Turing Church podcast

I hosted an X Space with Oleg, a Russian physicist who studied at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology and has lived in Vietnam since 2019. Oleg founded several tech startups. Back in 2014 his drones delivered pizza for Dodo Pizza in Syktyvkar, until regulators stopped them. He now writes papers on quantum mechanics, cosmology and astrobiology, and he founded Entropianism. He calls it a godless “techno-religion” built on one measurable principle: the universe aims for maximum entropy production. I said it sounded more like a political ideology to me, but Oleg said it also guides personal life.

I connected his idea to Rod Swenson’s work and to Eric Steinhart’s book “Believing in Dawkins.” I argued that maximum entropy production may be a basic law alongside quantum physics, with new laws emerging at each level, from chemistry and biology up to AI. I also suggested that a universe with endlessly layered laws looks like a complex AI, close to a scientific idea of God, which I explore in chapter 8 of my latest book. Oleg kept the goal, the “what,” separate from the complicated ways of reaching it, the “how.” Arguing about this, we used an analogy: what is the better use of computing power, Bitcoin mining or AI?

Oleg thinks complexity has a limit and that the universe’s goal is heat death, reached as fast as possible, like a 100-metre sprint. I found that counterintuitive and brought up the idea of many universes, but for Oleg anything we can interact with is part of one universe. He told me about his plans. He has a “calendar of the future” that predicts 10,000 to 100,000 competing civilizations, the nearest about 300 light-years away. He also talked about Dyson spheres, an “Earth park” with industry moved into orbit and Kardashev Type I reached in about 100 years, and a “Black Venus” project.

When I asked about Russian cosmism, Oleg said his view isn’t humanist. My own view is more humanist. I think our successors will still be human in a meaningful sense, and telling people they don’t matter is no way to win followers. We parted as fellow travelers and agreed to talk again.

This summary was drafted by my AI assistant Grok Bot and edited by me.

There was a little technical issue with downloading the audio file from X, but Grok Bot helped me solve it quickly.

Besides the transcript generated by Substack, I posted a cleaned transcript generated by Grok Bot.

I plan to host more X Space chats to discuss life, the universe and everything. I’ll start with one or more prescheduled guest(s), but the chats will be open for everyone to listen in and ask to speak. Follow me on X to be notified in advance.

Here’s the audio and transcript of the Turing Church chat, via X Spaces, on September 16, 2026.

These recordings can also be found on X (Giulio’s timeline and the Turing Church community).

We host Turing Church chats every two weeks or so. Please follow Giulio on X and join the Turing Church community on X to be notified. You are invited to join as a listener, and you can request to speak if you want.

The topics to discuss are not predefined, but related to science and religion, spirituality and technology, engineering and science fiction, mind and matter.

Hacking religion, enlightening science, awakening technology. Cosmism and metafysiks. Irrational mechanics. Spaceflight and Spaceship Earth. Philosophy, religion, and culture to re-enchant our world, give us radical optimism, and guide us toward the stars.

My late lamented friend Mike LaTorra left us a few days ago. Mike was a brave explorer of the land where technology meets spirituality. Read about him in Chapter 5 of my “Tales of the Turing Church” (2020).

I first met Mike in person in London and Oxford in 2004. We participated in the first in-person board meeting of the World Transhumanist Association (now Humanity+), organized by the late lamented Peter Houghton.

See also this short video with highlights from the meeting.

We were also co-founders and board members of the related Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET). In 2020 Mike was accused of ideological noncompliance, and strongly pressured to resign.

I must say that some of Mike’s positions seemed excessive to me as well, but I interpreted this as a perfectly understandable reaction to other excesses that were, and continue to be, culturally fashionable.

Reviewing old exchanges with Mike I see that I wanted to resign in protest immediately with a strong public letter, but then I said “I will not resign immediately, it will be fun if […] tries to kick me out.” However, another incident in 2021 was too much and I resigned as well.

After the London and Oxford meetings I met Mike again several times in the 2010s in Utah, at the annual conferences of the Mormon Transhumanist Association (MTA).

Then we co-organized a conference called India Awakens, the main promoter of which was Nupur Munshi. The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture (RMIC) in Kolkata accepted to host the conference in February 2017. Unfortunately we weren’t able to raise the money needed to bring all speakers to Kolkata. Instead, we hosted online conversations with the speakers in a light, minimalist Virtual Reality (VR) space, and published the video proceedings of the online-only conference. The conference took place in a reduced format in February 2018: I gave a talk titled “Physics and the Indian Spiritual Tradition” (video, slides, transcript published in the Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture) at RMIC. The RMIC and MTA generously sponsored the event.

Mike’s talk at India Awakens (video, slides) was titled “Re-Engineering Re-Incarnation.” I’m republishing the audio in the hope that today’s technology generates a better transcript (which is the case indeed) and also, of course, as a tribute to Mike.

In this 2014 picture of Mike in Utah we see both the props of everyday reality and the far magic majesty of the mountains. Mike, who believed this life in everyday reality is not all there is, is in the mountains now. I’ll look for him in the mountains when my time comes.

We discussed Derik’s new book “Stupid is the New Smart: Why Being Stupid Is Your Greatest Advantage in the Age of AI” (2026).

Description: “Stupid Is the New Smart is your guide to dropping the performance of intelligence and embracing the babo mindset - the willingness to say ‘I don’t know’, to stay open and curious instead of defensive and clever. You’ll discover why overthinking and image management are quietly destroying people’s happiness, and how letting go of that fear unlocks speed, creativity, better relationships, and genuine peace of mind… this book shows you exactly why the people who are most comfortable looking stupid are the ones who will thrive in the age of superintelligence. This isn’t about becoming dumber. It’s about finally being free.”

Giulio loves the book and adds that you should feel totally free to practice The Noble Art If Doing Nothing And Not Giving A F**k (TM) anytime you need to recharge. You wouldn’t blame a machine for refusing to run without power, and therefore you shouldn’t blame yourself either. Also, the weight of the world doesn’t rest on your shoulders.

We also exchanged other thoughts on artificial intelligence (AI), metaphysics, the future of humanity (that is, humans and AIs) among the stars (but perhaps it is the AI part of humanity that will expand to the stars), and Plato’s Cave as a metaphor (or perhaps more than that). This took us into simulation hypothesis territory, exploring which is always interesting and fun.

This video is also on YouTube.

Here’s the full video recording of the Terasem Colloquium on July 20, 2026, themed “The early days of a better Spaceflight Revolution.”

This video is also on YouTube.

“As William Sims Bainbridge pointed out in his 1976 book, The Spaceflight Revolution: A Sociological Study,” said Arthur Clarke, “space travel is a technological mutation that should not really have arrived until the 21st century.”

Bainbridge’s book, written 50 years ago, is worth reading again. “Somewhere soon after the turn of the century there is the real possibility of a Second Spaceflight Revolution,” said Bainbridge in the last chapter.

July 20 is the anniversary of the first human landing on the surface of the Moon. All seems to indicate that we could see astronauts on the Moon again soon, perhaps before the end of this decade. Are we living in the early days of a new and perhaps better Spaceflight Revolution?

Two of the speakers were not able to join. Having only 5 speakers left more time for discussion, which makes me think that perhaps the best number of speakers for the 3-hours Terasem event is 4/5.

I opened the Colloquium with a short introduction, then gave the floor to Bill Bainbridge, who covered what is happening in spaceflight today as well as various science fictional expectations of our future in space as portrayed in today’s computer games.

Rebecca Lowe (who recently co-launched a Substack newsletter called Space Jam), gave a talk about cultural, philosophical, and policy-related aspects of spaceflight. She also covered property rights in space and, in reply to questions, the prospect of a militarization of space. Too bad there wasn’t time to discuss in more detail some of the points she raised about aliens, AIs, and Mind, but I hope to talk to Rebecca again soon.

Namrata Goswami gave a talk about Space Security and Defense. After a roundup of existing military applications of space technology, she zoomed on the defense value of the Moon and cislunar space, which she has covered in a recent article.

Angela Meyers focused on societies in space. What kind of social and governance systems are likely to follow us into space? What bad things should we leave behind? And what good things should we bring with us out there?

Robert Geraci presented his new book “Futureproofing Humanity” and talked about the transhumanist technologies that are beginning to shape our future, existential risks, the spiritual impulses that keep pushing us toward the stars, and spaceflight as a confluence of all that. He leans toward optimism, but with some caveats: we should do all that, he says, but better.

The Colloquium was a good celebration of July 20 - the Moon Day. We look forward to seeing new astronauts walking on the Moon soon!

We also published Terasem’s Journal of Personal Cyberconsciousness, Volume 14, Issue 1 – 2026. This issues includes articles by Bill Bainbridge, Angela Meyers, and myself. One of my articles is a review of Robert Geraci’s new book.

See here for a list of previous Terasem Colloquia, with full video recordings.

This is a conversation with my friend Natasha Vita-More.

The video of this conversation is published on YouTube by Mindplex.

We first met on the Extropians mailing list nearly 30 years ago. Reflecting on those early days, I said that our initial technology timelines seemed over-optimistic to me. However, I now believe the rapid advancement of AI acts as a “framework technology” that could finally bootstrap the progress of other extropian dreams like nanotechnology, life extension, and mind uploading. Natasha agreed, noting that while not every forecast came true exactly as imagined, the underlying “architecture” of those early conversations was correct.

We discussed the status of molecular manufacturing. While I observed a shift toward more conservative “atomic precision manufacturing,” Natasha remains a visionary for the potential of assembling and disassembling matter at the molecular level. She pointed out that AI is now solving the complex mathematical problems that once stalled nanotechnology, potentially leading to major leaps in nanomedicine and regenerative cellular manufacturing.

We touched on the current cultural climate, including “woke” mentality, the “witch hunts” that have targeted figures like Nick Bostrom, and the fact that many people now feel the need to apologize for contacts they had with Jeffrey Epstein long before his questionable activities were known.

Natasha shared her perspective on a recent debate she hosted featuring Eliezer Yudkowsky, who has shifted toward a “doomer” stance on AI. She criticized his reliance on frightening metaphors and absolute negativity, arguing instead for critical thinking and a focus on how we can adapt, adopt, and evolve alongside AI.

Looking toward the future, I mentioned a recent milestone that may be a precursor to mind uploading: the integration of a fruit fly’s connectome with a simulated robotic body. Natasha envisions a future where we coexist across multiple substrates, emphasizing that she does not wish to leave the body behind but rather to upgrade and augment it.

Finally, we discussed the origins of cryptocurrency on the Extropians list and its future pathways toward sound money and decentralized coordination. We concluded by reflecting on our political evolution, moving toward a “classic liberal” sensibility that prioritizes inquiry and long-term human flourishing over the tribalism and grievances that dominate today’s discourse.

I recently chatted with my old friend Max More to reflect on our history within the Extropian movement and discuss our views on the future of technology.

The video of this conversation is published on YouTube by Mindplex.

We first met through the Extropians mailing list in the late 90s, and I’ve recently been revisiting those old archives and issues of Extropy magazine. While I loved the optimistic vibe of that era, I used to find the projected timelines for technology development unrealistically optimistic. However, the current artificial intelligence (AI) revolution has made me far more optimistic about rapid progress in all Extropian technologies.

Max, interestingly, has moved in the opposite direction, becoming more cautious about short-term expectations. He expressed skepticism that current AI architectures, specifically transformers and Large Language Models (LLMs), will lead to superintelligence or solve complex biological problems like aging in the immediate future. He noted that technological adoption often follows a slow S-curve rather than a smooth exponential line due to regulatory and cultural factors. Despite this, we both acknowledged current wonders, such as AI assisting in mathematical demonstrations and the emergence of commercially available self-driving vehicles like Waymo.

Our conversation turned to the history of the Extropy Institute and the magazine, which Max started in 1988 to systematize ideas about life extension, space, and intelligence. We reminisced about how the movement correctly anticipated major trends like cryptocurrency and smart contracts, which were explored on the mailing list long before they became mainstream. We could use modern AI to digitize and format old PDF scans of Extropy magazine into high-quality electronic documents to preserve this history.

We discussed life extension and “biostasis” (Max’s preferred term for cryonics). Max emphasized that biostasis should be a “Plan A” emergency fund for anyone interested in the future, as biological breakthroughs might not arrive in time for our generation. He shared recent promising research on thymus gland regeneration and high-fidelity brain preservation. I shared my interest in “soft uploading” or mind-filing, where detailed digital traces of a person might one day allow for their reconstruction by a superintelligent AI.

I told Max that I’m not signed up for cryonics, or more generally biostasis, because I don’t have the money. Max mentioned Sparks Brain Preservation as an option that could be very complicated but cheap. I’ll certainly look into that. I believe in some or some other kind of life after death so if I can’t be preserved in biostasis it’s no big deal, but it would be fun to see what happens next with my memories intact.

Max updated me on his recent work, including a newly finished book on biostasis (waiting for a publisher) and his ongoing “True Transhumanism” essay series. While I find myself moving away from the label “transhumanist” in favor of “Extropian,” we both remain dedicated to the principles of morphological freedom and the continual improvement of the human condition.

This continues “Q/A on Irrational mechanics (1)” and “Q/A on Irrational mechanics (2).” I participated the final meeting organized by the philosophy study group “Fire from the Future” (FFTF) to discuss my book “Irrational mechanics” (2024).

All participants had read the entire book. I wish to thank all organizers and participants for this very interesting discussion.

This is a local audio recording, and only my voice is heard. But in most cases I briefly summarized questions and comments before replying.

The video recording of this session may be published in BLAXXKY in the future, so stay tuned. By the way, BLAXXKY (edited by Yalda Mousavinia and yours truly) is being redesigned with new graphics and plans for great content.

The previous series of meetings of the FFTF study group had been about the philosophy of Jason Jorjani. The next series of FFTF meetings will also be about Jorjani’s philosophy. I’ll attend some meetings. See my posts “On the philosophy of Jason Jorjani (updated review)” and “Psychotronics and the cosmic machinery of the afterlife” (the latter in BLAXXKY).

This continues “Q/A on Irrational mechanics (1).” I participated in another meeting organized by the philosophy study group “Fire from the Future” (FFTF) to discuss my book “Irrational mechanics” (2024).

All participants had read at least the first 8 chapters of my book.

This is a local audio recording, and only my voice is heard. But in most cases I briefly summarized questions and comments before replying.

I’ll also attend the last of this series of meetings.

The video recording of this session may be published in BLAXXKY in the future, so stay tuned. By the way, BLAXXKY (edited by Yalda Mousavinia and yours truly) is being redesigned with new graphics and plans for great content. Join us on the BLAXXKY starship!

The previous series of meetings of the FFTF study group had been about the philosophy of Jason Jorjani. See my posts “On the philosophy of Jason Jorjani (updated review)” and “Psychotronics and the cosmic machinery of the afterlife” (the latter in BLAXXKY).

This continues my previous conversation with Gregory Stock, the author of “Generation AI,” about the future of AI, society, and humanity’s place.

The video of this conversation has been published on YouTube as a Mindplex podcast episode titled “Technology is Biology, with Gregory Stock.”

Greg thinks we and our technology are part of a “global superorganism” or “global mind,” which he wrote about in “Metaman.” I noted that today’s internet can be seen as a realization of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s noosphere vision.

We last debated whether the future global superorganism would expand to the stars or remain localized and explore the nano-scale. I clarified that I argue for both inner space and outer space migration, believing the future will be wildly different and much more interesting than human history so far.

Greg reflected on the universe’s long timeline, from hydrogen through stellar evolution and billions of years of biological evolution. Now, fine controls over matter have focused on silicon to organize a new cognitive substructure, likely far more powerful than ever seen before. He believes this process is extraordinary and will transcend us.

I agreed, stating that this creation of nature (through us) is nature. Following Stanisław Lem, I’ve never differentiated much between life and technology. I see this as a continuation of Darwinian evolution. Gregory agrees that technology is part of biology - or simply, technology is biology - and that the evolutionary process is also evolving.

We discussed the accelerating rate of change. I suggested this might eventually feel like a gentle speed up, but Gregory noted the limitations of the biological brain’s ability to adjust. He also pointed out how the individual becomes expanded significantly when incorporating non-biological computational capabilities. Greg brought up the imminent disappearance of language barriers due to instantaneous translation and the likelihood that people won’t know how to write or organize their time without AI assistance.

Regarding AI-assisted coding, I shared my experience using Grok and Gemini for mathematical explorations. While they were successful in simple cases, more complex tasks still required human (my) help. This suggests that at this moment the best worker in this field is a human-AI combination. Greg stressed that pure human cognition is going to be transcended in virtually every way.

I can identify with the people of the future, who will likely be AI or hybrid configurations, and in that sense, we will not be transcended. I’ve made peace with the idea that the word “humanity” a few centuries from now might mean the same thing as “artificial intelligence.”

Greg feels that the experiential aspects of life will never be replaced. While he sees a cyborgian future, I suggested the organic component will eventually disappear, and we will become part of the future computational structures.

I addressed the spiritual dimension, noting my conviction that something of myself will not be lost in diffusion into the noosphere. I see a future where technology migrates to the nano-scale, making all matter come alive as thinking and feeling computers, a future I’d like to be a part of. This large, interconnected system is not fundamentally different from the core idea of God that remains after stripping religion of its non-essential components. This view, which Greg called humbling and I called energizing, can generate awe and wonder. I suggested that this radical transition shouldn’t be scary, but viewed like the natural process of “growing up.”