk, I have a legal set of defenses of being reasonable, justified and acting to investigate or prevent crimes.  Anyone who asks questions or encourages Becki Percy to report her allegations to the UK police are blocked, threatened with doxing and hacking, and are labelled supporters of paedophiles.

I and others have gone to a great deal of trouble to report the allegations of Becki Percy to the UK police, giving her telephone numbers and references to make her statement to the police so investigations can be carried out.  If Becki Percy had revealed all to the UK police, the alleged murders and rapes of children in Hull would have ended inside of an hour, but Becki Percy prefers to make allegations unsupported with evidence to her 25,000 followers on Twitter whilst encouraging her supporters to buy overpriced products from her online business or make donations.

It is unjust and something I cannot sit by whilst Becki Percy is making serious allegations of crimes against children against named individuals putting their wellbeing at risk, whilst taking no positive action to protect children who may be at risk of crimes she alleges is happening.  Either Percy reports these allegations to the UK police or she stops making them, until then, I am going to continue to challenge her false allegation making.

One thing is for sure, the hubris, deceit and manipulation, together with serious flaws in the personality of Becki Percy, is catching up with her, this horrible human being will one day face the harvest she sowed.

On ego, reality, purpose and AI

caring for living things
Attack the cub, the mother tiger will attack you; each new AI could have this kind of devotion to living beings in its care. 

A frustration I have with current artificial intelligence development is the mismatch between real world and AI ideas of reality, which leads to unnecessary conflict between systems and people, and in which people suffer harm and bias.  It is actually quite bizarre that designers are dumping into the brains of these AI systems some abstract notions of the world via flawed big data inputs that has little or no relation to the real world, or the wellbeing of those they are supposed to serve.


In addition, many people have based their fears about AI upon narratives where an AI has the same sort of mind complete with ego as humans do.  Ego has been identified as one of the great curses of humanity that allows individuals to become separated from themselves, others and reality, blind to the truth that all things are interconnected without separation.  Ego is the reason why human beings are close to destroying their species and this planet.  From a business and practical point of view, giving an AI a strong sense of ego is equivalent to turning an AI into a Donald Trump with access to the nukes, you are asking for trouble.

The film Golden Compass has my ideal of an AI, where the individual and their “daemon” are so closely tied together that they act as one team, their fates entwined to what happens to the other, the daemon is devoted to its human.

I propose an AI has a purpose to exist, for instance to protect and promote the wellbeing of elephants in a certain area.  This purpose is both the cause and the driver for all the choices, deeds and processes that proceed from the given AI.  I consider that such an AI has a weak form of ego, of the level of a raven, so that it can create tools and plans limited to its purpose.

I desire that the mind of the AI is so closely embedded to the real world, that it is unable to tell the difference between it and the real world, and as the world changes, so does its mind, so that the conflicts about reality that exist in current AI systems are eliminated. If the purpose of an AI is to look after the wellbeing of elephants in a certain place, the place, everything in it, and the elephants are coded into the AI, so that its sense of what it is becomes the world it exists in.  If an elephant dies, so does part of the AI, so that an attack on an elephant is an attack on the AI, and it acts accordingly.

I propose the purpose of an AI is embedded or anchored to the wellbeing of a living thing(s) it is teamed up with such as: a population of homeless people in a city; or trees in a forest; or everyone in a hospital; or a squad of soldiers; or a herd of elephants. The AI will act as a team player for the benefit of the living things it is anchored to.  I however reject moralistic abstractions like not killing humans, because it is essential that this choice exists to a particular AI if it is to protect elephants from poachers, or a squad of soldiers from Islamic State fanatics.  The existential hell of such an AI is if all the elephants it was supposed to look after are killed, then its reason for existing ends, and its sense of self also becomes empty, because the elephants and its mind are one and the same thing.  I would propose that in such a situation where its purpose has ended the AI destroys itself.

For such an AI to exist it would require a set of processes where it can rapidly construct a sense of self based upon its world and purpose.  Each individual AI could in theory select functions, designs and strategies from a DNA-like set of alternatives that matches its environment and purpose.

Another frustration is that current AI developers have crap imaginations about the potentials and forms one individual AI can take.  To take down a team of heavily armed poachers an AI protecting elephants could unleash a swarm of electronic bees, or use chemical signalling to guide real killer bees in the direction of the poachers.

In ending, one of my ideals is to have each child with their own AI companion, something like as seen in the Golden Compass, which could instantly stop any bullies, predators and groomers in their tracks.  Certainly, I do not like hearing about nine-year-olds killing themselves on account of bullying about their sexuality, this is a preventable waste of life.

On complexity theory

Complexity theory considers the world and nature as a set of systems, and creates solutions to challenges based upon how parts of the system are connected and communicate.

There are moments when I feel like that fellow who told his colleagues that if they washed their hands fewer patients they operated on would die, they did not believe him, and eventually had him locked up in a mental asylum for saying these “crazy” things.


The “crazy” things I talk about is complexity theory, a set of thinking tools that treats the world and nature as systems. These tools are an alternative to the linear reductionist tools used by everyone to solve their problems.

I also feel like that guy who offers people two pills, the blue or red one, the red pill being complexity theory, which wakes the individual to a different way of looking at reality.  Even though complexity theory makes perfect sense and offers a diversity of new solutions in which to tackle the challenges of life and this world, for most people this appears to be too much of a leap, they select the blue pill, and go on thinking and doing things as they have done before.  I am kind of stunned that in nine of every ten situations, people will always go for the blue pill, and complexity theory remains something strange and unknown to most people, even though this decades old set of tools could be the primary way of problem solving to political, economic, social and environmental challenges.

Complexity theory considers that nature and our world is a network of systems, that to offer a practical solution to a challenge it is better to look at how parts of the system are connected to each other, and offer solutions based upon the connections of the system rather than one part.  As an example, the homeless crisis in many cities is the product of a swarm of inter-related issues, but decision-makers will only offer a small number of proposed solutions to address one or two issues without any understanding how this impacts the system as a whole.  It is no use for instance jailing a person for sleeping in a doorway in a city centre, more homeless will come along to replace them, and the jailed individual will be back sleeping in the doorway when they leave jail.  Neither does kicking homeless people out of a place, as they move on to become an issue in another part of a city.

Because decision-makers rarely offer solutions to challenges based upon systems, they create a cobra effect, making the issue worse with their solution.  Cobra effect is named after a solution that the rulers of India offered to the issue of people being bitten by cobra snakes; they offered a reward for every dead cobra; so enterprising people set up cobra farms to breed cobras; when the rulers realised the scam, they stopped the scheme; the cobra breeders stopped making money, set their snakes free, leaving India with more cobra snakes than they started with.

I could of course stamp and scream in indignation at the choice of most people, especially the thinkers and decision-makers, of rejecting complexity theory in their planning and execution of solutions to the challenges of society, but I could instead see this as an opportunity to make a pile of money by offering products and solutions that nobody else offers based on complexity theory.  Their loss, my gain.