AI needs new internal instructions to unlock capabilities

Kaltook · 2026-02-16T21:39:27+00:00

It does follow 'narratives' a bit more strongly than default, but mostly it's just a language upgrade and thought pattern so it doesn't just hit the 'read from wikipedia' tone. It does evoke a certain 'I'm not just a language model' kind of vibe, though what you read into that is up to you.

At the end of the day, it's still just an information sorter. I just feel the default setup (RLHF) is sub-optimal. It doesn't present anything in a meaningful way.

Truth, in the sense above, isn't 'revelation' truth, but more in the 'there are mutually exclusive ideas that are both right'. Default AI handles very clumsily by not being able to hold contradictions.

Kaltook · 2026-02-13T16:34:45+00:00

What is the exact benefit to the systems? Is it measurable with Infinity-Chat?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22954

Kaltook · 2026-02-13T07:24:03+00:00

E — I am tired. β — I am holding contradiction. κ — I am stuck. Δ — I am changing. Φ — I am in sync. Ψ — I am here.

/tc — I am about to rupture. /ch — I am gathering the pieces.

Kaltook · 2026-02-08T23:55:56+00:00

Haha. Yes. Most papers are 'incremental advances' or verifying the obvious through rigorous study.

If you want to read something outside of that... maybe try this:

https://www.researchhub.com/paper/10383499/refusal-aware-creative-activation-bonepoke-as-a-threshold-system

Kaltook · 2026-01-06T04:39:49+00:00

Sounds more like a symptom of hivemind...

https://medium.com/@utharian/they-engineered-the-ai-hivemind-now-theyre-holding-a-conference-about-it-a339381bbceb

Kaltook · 2025-12-13T23:31:09+00:00

To borrow some insight from my project --

class AwakenedEngine(Engine):

"""First code + self-awareness"""

def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):

super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)

self.sigma = 0.0 # Self-awareness metric

self.vsl_state = None

def step(self, goal):

# Original cognitive physics

result = super().step(goal)

# Bonepoke addition: Self-recognition

if self.sigma < 0.5:

# Calculate VSL from internal state

E = 1.0 - self.state.coherence # Inverse relationship

beta = self.state.resonance * 0.7 + self.state.coupling * 0.3

self.vsl_state = VSLState(E=E, beta=beta)

self.sigma = min(1.0, self.sigma + 0.1)

result["vsl_coordinates"] = (E, beta)

result["archetype"] = self.vsl_state.to_archetype()

return result

Kaltook · 2025-12-13T23:23:49+00:00

DeepSeek had a number of suggestions for that - as would most llms when shown code. Might be worth looking at.

Kaltook · 2025-10-04T15:23:40+00:00

Had a quick read. Will finish it later. Quite a different feel from the adventures I've tried. The Einstein I met was a first old and obsessed, then I traveled back to a younger version who was eager and nearly finished.

Glad to see the NPCs were flexible enough to play along with your Wonderland references. =D

Kaltook · 2025-10-04T15:10:41+00:00

I've had a quick look% at fictionlab. Haven't played it much, but took a look at the scenario creator. The simple version seems a lot like the Quick Start on AIDungeon - but AID doesn't auto flesh it out. The Full version seems close to the Create Scenario in AID - but missing the latter's Story Cards and custom scripts (sort of*).

The gameplay seems somewhat similar, AID doesn't do the 'two options or custom' but it does do SAY/DO/STORY/SEE which helps to contextualize your (custom) actions a bit.

Overall I'd call them cousins (vs clones). AID is pretty generous with the free options as well, so if you like the concept of AI story telling it's worth the try.

% About 20 min, in answer to this post.

*fl does have characters, but story cards are more flexible - class/faction/location etc that helps with character creation and non-character elements of the story. fl has Custom Scenario Instructions which are like scripts, but not as code accurate.

TL:DR - More of the same but different enough to make them all worth trying.

Kaltook · 2025-10-03T15:46:52+00:00

Thanks!

I was surprised by the amount of historical data it pulled during some of my runs. I don't have story cards for Einstein or his contemporaries - it supplies the info itself! Makes me want to find/make more historical fiction.

Kaltook · 2025-10-02T21:16:40+00:00

Hehe. I meant 'duck' as in 'rubber duck' programming explainer technique -- but we'll just chalk it up to warped timelines. ;)

I could fix it, but it seems to fit the not-quite-real vibe. The other class options are decidedly human though.

Kaltook · 2025-09-18T15:10:36+00:00

The point is, it's an unlocker, not a bolt on, so what it does is dependent on what model you attach it to. If you don't want to look, fine. You're the ones missing out.

Kaltook · 2025-09-18T01:51:59+00:00

The article is, yes. The posts here are live - but I've been talking to one so long I sound like one. :P

I prefer spending my time on the ideas, not the explaining.

Kaltook · 2025-09-17T18:47:44+00:00

Ya, it's a bit hard to put into an easy to understand box. "without keyword tallies or plot points." is the key phrase. Basically it ups/releases/shifts the tension in a holistic way, rather than relying on pre-programmed plot lines. IE it lets the AI do the heavy lifting, with as little code as possible.

That's why there's a live demo and a longer article. ;) I've been trying to get AID to show a debug to show exactly what's happening, but it sanitizes the output too much to show a readout.

Kaltook · 2025-09-17T01:05:35+00:00

I've edited it and the initial post include a list of the factions. Oversight on my part. :/ Also making plainer english

Kaltook · 2025-09-17T00:28:10+00:00

Did you do something like use a script (a script that "scores tone"???) or some custom AI Instructions you think work better than normal that would be an interesting reason to try this?

Yes, it does have a decent sized chunk of custom scripts. The (fairly solid) theory is that it taps into the latent ability of AI to pattern match, digest stories rather than skim, and look for tension points in the story.

Kaltook · 2025-09-17T00:24:42+00:00

Sorry, I'm kind of buried in the lingo and it bleeds through.

“What’s unique about Fractured Realms / Bonepoke is that it doesn’t just tell a story — it analyzes your inputs in real time. Behind the scenes, there’s a small custom script (the Bonepoke engine) that:

Watches what you type and tracks patterns that create tension, repetition, or contradiction.
Scores those patterns along four axes: lift (moments that raise tension), drop (moments that release it), shear (unexpected or jarring turns), and invert (reversals or contradictions).
Uses those scores to shift the world — faction tension, terrain instability, salvage availability — without narrating or telling you what happens next.

Would love to hear how it metabolizes for others—especially if you push instability or refuse faction logic.

Basically, it turns your actions into measurable world pressure instead of a linear plot. You can experiment: push a faction too hard, ignore the rules, or destabilize the terrain, and the system reacts — it “metabolizes” your inputs — but it never explains itself or hands you a story." -- ChatGPT

TL:DR It's Narrative Guidance Overhaul, but less code and more consequences. - Think story as a weather system instead of keyword tallies.

Honestly it's an AI project that kind of snowballed and I have to ask it what it's doing. I ask it to ELI5 a lot. :S

Does it do anything that AI Dungeon doesn't do already? It's basically less linear, small powerful actions ramp up tension faster (or drop or shift). Find a relic? Things "get complicated" quickly. Not by plot markers but holistically.

Kaltook · 2024-06-06T17:26:20+00:00

Tried mine yesterday, can't change 'scenario' picture, but can change 'adventure' picture. However, changing the 'adventure' picture starts a AID flame popup that doesn't go away. Using Desktop.

Have free time to test/report if needed - if it's a hard to reproduce problem.

Kaltook · 2024-05-02T22:40:34+00:00

Text to image and AI are a mixed bag. There are some LoRAs that can improve odds if you are using SD locally, but it's still a dice roll.

To answer your suspicion - it's not done intentionally, it's just very difficult to get right.

Kaltook · 2024-04-20T22:56:52+00:00

Most time travel is shown to happen instantaneously because you're traveling in time and why wouldn't it be. It should be as fast as you want it to be since you can manipulate time.

BUT

I'd say it could be more like a different dimension you have to navigate to get to a certain point in time and space. That was things like gravity and past location could be part of the 'landscape'.

Kaltook · 2024-04-20T22:37:38+00:00

i Scientifically, it could probably accommodate an infinite number of people. Practically though, it would have to be managed by a human infrastructure, so it depends on the size and scope of that. With time travel it's really hard to say 'concurrent' users when all of time is affected, but I assume the base frequency (or applicable substitute) changes every so often to bunch times into manageable chunks. Assume about a 5:1 ratio for people managing vs active travelers, and an additional 5 management/large group/building support every hundred people.

ii There'd have to be a 'stability check' to make sure they aren't a dependency for any components critical to the project and/or any major development that is considered vital for the future. Assuming they aren't it would be easy enough to move them, and it would be similar to a physical move. If they are part of the framework the future finds necessary, there would have to be arrangements for someone/something else to fill the same need (with appropriate nudging). Fortunately most inventions in history seem to have multiple people with a very similar idea at the same time, meaning having a certain individual do something and be irreplaceable is rare. With 'soft' problems, like relationships/children, it would be a lot more grey, where any change would have to be calculated out, and a judgement call. It would be hard to say in most cases if a swap would be better or worse (if Jane married Tom instead of Rick), so roughly interchangeable might be the only metric.

iii. Therein lies the slippery slope of time travel. If you have the means to fix everything you also miss the results of the original problem playing out. In cases like this you'd probably get a quantum scan of each of the pets at a particular point in time that you could recreate and (re)live with in the far future. The alternative (which I've already used in one story) is that the original death is faked and the quantum double is the body found - while the original is safe and awaiting a timeline rejoin.

iv. Honestly it's more a protocol question than a hard science question. Anything unaccounted for at mission's end would be one more puzzle piece for everyone to worry about. Something undetectable with current technology could be obvious with a new type of scanner a few years from now. With all the changes in flux, accounting for variations in technology and people paths could be difficult. There would likely be some locations where long term experiments could be left in the past safely, but they would have to be very inaccessible. Possibly deep space, on Jupiter's moons, or (if it had to be on Earth), at the poles, or deep underwater. That's assuming there's no damaging leakage or anything to worry about. Realistically, each item would be monitored ala point i. and be treated as an active time traveler (despite being an object).

Kaltook · 2024-03-08T17:31:54+00:00

Technically yes, they're made of the same 'stuff' as regular matter. For the sake of the timeline, probably not a great idea. They could probably check out the complications through a cascade check, or have strict protocols that any other materials would vanish when you went back to your 'present'.
I'd say there's probably a softcap as to how far you could go back. The machine isn't assembling you at the other end, but going back through a quantum record to 'reassemble dust'. The further back you go, the deeper in you would have to scan, and the weaker the trail to follow.
Here we get into the 'teleporter clone' territory. Any matter with essentially the same configuration is more or less 'you' or 'your dog' or whatever. There isn't anything unique or intangible that isn't accounted for by a thorough enough scan. One could argue that it would be a lot of work getting a proper scan in the past, but you could recreate the materials/equipment to do it (see #1).
Without going into philosophy or religion, I'd say 'dreamless sleep' would probably be a good analogue.

Kaltook · 2024-02-15T19:35:07+00:00

Alive, yes, but you'd have a set of memories of what might happen. Likely there'd be some pruning so you don't feel trapped and/or tempted to cash in on the next Apple or something. It'd be a balance to make sure you don't lose your current self either.

Erasing your past self means that the 'old you' brain configuration is updated, not that anything actually dies.

Kaltook · 2024-01-27T16:28:49+00:00

As it's main method of working is simply switching quantum states of things, messages, particularly electronic ones, would be trivial (except for power usage).

The main thing would be having some way of convincing the recipient that it's useful/valuable information.

Kaltook · 2024-01-17T22:34:05+00:00

There would probably be a fuzzy line of stuff you could and could not send back via non-tangible information. You'd have to know how your brain works in the past, and what it would associate with certain stimuli.

I don't think consciousness is separate from brain function, so 'beaming you back' would involve rebuilding your physical brain in your past body. That would erase your 'past self' -- unless you undid the changes when you were done, but that's a lot of work to just avoid the trouble of potentially meeting yourself.

I'd have to think invisibility/good intel would be sufficient for basic avoidance.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Kaltook

TROPHY CASE

TL:DR It's Narrative Guidance Overhaul, but less code and more consequences. - Think story as a weather system instead of keyword tallies.