BLOG

Optimisation doesn’t drift - it compounds. In the first article of this series I argued that optimisation isn’t a choice. I suggested that once intelligence exists, competition exists, and a species can imagine alternatives, the removal of friction becomes a kind of cognitive imperative. Humans look at a situation, detect inefficiency, picture a better outcome, and then feel pulled towards eliminating whatever slows things down. That pull is not ideological - it’s biological.

The assumption we never question Most people talk about optimisation as if it is a lifestyle preference, like minimalism, or running, or going vegan. As though society could simply decide to calm down if it wanted to, and that our collective obsession with speed, convenience, efficiency and frictionless living is the product of a long meeting we all attended and politely agreed to. But optimisation is not a policy, it is not a project, and it is not optional. It behaves less

In the first three parts of this series, I have been asking a deceptively simple question. How does artificial intelligence actually perceive the world? We began by exploring the idea that AI does not think in stories or sequences, but in shapes, relationships and topologies. We then examined the uncomfortable but unavoidable realisation that AI has no senses of its own, and that humanity functions as its sensory organ, feeding it interpretations of reality at scale. From the