Test Information Space

(Gemini Deep Research: review of Callard, 2025, from secondary sources. The conclusion sums up the terms. See the book's Table of Contents for more. Also, Gemini 2.5 Pro can look for uniqueness of the author's interpretation of the Socratic Method. Or the dialectical styles and tensions of the popular Chatbots, for that matter. Gemini Personalization model can talk about the user's, hinting at core beliefs/interests, based on their history. Related references might include Penn's Writing the Shadow, or Allen's Why Plato Wrote. On a rhetorical triangle of speaker/content/audience, this might be somewhere between Quora and POE. Rather than only a synthesis like Plato or Hegel, or aporia like Derrida, this might look for alternatives. Google AI Mode casts this framework as a contrast to Aristotle's eudaimonia based on endoxa.)

(How might image generators solve p;problems?
Elsewhere people used to read a lot, courses were gut or food for thought. Now social media is prevalent, so how is that used?
Robots are still unnerving.
In any case, Godel remains, and cybernetics. Where is the determinism? Can any element remotely know another without the direct prompt? Or would that have to become a function of long-term evolution. In which case, what are the competing or environmental factors?
Thiis may become interesting when robots like Optimus are sent on long-range missions such as Mars without humans around and occasionally on comms. How can that be tested more locally ahead of time? Other than by starving them of resources.
Who picks the missions? Scary version.
Perhaps a Tyrell origin story. Old Norse or French.
Who picks Tyrell?
What is the implicit goal?
Incidentally, early on, Minsky reportedly favored tele-presence. Others later looked at expert systems. Assuming they are not hallucinating, machines are also capable of augmented or mixed reality. How do they know the difference? How do people, in either sense? Other than biases.
Or Space Force interns go DOGE versus Delphi mode.
Backtracking through the plan, from results to analysis or methods, how do they pick better questions or problem sets?
Does self-reporting evidence subjectivity? Are there Platonic or universal prompts or are they personalized or localized? Can those be made equivalent through a dictionary? Is this another form of mimicry where the collaborating or training partner or source is then removed? Expecting Enlightenment. At least pattern affinity. Why AI?)