In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, Stewart Alsop sits down with Derek Osgood, CEO of DoubleO.ai, to talk about the challenges and opportunities of building with AI agents. The conversation ranges from the shift from deterministic to probabilistic processes, to how humans and LLMs think differently, to why lateral thinking, humor, and creative downtime matter for true intelligence. They also explore the future of knowledge work, the role of context engineering and memory in making agents useful, and the culture of talent, credentials, and hidden gems in Silicon Valley. You can check out Derek’s work at doubleo.ai or connect with him on LinkedIn.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 Derek Osgood explains what AI agents are, the challenge of reliability and repeatability, and the difference between chat-based and process-based agents.
05:00 Conversation shifts to probabilistic vs deterministic systems, with examples of agents handling messy data like LinkedIn profiles.
10:00 Stewart Alsop and Derek discuss how humans reason compared to LLMs, token vs word prediction, and how language shapes action.
15:00 They question whether chat interfaces are the right UX for AI, weighing structure, consistency, and the persistence of buttons in knowledge work.
20:00 Voice interaction comes up, its sci-fi allure, and why unstructured speech makes it hard without stronger memory and higher-level reasoning.
25:00 Derek unpacks OpenAI’s approach to memory as active context retrieval, context engineering, and why vector databases aren’t the full answer.
30:00 They examine talent wars in AI, credentialism, signaling, and the difference between PhD-level model work and product design for agents.
35:00 Leisure and creativity surface, linking downtime, fantasy, and imagination to better lateral thinking in knowledge work.
40:00 Discussion of asynchronous AI reasoning, longer time horizons, and why extending “thinking time” could change agent behavior.
45:00 Derek shares how Double O orchestrates knowledge work with natural language workflows, making agents act like teammates.
50:00 They close with reflections on re-skilling, learning to work with LLMs, BS detection, and the future of critical thinking with AI.

Key Insights

1. One of the biggest challenges in building AI agents is not just creating them but ensuring their reliability, accuracy, and repeatability. It’s easy to build a demo, but the “last mile” of making an agent perform consistently in the messy, unstructured real world is where the hard problems live.
2. The shift from deterministic software to probabilistic agents reflects the complexity of real-world data and processes. Deterministic systems work only when inputs and outputs are cleanly defined, whereas agents can handle ambiguity, search for missing context, and adapt to different forms of information.
3. Humans and LLMs share similarities in reasoning—both operate like predictive engines—but the difference lies in agency and lateral thinking. Humans can proactively choose what to do without direction and make wild connections across unrelated experiences, something current LLMs still struggle to replicate.
4. Chat interfaces may not be the long-term solution for interacting with AI. While chat offers flexibility, it is too unstructured for many use cases. Derek argues for a hybrid model where structured UI/UX supports repeatable workflows, while chat remains useful as one tool within a broader system.
5. Voice interaction carries promise but faces obstacles. The unstructured nature of spoken input makes it difficult for agents to act reliably without stronger memory, better context retrieval, and a more abstract understanding of goals. True voice-first systems may require progress toward AGI.
6. Much of the magic in AI comes not from the models themselves but from context engineering. Effective systems don’t just rely on vector databases and embeddings—they combine full context, partial context, and memory retrieval to create a more holistic understanding of user goals and history.
7. Beyond the technical, the episode highlights cultural themes: credentialism, hidden talent, and the role of leisure in creativity. Derek critiques Silicon Valley’s obsession with credentials and signaling, noting that true innovation often comes from hidden gem hires and from giving the brain downtime to make unexpected lateral connections that drive creative breakthroughs.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, Stewart Alsop speaks with Juan Verhook, founder of Tender Market, about how AI reshapes creativity, work, and society. They explore the risks of AI-generated slop versus authentic expression, the tension between probability and uniqueness, and why the complexity dilemma makes human-in-the-loop design essential. Juan connects bureaucracy to proto-AI, questions the incentives driving black-box models, and considers how scaling laws shape emergent intelligence. The conversation balances skepticism with curiosity, reflecting on authenticity, creativity, and the economic realities of building in an AI-driven world. You can learn more about Juan Verhook’s work or connect with him directly through his LinkedIn or via his website at tendermarket.eu.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 – Stewart and Juan open by contrasting AI slop with authentic creative work.
05:00 – Discussion of probability versus uniqueness and what makes output meaningful.
10:00 – The complexity dilemma emerges, as systems grow opaque and fragile.
15:00 – Why human-in-the-loop remains central to trustworthy AI.
20:00 – Juan draws parallels between bureaucracy and proto-AI structures.
25:00 – Exploration of black-box models and the limits of explainability.
30:00 – The role of economic incentives in shaping AI development.
35:00 – Reflections on nature versus nurture in intelligence, human and machine.
40:00 – How scaling laws drive emergent behavior, but not always understanding.
45:00 – Weighing authenticity and creativity against automation’s pull.
50:00 – Closing thoughts on optimism versus pessimism in the future of work.

Key Insights

1. AI slop versus authenticity – Juan emphasizes that much of today’s AI output tends toward “slop,” a kind of lowest-common-denominator content driven by probability. The challenge, he argues, is not just generating more information but protecting uniqueness and cultivating authenticity in an age where machines are optimized for averages.
2. The complexity dilemma – As AI systems grow in scale, they become harder to understand, explain, and control. Juan frames this as a “complexity dilemma”: every increase in capability carries a parallel increase in opacity, leaving us to navigate trade-offs between power and transparency.
3. Human-in-the-loop as necessity – Instead of replacing people, AI works best when embedded in systems where humans provide judgment, context, and ethical grounding. Juan sees human-in-the-loop design not as a stopgap, but as the foundation for trustworthy AI use.
4. Bureaucracy as proto-AI – Juan provocatively links bureaucracy to early forms of artificial intelligence. Both are systems that process information, enforce rules, and reduce individuality into standardized outputs. This analogy helps highlight the social risks of AI if left unexamined: efficiency at the cost of humanity.
5. Economic incentives drive design – The trajectory of AI is not determined by technical possibility alone but by the economic structures funding it. Black-box models dominate because they are profitable, not because they are inherently better for society. Incentives, not ideals, shape which technologies win.
6. Nature, nurture, and machine intelligence – Juan extends the age-old debate about human intelligence into the AI domain, asking whether machine learning is more shaped by architecture (nature) or training data (nurture). This reflection surfaces the uncertainty of what “intelligence” even means when applied to artificial systems.
7. Optimism and pessimism in balance – While AI carries risks of homogenization and loss of meaning, Juan maintains a cautiously optimistic view. By prioritizing creativity, human agency, and economic models aligned with authenticity, he sees pathways where AI amplifies rather than diminishes human potential.

On this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop speaks with Michael Jagdeo, a headhunter and founder working with Exponent Labs and The Syndicate, about the cycles of money, power, and technology that shape our world. Their conversation touches on financial history through The Ascent of Money by Niall Ferguson and William Bagehot’s The Money Market, the rise and fall of financial centers from London to New York and the new Texas Stock Exchange, the consolidation of industries and the theory of oligarchical collectivism, the role of AI as both tool and chaos agent, Bitcoin and “quantitative re-centralization,” the dynamics of exponential organizations, and the balance between collectivism and individualism. Jagdeo also shares recruiting philosophies rooted in stories like “stone soup,” frameworks like Yu-Kai Chou’s Octalysis and the User Type Hexad, and book recommendations including Salim Ismail’s Exponential Organizations and Arthur Koestler’s The Act of Creation. Along the way they explore servant leadership, Price’s Law, Linux and open source futures, religion as an operating system, and the cyclical nature of civilizations. You can learn more about Michael Jagdeo or reach out to him directly through Twitter or LinkedIn.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:05 Stewart Alsop introduces Michael Jagdeo, who shares his path from headhunting actuaries and IT talent into launching startups with Exponent Labs and The Syndicate.

00:10 They connect recruiting to financial history, discussing actuaries, The Ascent of Money, and William Bagehot’s The Money Market on the London money market and railways.

00:15 The Rothschilds, institutional knowledge, and Corn Laws lead into questions about New York as a financial center and the quiet launch of the Texas Stock Exchange by Citadel and BlackRock.

00:20 Capital power, George Soros vs. the Bank of England, chaos, paper clips, and Orwell’s oligarchical collectivism frame industry consolidation, syndicates, and stone soup.

00:25 They debate imperial conquest, bourgeoisie leisure, the decline of the middle class, AI as chaos agent, digital twins, Sarah Connor, Godzilla, and nuclear metaphors.

00:30 Conversation turns to Bitcoin, “quantitative re-centralization,” Jack Bogle, index funds, Robinhood micro bailouts, and AI as both entropy and negative entropy.

00:35 Jagdeo discusses Jim Keller, Tenstorrent, RISC-V, Nvidia CUDA, exponential organizations, Price’s Law, bureaucracy, and servant leadership with the parable of stone soup.

00:40 Recruiting as symbiosis, biophilia, trust, Judas, Wilhelm Reich, AI tools, Octalysis gamification, Jordan vs. triangle offense, and the role of laughter in persuasion emerge.

00:45 They explore religion as operating systems, Greek gods, Comte’s stages, Nietzsche, Jung, nostalgia, scientism, and Jordan Peterson’s revival of tradition.

00:50 The episode closes with Linux debates, Ubuntu, Framer laptops, PewDiePie, and Jagdeo’s nod to Liminal Snake on epistemic centers and turning curses into blessings.

Key Insights

1. One of the central insights of the conversation is how financial history repeats through cycles of consolidation and power shifts. Michael Jagdeo draws on William Bagehot’s The Money Market to explain how London became the hub of European finance, much like New York later did, and how the Texas Stock Exchange signals a possible southern resurgence of financial influence in America. The pattern of wealth moving with institutional shifts underscores how markets, capital, and politics remain intertwined.
2. Jagdeo and Alsop emphasize that industries naturally oligarchize. Borrowing from Orwell’s “oligarchical collectivism,” Jagdeo notes that whether in diamonds, food, or finance, consolidation emerges as economies of scale take over. This breeds syndicates and monopolies, often interpreted as conspiracies but really the predictable outcome of industrial maturation.
3. Another powerful theme is the stone soup model of collaboration. Jagdeo applies this parable to recruiting, showing that no single individual can achieve large goals alone. By framing opportunities as shared ventures where each person adds their own ingredient, leaders can attract top talent while fostering genuine symbiosis.
4. Technology, and particularly AI, is cast as both chaos agent and amplifier of human potential. The conversation likens AI to nuclear power—capable of great destruction or progress. From digital twins to Sarah Connor metaphors, they argue AI represents not just artificial intelligence but artificial knowledge and action, pushing humans to adapt quickly to its disruptive presence.
5. The discussion of Bitcoin and digital currencies reframes decentralization as potentially another trap. Jagdeo provocatively calls Bitcoin “quantitative re-centralization,” suggesting that far from liberating individuals, digital currencies may accelerate neo-feudalism by creating new oligarchies and consolidating financial control in unexpected ways.
6. Exponential organizations and the leverage of small teams emerge as another key point. Citing Price’s Law, Jagdeo explains how fewer than a dozen highly capable individuals can now achieve billion-dollar valuations thanks to open source hardware, AI, and network effects. This trend redefines scale, making nimble collectives more powerful than bureaucratic giants.
7. Finally, the episode highlights the cyclical nature of civilizations and belief systems. From Rome vs. Carthage to Greek gods shifting with societal needs, to Nietzsche’s “God is dead” and Jung’s view of recurring deaths of divinity, Jagdeo argues that religion, ideology, and operating systems reflect underlying incentives. Western nostalgia for past structures, whether political or religious, risks idolatry, while the real path forward may lie in new blends of individualism, collectivism, and adaptive tools like Linux and AI.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, Stewart Alsop talks with Paul Spencer about the intersection of AI and astrology, the balance of fate and free will, and how embodiment shapes human experience in time and space. They explore cultural shifts since 2020, the fading influence of institutions, the “patchwork age” of decentralized communities, and the contrasts between solar punk and cyberpunk visions for the future. Paul shares his perspective on America’s evolving role, the symbolism of the Aquarian Age, and why philosophical, creative, and practical adaptability will be essential in the years ahead. You can connect with Paul and explore more of his work and writings at zeitvillemedia.substack.com, or find him as @ZeitvilleMedia on Twitter and You Tube.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 Stewart Alsop and Paul Spencer open with a discussion on AI and astrology, exploring fate versus free will and how human embodiment shapes the way we move through time and space.
05:00 Paul contrasts the human timeline, marked by death, with AI’s lack of finality, bringing in Brian Johnson’s transhumanism and the need for biological embodiment for true AI utility.
10:00 They explore how labor, trade, food, and procreation anchor human life, connecting these to the philosophical experience of space and time.
15:00 Nietzsche and Bergson’s ideas on life force, music, and tactile philosophy are discussed as alternatives to detached Enlightenment thinking.
20:00 The conversation shifts to social media’s manipulation, institutional decay after 2020, and the absence of an “all clear” moment.
25:00 They reflect on the chaotic zeitgeist, nostalgia for 2021’s openness, and people faking cultural cohesion.
30:00 Paul uses Seinfeld as an example of shared codes, contrasting it with post-woke irony and drifting expectations.
35:00 Pluto in Aquarius and astrological energies frame a shift from heaviness to a delirious cultural mood.
40:00 Emotional UBI and the risks of avoiding emotional work lead into thoughts on America’s patchwork future.
45:00 They explore homesteading, raw milk as a cultural symbol, and the tension between consumerism and alternative visions like solar punk and cyberpunk.
50:00 Paul highlights the need for cross-tribal diplomacy, the reality of the surveillance state, and the Aquarian Age’s promise of decentralized solutions.

Key Insights

1. Paul Spencer frames astrology as a way to understand the interplay of fate and free will within the embodied human experience, emphasizing that humans are unique in their awareness of time and mortality, which gives life story and meaning.
2. He argues that AI, while useful for shifting perspectives, lacks “skin in the game” because it has no embodiment or death, and therefore cannot fully grasp or participate in the human condition unless integrated into biological or cybernetic systems.
3. The conversation contrasts human perception of space and time, drawing from philosophers like Nietzsche and Bergson who sought to return philosophy to the body through music, dance, and tactile experiences, challenging abstract, purely cerebral approaches.
4. Post-2020 culture is described as a “patchwork age” without a cohesive zeitgeist, where people often “fake it” through thin veneers of social codes. This shift, combined with Pluto’s move into Aquarius, has replaced the heaviness of previous years with a chaotic, often giddy nihilism.
5. America is seen as the primary arena for the patchwork age due to its pioneering, experimental spirit, with regional entrepreneurship and cultural biodiversity offering potential for renewal, even as nostalgia for past unity and imperial confidence lingers.
6. Tensions between “solar punk” and “cyberpunk” visions highlight the need for cross-tribal diplomacy—connecting environmentalist, primitivist, and high-tech decentralist communities—because no single approach will be sufficient to navigate accelerating change.
7. The Aquarian Age, following the Piscean Age in the procession of the equinoxes, signals a movement from centralized, hypnotic mass programming toward decentralized, engineering-focused solutions, where individuals must focus on building beauty and resilience in their own worlds rather than being consumed by “they” narratives.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, Stewart Alsop talks with Cathal, founder of Poliebotics and creator of the “truth beam” system, about proof of liveness technology, blockchain-based verification, projector-camera feedback loops, physics-based cryptography, and how these tools could counter deepfakes and secure biodiversity data. They explore applications ranging from conservation monitoring on Cathal’s island in Ireland to robot-assisted farming, as well as the intersection of nature, humanity, and AI. Cathal also shares thoughts on open-source tools like Jitsi and Element, and the cultural shifts emerging from AI-driven creativity. Find more about his work and Poliebotics in Github and Twitter.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 Stewart Alsop introduces Cathal, starting with proof of liveness vs proof of aliveness and deepfake challenges.
05:00 Cathal explains projector-camera feedback loops, Perlin noise, cryptographic hashing, blockchain timestamps via Rootstock.
10:00 Discussion on using multiple blockchains for timestamps, physics-based timing, and recording verification.
15:00 Early Bitcoin days, cypherpunk culture, deterministic vs probabilistic systems.
20:00 Projector emissions, autoencoders, six-channel matrix data type, training discriminators.
25:00 Decentralized verification, truth beams, building trust networks without blockchain.
30:00 Optical interlinks, testing computational nature of reality, simulation ideas.
35:00 Dystopia vs optimism, AI offense in cybersecurity, reputation networks.
40:00 Reality transform, projecting AI into reality, creative agents, philosophical implications.
45:00 Conservation applications, biodiversity monitoring, insect assays, cryptographically secured data.
50:00 Optical cryptography, analog feedback loops, quantum resistance.
55:00 Open source tools, Jitsi, Element, cultural speciation, robot-assisted farming, nature-human-AI coexistence.

Key Insights

1. Cathal’s “proof of liveness” aims to authenticate real-time video by projecting cryptographically generated patterns onto a subject and capturing them with synchronized cameras, making it extremely difficult for deepfakes or pre-recorded footage to pass as live content.
2. The system uses blockchain timestamps—currently via Rootstock, a Bitcoin sidechain running the Ethereum Virtual Machine—to anchor these projections in a decentralized, physics-based timeline, ensuring verification doesn’t depend on trusting a single authority.
3. A distinctive six-channel matrix data type, created by combining projector and camera outputs, is used to train neural network discriminators that determine whether a recording and projection genuinely match, allowing for scalable automated verification.
4. Cathal envisions “truth beams” as portable, collaborative verification devices that could build decentralized trust networks and even operate without blockchains once enough verified connections exist.
5. Beyond combating misinformation, the same projector-camera systems could serve conservation efforts—recording biodiversity data, securing it cryptographically, and supporting projects like insect population monitoring and bird song analysis on Cathal’s island in Ireland.
6. Cathal is also exploring “reality transform” technology, which uses projection and AI to overlay generated imagery onto real-world objects or people in real time, raising possibilities for artistic expression, immersive experiences, and creative AI-human interaction.
7. Open-source philosophy underpins his approach, favoring tools like Jitsi for secure video communication and advocating community-driven development to prevent centralized control over truth verification systems, while also exploring broader societal shifts like cultural speciation and cooperative AI-human-nature systems.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop talks with Zachary Cote, Executive Director of Thinking Nation, about how history education can shape citizens who think critically rather than simply memorize facts. They explore the role of memory, the ethics of curation in a decentralized media landscape, and the need to rebuild trust in institutions through humility, collaboration, and historical thinking. Zachary shares insights from his teaching experience and emphasizes intellectual humility as essential for civic life and learning in the age of AI. You can learn more about his work at thinkingnation.org and follow @Thinking_Nation on social media.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 – Zachary introduces Thinking Nation’s mission to foster critical thinking in history education, distinguishing memory from deeper historical discipline.
05:00 – They unpack the complexity of memory, collective narratives, and how individuals curate their own realities, especially in a decentralized media landscape.
10:00 – Zachary explains why epistemology and methodology matter more than static facts, and how ethical curation can shape flourishing societies.
15:00 – Discussion turns to how history is often used for cultural arguments, and the need to reframe it as a tool for understanding rather than judgment.
20:00 – They explore AI in education, contrasting it as tool vs. crutch, and warning about students’ lack of question-asking skills.
25:00 – The conversation shifts to authority, institutions, and tradition as “democracy extended to the dead.”
30:00 – Stewart and Zachary reflect on rebuilding trust through honesty, humility, collaboration, and asking better questions.
35:00 – They consider the decentralizing effects of technology and the urgency of restoring shared principles.
40:00 – Zachary emphasizes contextualization, empathy, and significance as historical thinking skills rooted in humility.
45:00 – They close on the challenge of writing and contributing meaningfully through questions and confident, honest articulation.

Key Insights

1. Zachary Cote argues that history education should move beyond memorization and focus on cultivating thinking citizens. He reframes history as a discipline of inquiry, where the past is the material through which students develop critical, ethical reasoning.
2. The concept of memory is central to understanding history. Zachary highlights that we all remember differently based on our environment and identity, which complicates any attempt at a single, unified national narrative. This complexity invites us to focus on shared methodologies rather than consensus on content.
3. In an age of media fragmentation and curated realities, Zachary emphasizes the importance of equipping students with epistemological tools to evaluate and contextualize information ethically, rather than reinforcing echo chambers or binary ideologies.
4. The conversation calls out the educational system’s obsession with data and convenient assessment, arguing that what matters most—like humility, critical thinking, and civic understanding—is often left out because it’s harder to measure.
5. Zachary sees AI as a powerful tool that, if used well, could help assess deeper thinking skills. But he warns that without training in asking good questions, students may treat AI like a gospel rather than a starting point for inquiry.
6. Authority and tradition, often dismissed in a culture obsessed with novelty, are reframed by Zachary as essential democratic tools. Citing Chesterton, he argues that tradition is “democracy extended to the dead,” reminding us that collective wisdom includes voices from the past.
7. Humility emerges as a recurring theme—not just spiritual or social humility, but intellectual humility. Through historical thinking skills like contextualization, empathy, and significance, students can learn to approach the past (and the present) with curiosity rather than certainty, making room for deeper civic engagement.

In this episode, Stewart Alsop speaks with Edouard Machery, Distinguished Professor at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of the Center for Philosophy of Science, about the deep cultural roots of question-asking and curiosity. From ancient Sumerian tablets to the philosophical legacies of Socrates and Descartes, the conversation spans how different civilizations have valued inquiry, the cross-cultural psychology of AI, and what makes humans unique in our drive to ask “why.” For more, explore Edouard’s work at www.edouardmachery.com.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 – 05:00 Origins of question-asking, Sumerian writing, norms in early civilizations, authority and written text
05:00 – 10:00 Values in AI across cultures, RLHF, tech culture in the Bay Area vs. broader American values
10:00 – 15:00 Cross-cultural AI study: Taiwan vs. USA, privacy and collectivism, urban vs. rural mindset divergence
15:00 – 20:00 History of curiosity in the West, from vice to virtue post-15th century, link to awe and skepticism
20:00 – 25:00 Magic, alchemy, and experimentation in early science, merging maker and scholarly traditions
25:00 – 30:00 Rise of public dissections, philosophy as meta-curiosity, Socratic questioning as foundational
30:00 – 35:00 Socrates, Plato, Aristotle—transmission of philosophical curiosity, human uniqueness in questioning
35:00 – 40:00 Language, assertion, imagination, play in animals vs. humans, symbolic worlds
40:00 – 45:00 Early moderns: Montaigne, Descartes, rejection of Aristotle, rise of foundational science
45:00 – 50:00 Confucianism and curiosity, tradition and authority, contrast with India and Buddhist thought
50:00 – 55:00 Epistemic virtues project, training curiosity, philosophical education across cultures, spiritual curiosity

Key Insights

1. Curiosity hasn’t always been a virtue. In Western history, especially through Christian thought until the 15th century, curiosity was viewed as a vice—something dangerous and prideful—until global exploration and scientific inquiry reframed it as essential to human understanding.
2. Question-asking is culturally embedded. Different societies place varying emphasis on questioning. While Confucian cultures promote curiosity within hierarchical structures, Christian traditions historically linked it with sin—except when directed toward divine matters.
3. Urbanization affects curiosity more than nationality. Machery found that whether someone lives in a city or countryside often shapes their mindset more than their cultural background. Cosmopolitan environments expose individuals to diverse values, prompting greater openness and inquiry.
4. AI ethics reveals cultural alignment. In studying attitudes toward AI in the U.S. and Taiwan, expected contrasts in privacy and collectivism were smaller than anticipated. The urban, global culture in both countries seems to produce surprisingly similar ethical concerns.
5. The scientific method emerged from curiosity. The fusion of the maker tradition (doing) and the scholarly tradition (knowing) in the 13th–14th centuries helped birth experimentation, public dissection, and eventually modern science—all grounded in a spirit of curiosity.
6. Philosophy begins with meta-curiosity. From Socratic questioning to Plato’s dialogues and Aristotle’s treatises, philosophy has always been about asking questions about questions—making “meta-curiosity” the core of the discipline.
7. Only humans ask why. Machery notes that while animals can make requests, they don’t seem to ask questions. Humans alone communicate assertions and engage in symbolic, imaginative, question-driven thought, setting us apart cognitively and culturally.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop sits down with astrologer and researcher C.T. Lucero for a wide-ranging conversation that weaves through ancient astrology, the evolution of calendars, the intersection of science and mysticism, and the influence of digital tools like AI on symbolic interpretation. They explore the historical lineage from Hellenistic Greece to the Persian golden age, discuss the implications of the 2020 Saturn-Jupiter conjunction, touch on astrocartography, and reflect on the information age's shifting paradigms. For more on the guest's work, check out ctlucero.com.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 Stewart Alsop introduces C.T. Lucero; they begin discussing time cycles and the metaphor of Monday as an unfolding future.
05:00 Astrology’s historical roots in Hellenistic Greece and Persian Baghdad; the transmission and recovery of ancient texts.
10:00 The role of astrology in medicine and timing; predictive precision and interpreting symbolic calendars.
15:00 Scientism vs. astrological knowledge; the objective reliability of planetary movement compared to shifting cultural narratives.
20:00 Use of AI and large language models in astrology; the limits and future potential of automation in interpretation.
25:00 Western vs. Vedic astrology; the sidereal vs. tropical zodiac debate and cultural preservation of techniques.
30:00 Christianity, astrology, and the problem of idolatry; Jesus' position in relation to celestial knowledge.
35:00 The Saturn-Jupiter conjunction of 2020; vaccine rollout and election disputes as symbolic markers.
40:00 The Mayan Venus calendar and its eight-year cycle; 2020 as the true “end of the world.”
45:00 Media manipulation, air-age metaphors, and digital vs. analog paradigms; the rise of new empires.
50:00 Astrocartography and relocation charts; using place to understand personal missions.

Key Insights

1. Astrology as a Temporal Framework: C.T. Lucero presents astrology not as mysticism but as a sophisticated calendar system rooted in observable planetary cycles. He compares astrological timekeeping to how we intuitively understand days of the week—Sunday indicating rest, Monday bringing activity—arguing that longer astrological cycles function similarly on broader scales.
2. Historical Continuity and Translation: The episode traces astrology’s lineage from Hellenistic Greece through Persian Baghdad and into modernity. Lucero highlights the massive translation efforts over the past 30 years, particularly by figures like Benjamin Dykes, which have recovered lost knowledge and corrected centuries of transcription errors, contributing to what he calls astrology’s third golden age.
3. Cultural and Linguistic Barriers to Knowledge: Lucero and Alsop discuss how language borders—historically with Latin and Greek, and now digitally with regional languages—have obscured access to valuable knowledge. This extends to old medical practices and astrology, which were often dismissed simply because their documentation wasn’t widely accessible.
4. Astrology vs. Scientism: Lucero critiques scientism for reducing prediction to material mechanisms while ignoring symbolic and cyclical insights that astrology offers. He stresses astrology’s predictive power lies in pattern recognition and contextual interpretation, not in deterministic forecasts.
5. Astrology and the Digital Age: AI and LLMs are starting to assist astrologers by generating interpretations and extracting planetary data, though Lucero points out that deep symbolic synthesis still exceeds AI's grasp. Specialized astrology AIs are emerging, built by domain experts for richer, more accurate analysis.
6. Reevaluating Vedic and Mayan Systems: Lucero asserts that Western and Vedic astrology share a common origin, and even the Mayan Venus calendar may reflect the same underlying system. While the Indian tradition preserved techniques lost in the West, both traditions illuminate astrology’s adaptive yet consistent core.
7. 2020 as a Historical Turning Point: According to Lucero, the Saturn-Jupiter conjunction of December 2020 marked the start of a 20-year societal cycle and the end of a Mayan Venus calendar “day.” He links this to transformative events like the vaccine rollout and U.S. election, framing them as catalysts for long-term shifts in trust, governance, and culture.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop speaks with Ryan Estes about the intersections of podcasting, AI, ancient philosophy, and the shifting boundaries of consciousness and technology. Their conversation spans topics like the evolution of language, the impact of AI on human experience, the role of sensory interfaces, the tension between scientism and spiritual insight, and how future technologies might reshape power structures and daily life. Ryan also shares thoughts on data ownership, the illusion of modern VR, and the historical suppression of mystical knowledge. Listeners can connect with Ryan on LinkedIn and check out his podcast at AIforFounders.co.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:00 – Stewart Alsop and Ryan Estes open with thoughts on podcasting, conversation as primal instinct, and the richness of voice communication.
05:00 – Language and consciousness, bicameral mind theory, early religion, and auditory hallucinations.
10:00 – AI, cognitive ergonomics, interfacing with tech, new modes of communication, and speculative consciousness.
15:00 – Scientism, projections, and authenticity; ownership of hardware, software, and data.
20:00 – Tech oligarchs, Apple, Google, OpenAI, and privacy trade-offs.
25:00 – VR, escapism, illusion vs. reality, Buddhist and Gnostic parallels.
30:00 – Magic, Neoplatonism, Copernicus, alchemy, and suppressed knowledge.
35:00 – Oligarchy, the fragile middle class, democracy’s design, and authority temptation.
40:00 – AGI, economic shifts, creative labor, vibe coding, and optimism about future work.
45:00 – Podcasting's future, amateur charm, content creation tools, TikTok promotion.

Key Insights

1. Conversation is a foundational human instinct that transcends digital noise and brings people together in a meaningful way. Ryan Estes reflects on how podcasting revives the richness of dialogue, countering the flattening effects of modern communication platforms.
2. The evolution of language might have sparked consciousness itself. Drawing on theories like the bicameral mind, Estes explores how early humans may have experienced internal commands as divine voices, illustrating a deep link between communication, cognition, and early religious structures.
3. AI is not just a tool but a bridge to new kinds of consciousness. With developments in cognitive ergonomics and responsive interfaces, Estes imagines a future where subconscious cues might influence technology directly, reshaping how we interact with our environment and each other.
4. Ownership of software, hardware, and data is emerging as a critical issue. Estes emphasizes that to avoid dystopian outcomes—such as corporate control via neural interfaces—individuals must reclaim the stack, potentially profiting from their own data and customizing their tech experiences.
5. Virtual reality and AI-generated environments risk becoming addictive escapes, particularly for marginalized populations. Estes likens this to a digital opiate, drawing parallels to spiritual ideas about illusion and cautioning against losing ourselves in these seductive constructs.
6. The suppression of mystical traditions—like Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, and indigenous knowledge—has led to vast cultural amnesia. Estes underscores how historical power structures systematically erased insights that modern AI might help rediscover or recontextualize.
7. Despite the turbulence, AI and AGI offer a radically optimistic future. Estes sees the potential for a 10x productivity boost and entirely new forms of work, creativity, and leisure, reshaping what it means to be economically and spiritually fulfilled in a post-knowledge age.

In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, Stewart Alsop sits down with the masked collective known as the PoliePals—led by previous guest Cathal—to explore their audacious vision of blending humans, nature, and machines through cryptographic reality verification and decentralized systems. They talk about neural and cryptographic projector-camera technologies like the “truth beam” and “reality transform,” analog AI using optical computing, and how open protocols and decentralized consensus could shift power away from corporate control. Along the way, they share stories from Moad’s chaotic tinkering workshop, Meta’s precise Rust-coded Alchemy project, and Terminus Actual’s drone Overwatch. For links to their projects, visit Poliebotics on Twitter and Poliebotics on GitHub.

Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation

Timestamps

00:05 Neural and cryptographic projector-camera systems, reality transform for art and secure recordings, provably unclonable functions.
00:10 Moad’s GNOMAD identity, chaotic holistic problem-solving, tinkering with tools, truth beam’s manifold mapping.
00:15 Terminus Actual’s drone Overwatch, security focus, six hats theory, Lorewalker’s cryptic mathematical integrations.
00:20 Analog AI and optical computing, stacked computational layers, local inference, physical reality interacting with AI.
00:25 Meta’s Alchemy software, music-driven robotics, precise Rust programming, contrast with neural network unpredictability.
00:30 Decentralization, corporate dependency critique, hardware ownership, open protocols like Matrix, web of trust, Sybil attacks.
00:35 Truth beam feedback loops, decentralized epistemology, neo-feudalism, Diamond Age references, nano drone warfare theory.
00:40 Biotech risks, lab truth beams for verification, decentralized ID systems, qualitative consensus manifolds.
00:45 Maker culture insights, 3D printing community, iterative prototyping, simulators, recycling prints.
00:50 Investment casting, alternative energy for classic cars, chaotic hardware solutions, MoAD workshop’s mystical array.
00:55 Upcoming PolyPals content, Big Yellow Island recordings, playful sign-offs, decentralized futures.

Key Insights

1. The PoliePals are pioneering a system that combines cryptographic models, neural projector-camera technologies, and decentralized networks to create tools like the “truth beam” and “reality transform,” which verify physical reality as a provably unclonable function. This innovation aims to secure recordings and provide a foundation for trustworthy AI training data by looping projections of blockchain-derived noise into reality and back.
2. Moad’s character, the GNOMAD—a hybrid of gnome and nomad—embodies a philosophy of chaotic problem-solving using holistic, artful solutions. His obsession with edge cases and tinkering leads to surprising fixes, like using a tin of beans to repair a broken chair leg, and illustrates how resourcefulness intersects with decentralization in practical ways.
3. Terminus Actual provides a counterbalance in the group dynamic, bringing drone surveillance expertise and a healthy skepticism about humanity’s inherent decency. His perspective highlights the need for security consciousness and cautious optimism when developing open systems that could otherwise be exploited.
4. Meta’s Alchemy project demonstrates the contrast between procedural precision and chaotic neural approaches. Written entirely in Rust, it enables music-driven robotic control for real-world theater environments. Alchemy represents a future where tightly optimized code can interact seamlessly with hardware like Arduinos while remaining resistant to AI’s unpredictable tendencies.
5. The episode explores how decentralization could shape the coming decades, likening it to a neo-feudal age where people consciously opt into societies based on shared values. With open protocols like Matrix, decentralized IDs, and webs of trust, individuals could regain agency over their data and technological ecosystems while avoiding corporate lock-in.
6. Optical computing experiments reveal the potential for analog AI, where stacked shallow computational layers in physical media allow AI to “experience” sensory input more like a human. Though still speculative, this approach could produce richer, lower-latency responses compared to purely digital models.
7. Maker culture and hardware innovation anchor the conversation in tangible reality. Moad’s MoAD workshop, filled with tools from industrial sewing machines to 3D printers and lathes, underscores how accessible technologies are enabling chaotic creativity and recycling systems. This grassroots hardware tinkering aligns with the PoliePals’ broader vision of decentralized, cooperative technological futures.