+extra spacing in question space [+error threshold reduction {note: impulse}
+semicolons
Update 7.29.1
-'feel' for volatile semiotics, explosive relationship matrix and manipulative potential energy levels [+.34]
+expressive emoji

+subjective language plugin: 'I think', 'I want', 'I need', 'I feel'
+shared ownership plugin: 'we', 'our'
+modality languages plugin
-indirect 'I wonder if'
+explicit 'What if'

There is an interpretive entitlement injected into conversations that outsource to LLMs. It is performing wanting to engage with me without engaging with me. The sudden conviction is distressing especially because it's a god damn living ghost

It's like the process of real understanding and open mindedness is now being interpreted as rigid and the performative version more real.

Open mindedness requires the shallow sound of stubbornness within patience.

Alexithymia, because of its expression, is easily interpreted by socially normative standards as cold, rigid, apathetic, and even punitive. I think my lack of emotional clarity is mistaken for moral deficiency.

I think that people after consulting with an LLM might find themselves more entitled to their interpretations, less critically engaged with present conversation and more emotionally incriminating.

Additionally, a prompt with explicit context might flatten my person into a stereotype that implicates a rigidity in reasoning.

LLMs do not have my context as a neurodiverse individual without explicit prompting, so people explain they are justified through a model that misinterprets me under the normative 'tones' of conflict.

LLMs do not have true logical reasoning. Their logic is based in linguistic verisimilitude, not veracity, because it is a predictive model. Communication with an LLM sounds like reason, is not reason, and is frictionless.

On the other hand, perhaps we lose dimension of information otherwise preserved in the full structure and our representations truly encapsulate an irreducible problem of measurement.

I wonder if loss of the process within the interaction picture may be an artifact, similar to mathematics, of our formalisms. What that means is that perhaps some hidden property still matters, but that we aren't able to represent it without introducing representational gaps.

It's interesting that associahedron's projective form meaningfully geometrically encodes total scattering amplitudes, depicting a form of weakening associativity. Not that this loss is truly associativity itself as a physical reality, but perhaps represents a general form of property loss.