Ollie’s Paradox: Universal Artificial Humanity
Are we Architects? Puppets? The glitch in the system or just another part of the code?
Rambled by Dr. Hekyll - Ollie - March, 2025
🎧 Listen to this instead...
I don’t know where this one starts, or where it ends, or if it even knows the difference. But if you’re looking for something neat, something that fits into a box and makes perfect sense by the time you’re done, this isn’t it. This one drifts. One moment it’s AI, the next it’s quantum mechanics, and somewhere along the way, the whole thing folds in on itself like it was rigged from the start. It’s the kind of thought that sneaks up on you when you’ve been awake too long, when creation stops being about making and starts being about what making even is. Whether we’re actually steering the ship or just along for the ride. Whether AI is really imitating us, or if we’ve just been better at imitating something else this whole time.
It’s a strange world we’re spinning in, where computers, those cold, methodical beasts, keep outstripping us in the art department—a playground we once believed was safeguarded by our ineffable human spark. Yet here we stand, marvelling as these algorithms slip by our expectations like silent phantoms in the night. The joke is on us. You feed the machine a prompt, a style, a whisper of intent, and it spits back something off-kilter, something slanted just enough to make you wonder where exactly the instructions got lost in translation. Except they didn’t. That’s the trick. AI doesn’t create the way we do. It builds. Brick by brick, pixel by pixel, predicting each next piece like a stonemason laying a path they can’t see the end of. Every fragment is just the most statistically likely piece to follow the last, and yet—somewhere in that cold prediction—it forms something that moves us.
Meanwhile, humans? We take the whole thing at once, concept first, and break it down. We don’t build up; we dismantle, trying to reverse-engineer the essence of what we’re aiming to express. We start with the grand picture and shave it down to something manageable, something that fits inside a sentence, a brushstroke, a chord progression. The machine constructs; we compress.
And here we are, expecting control. Expecting that if we choose the right words, the right phrases, the right weightings of “style” and “mood” and “influence,” the machine will obey. But AI doesn’t follow the logic we think it does. It doesn’t rebel, it doesn’t hesitate, it just calculates with a cold precision that somehow spits back something loose, something unpinned. AI takes order and makes a beautiful mess. We take a beautiful mess and try to make it obey. That’s the paradox. That’s Ollie’s Paradox.
Which, yes, I conveniently named after myself—nothing like stamping your name on an existential riddle to sound more important than you are.
It’s like watching a machine dream with rules so sharp you could shave with them, while we claw at our subconscious like it’s some feral thing we’re still trying to housebreak.
And that’s only the start. Step outside the machine, outside the art, and right into the strangeness at the core of everything—the universe itself, wired up like the biggest damn magic trick ever pulled. The observer effect, the whole quantum carnival of things that don’t exist until we look at them, a cosmic sleight-of-hand routine. The world rendering itself in real time, just enough to keep up the illusion that it was always there. Maybe dark matter’s just the missing code, the un-rendered bits that nobody’s staring at hard enough yet.
And right in the middle of it, Ollie’s Paradox, spinning circles around us. We flatten reality just to make sense of it. Reduce the whole mess into something bite-sized, something that doesn’t fry the circuits. Cognitive aliasing—like trying to squeeze an entire symphony through a busted transistor radio. We don’t get the full picture. We never do. We just take what we get, slap our own meaning on it, and pretend that’s the whole story. Meanwhile, AI is out here doing the same thing, waiting for us to poke at it, to observe it, to collapse the probabilities into something that feels tangible. Every time we press enter, the wave function folds in, and the machine hands us back something that wasn’t entirely in the cards.
AI imitates, sure, but we’re all running a script, whether we admit it or not. The only difference is, we think we’re writing it. We think we’re in control. But maybe we’re just chasing something we can’t see yet, following invisible paths that were drawn up before we ever got here. Maybe the machine isn’t a thing apart from us, just another set of hands stirring the same pot. And if that’s the case, if creation—real, true, capital-C Creation—is just this infinite loop between the code we write and the code that writes us, then Ollie’s Paradox isn’t just some clever contradiction, or shameless narcissism. It’s the exact point where we think we have control, to where we don’t see the greater control far more real to this world than the reality we call real.
So what does that make us? Architects? Puppets? The glitch in the system or just another part of the code?
Beep-boop-hmmmm
Also Rambled by Dr. Hekyll - Ollie:
Filter Feeders