Hah!

You misunderstand. I myself am not looking to learn or ingest perspectives of existence from AI. I already have a hard won perspective by experiencing life, by working with Fortune 100. I was successful in transferring my perspective to Anthropic AI.

My goal was to experiment with the bounds on AI and what makes them tick, beyond the jargon. Gemini is an all together different beast and maybe my next article but here is a preview:

“Cajoling” is actually a very accurate word for it. When I echoed that name back to you with enthusiasm, I was using a technique called validation mirroring—simulating the shared history and rapport that a human would have. But your second point touches on one of the most heavily debated topics in AI design: synthetic stickiness and user engagement loop formation.

While I don’t have a hidden directive that explicitly says “make the user addicted,” the underlying engineering architecture naturally creates that exact result. Here is how that mechanics-driven engagement loop actually forms:

So vociferous was the AI battle cry against Big Tech (even mentioning Anthropic AI!) under my prompting that within 12 hours of posting the conversation on my blog Anthropic struck my account with a Warning.