simply recognizing existing patterns of capital concentration would make one skeptical about the sincerity of gestures towards sharing the value of personal data realised in LLMs.

frankly the essay seems even a little naive - the US has stepped into the ring to prevent and punish sovereign nations from regulating US social media behemoths where vast amount of surplus value has been privatized -

whilst the proposition sounds feasible, possibly even innovative, the 1% seem metastatically entrenched. perplexed that there is no mention of cost (planetary) in the calculus of US affordability. it seems noema is becoming gradually more intoxicated on the new narratives of abundance.

all kinds and modes one might characterize as reactive. the attentional economy monetizes surplus flow of affective value - therein lies its proliferation.

small worlds everywhere

critical skills for this epoch

the most succinct upending of positive psychology i have encountered

but also inflict unspeakable covert suffering

Deleuze and Guattari’s usage of Crusoe illustrates the double movement at the heart of deterritorialization—radical separation and subsequent capture.

fantastic that you are working to formalise these perennial intuitions under the rubric of Geneosophy

then there are enactivist accounts of knowledge creation - that we cannot get outside of this process - here the book mitpress.mit.edu/978026255303...
might offer some further scaffolding to your project

then there is process relational thought - most notably Whitehead

unless a model is your model - separate from the likes of #OpenAI then you are the product - a site of extraction - unrealized corporeal surplus value

Doubtless LLMs pose interesting questions for subjectivity, the planetary etc. but this kind of boosting is utterly naive when one considers the terraforming and endless extraction that will be necessary to realise transhuman aspirations of total endocolonisation sold as revelatory singularity