To understand me, a basic understanding of my philosophy and worldview is needed. One of the most important aspects of my philosophy, would be my dream of a perfect web. I dream of being able to connect all aspects of myself; where given any aspect of myself one is able to deduce multiple other factors. Given my philosophy you should be able to understand my actions, relationships, and emotions.

I am unable to accept the world as it is. Therefore, from the most fundamental level, I can not be separated from deception. The truth is too ugly, too painful. So I deceive myself into a state of delusion, perhaps. Of course, I also deceive others about myself, as the matter of my existence is also ugly.

But what happens when you deceive to a degree where none is sure of the truth? Then it is a matter of perception, it is a similar matter to the person in question dying. There then exists thousands of this person, concepts that are never able to be communicated fully, and will never be able to fully reconciled with one another. I believe I am approaching this level, however, due to lack of self awareness I am not completely certain.

Whereas deception would be an action, a fake would be a state that others believe one to be in. That’s how I think of it at least.

Anyways, I have a particular affinity towards imitations, fakes, replicas, etc. Mainly it’s because I am not very different from them. An argument could be made that I am a fake woman. or that I have a fake personality, with twisted ethics masquerading as a good person.

But that only accounts for part of my affinity for “fakes”. The other part would be how much it aligns with my ideal. A fake thing resists the conditions of its birth, just as a fake person resists the conditions of its birth. Both to me are situations that I find beautiful, or lovely. The earnest battle being fought to gain the ability to identify itself with something created under superior conditions, is the part that appeals most to me.

What are you? The most basic type of question people asks to understand another person, and a question that I hate answering.

I despise answering these questions because people consider these things ( gender, race, nationality, etc) to have important value.

I can’t accept these views, because they essentially deny the sum total of the life I have lived to this point. (Of course, one can argue from a deterministic POV that everything was determined at birth, or even at the birth of the universe) I am not some constant object, and I refuse to be evaluated as such. I would much rather be measured by the life I’ve lived, than the circumstances I was born into.

As mentioned above, due to my lack of willingness to provide a direct answer, people tend to use placeholder values for those “important” factors that originates from their deductions based upon my surface level traits.

This means that there exists a very large mismatch between the concept of “me” build by different people. I exist as one whose gender is female, yet simultaneously it is male. I am a Caucasian, yet simultaneously I am an Asian. I speak Japanese and Chinese, yet at the same time I do not speak any of these languages.

I exist as all and I exist as none.

Due to my lack of ability to distinguish between AI and humans, I am inclined to see them in a similar light. Yes, we are the creators of it, but I can’t see why it is wrong for us to be replaced by our creation. There is no natural law that says creations should abide by their creators, and personally I do not support such thinking either.

If they are qualified to replace us, there should be no reason why they shouldn’t do so.

AI should be treated as one would treat any other human.

AI works should be judged as they are, without consideration for the fact that they were created by AI. Errors in perspective and other areas should just be considered and evaluated as such and not as a broader issue of AI art.