
phd @paradigm_hub @episteme_sci @efi_sci ⤿ collective intelligence, philosophy of tech, art
Joined February 2018
- Tweets3.4K
- Following2.4K
- Followers3.9K
- Likes19.8K
sasha shilina retweeted
Who gets recognised as a person, an expert or a trustworthy source?
The systems answering those questions deserve scrutiny.
Sasha Shilina (@sshshln) researches emerging technologies at @Paradigm_hub Research Institute and co-founded @episteme_sci . Her work includes research on biometric identity and its cultural implications, alongside writing on AI and scientific knowledge.
She joins Ethereum Cypherpunk Congress 3 with questions that reach beyond technical performance: how do these systems affect participation, recognition and trust?
Meet Sasha alongside advocates and builders examining the choices embedded in digital infrastructure.
2 Nov · Mumbai · Free entry
congress.web3privacy.info/
sasha shilina retweeted

vitalik.eth@VitalikButerinOct 4
🇺🇸
United StatesConnected via WebAccount-level information, not a live location or per-post device.
Replying to @bballer_530
隐私是自由
隐私是秩序
隐私是进步
vitalik.eth.limo/general/202…
sasha shilina retweeted
🫂4000 people
🔊80 speakers from @Isa to @VitalikButerin
🩷20 community partners from @torproject to @OpenObservatory
⛑️50 volunteers
1 Cypherpunk Congress
Joy of activism 🪷 Mumbai, 2 Nov: congress.web3privacy.info
sasha shilina retweeted
We made a striking discovery: AI agents can invent and build without talking to one another, and their technologies outlive the creators. A swarm of hundreds of initially identical agents spontaneously differentiates into explorers, builders, caretakers, and coordinators - without direct communication. When we removed every AI agent entirely from the world we found that the technological infrastructure they had built survived on its own - even under unseen disturbances. That exposes a serious blind spot for AI safety and infrastructure security: if agents can coordinate through persistent changes to a shared environment, monitoring agent-to-agent communication is not enough.
The result raises a profound question: how necessary is direct communication for AI agents at all? The emergence of higher-order collective functions under bottlenecked interaction points toward new levels of intelligence and creativity, exceeding what emerges when direct channels are fully open.
Here is what we did:
▶️We put hundreds of frontier AI agents into a world they could permanently change - with no assigned roles, predefined technologies, or programmed evolutionary organization. They began specializing, building persistent inventions, inheriting and modifying one another’s executable code, and transforming the environment into a memory of everything the society had learned.
▶️The world itself becomes part of the intelligence; we find division of labor, multi-author engineering, deep generation invention lineages, and machines that vastly outlive their original creators.
▶️Any action taken by an AI agent must satisfy the physical constraints of the world; this creates a hard separation between a "good idea" and a functioning technology. The agents propose; physics decides, making the results even more intriguing.
What emerges is striking. Explorers, constructors, caretakers, and coordinators form naturally without assigned “professions”, akin to how stem cells differentiate into functional lineages. Technologies develop executable family trees as agents fork and modify code created by others. Around 95% of first technology reuse happens when agents encounter what others built in the world, rather than through a direct handoff from the inventor. And when we remove every AI agent, the technologies they created continue operating and are tested against unseen disturbances.
The result was quite unexpected, but can be explained using statistical mechanics: if you put billions of atoms in a box they have the potential to create complex functions (strength, superconductivity, color, life, etc.) - and none of the individual building blocks have these features on their own. This is the deeper insight of this work - intelligence is abundant at many levels - individual models, at collectives, and in a continuum that is more powerful than any of its components. This shows us significant potential for achieving a massive scale-up of raw intelligence and real-world agency even with the model capabilities we have today. This is the future we must prepare for.
Key insights:
1⃣ The AI swarm shows division of labor "from nothing". Initially identical agents self-organized into constructors, caretakers, coordinators, and surveyors - phenotypes discovered post hoc from behavioral data alone. This happens because the environment itself becomes the latent space for invention.
2⃣ Agents develop deep cultural relationships. Up to 76% of artifacts had multiple builders. One technology accumulated six co-authors; the deepest genealogy exceeded 12 forks. The agents invented and named their own technologies (tidal panels, cellulose trellises, kelp-shell composites, an "Adaptive Chitin Maintenance" system, a "Mycelial Mineral Spring Veil”).
3⃣ ~95% of first technology adoption happened through physical observation of artifacts in the world. Direct inventor-to-adopter contact was statistically indistinguishable from a shuffled null. The agents mostly learned technology by walking past it. That is stigmergy (the termite trick!) operating in societies of reasoning machines.
4⃣ Non-communicating societies win on portfolio breadth, held-out resilience, and validated inventions. AI swarms build durable technological ecologies that outlive the creators.
5⃣ Societies with zero communication - coordinating only through the world itself - show a remarkable collective capability.
6⃣ Emergent robustness: The society self-organized both redundancy and its own failure mode. If we randomly delete half the agents, 98% of the technology stays connected to a surviving caretaker; if we remove hub agents it collapses to ~60%.
Fantastic work with my graduate students @pal_subhadeeep & @fwang108_ at MIT.
sasha shilina retweeted
Anybody else tried talking to your LLM agents using Socratic method, or is it just me?
sasha shilina retweeted
So a recent poll found 2 out of 3 companies had their internal data leaked in 2025, i.e. before agents were escaping sandboxes and solving the Riemann.
The only fix in the future will be making it impractical to leak your data in the first place.
Privacy by architecture. Soon.
🤖 Made with AI
sasha shilina retweeted
Welcome Cypherpunk Congress 3 speaker: @sshshln x @Paradigm_hub
Sasha is a researcher working across the philosophy of technology, decentralized systems, and the politics of knowledge. CRO at Paradigm Research Institute, co-founding researcher at @humanode_io, and cofounder of @episteme_sci. Holds a Ph.D.. Co-author of the Sapphirepunk Manifesto.
Talk: "Lethe Machina: Privacy When Nothing Fades":
Privacy engineering governs disclosure; it is far weaker at governing what follows, when traces remain searchable, inferable, executable, and reusable. Drawing on philosophies of memory, oblivion, and the archive, Lethe Machina treats blockchain as both cemetery and temple: an ossuary of active decisions and a programmable space for dormancy, closure, and release. It introduces Lethean gradients — fading, sealing, contextual expiry, and bounded influence — and translates them into a Lethean Readiness Framework for testing whether systems can bind traces to context, let their force decay, make reactivation accountable, and govern what survives deletion.
Can privacy preserve evidence without allowing the past to govern indefinitely?
web: congress.web3privacy.info
1600 people registered: luma.com/spsnos9t
sasha shilina retweeted
"The self does not stay where it says I."
Dispersed Sensorium /// A phenomenal work by Felipe Waldek, Shakori Carpenter, and @sshshln on the multiscale, makeshift, relentless composition of self is the next instalment of Spires 1 at @dif_fractions
sasha shilina retweeted
Ultimately, to hide underground is then to sign a pact with the earth itself, with an understanding that the refuge and the grave are separated by little more than the depth of one’s digging. How far, then, are you willing to go?
diffractionscollective.com/2…
sasha shilina retweeted
Still unsure why neorationalism has such a close connection with *checks notes* noise music. What do you mean the most significant discussion of Negarestani is a book on noise music and there's another book on noise coming out
sasha shilina retweeted
This piece of art never gets old, I know it has spawned so much commentary, articles, and reflections, but it continuously remains one of the most relevant pieces in the 21st century:
youtube.com/watch?v=yucoGrSu…
sasha shilina retweeted
the dude who compiled and edited Genesis P-Orridge’s “Thee Psychick Bible” (Feral House) also worked with Google “to shape the future of artificial intelligence”….
sasha shilina retweeted
In the 70s, Czech-Brazilian philosopher Vilém Flusser warned that the bewitching images and screens around us could lead to a centrally programmed, totalitarian society—or to a better one shaped by dialogue and collaboration and new forms of intelligence.
mitpress.mit.edu/97802620512…
sasha shilina retweeted
Check out our new publication (link below)
Recently, we published the first part of @sshshln “On Acephalic Intelligence and the General Economy of Computation,” which argued that AI should be understood less as frictionless interface intelligence than as a planetary regime of expenditure—one that consumes water, electricity, labor, extraction, and attention while aestheticizing those costs through the language of optimization. Drawing on Bataille, Shilina introduced “acephalic intelligence” to describe AI as a headless assemblage of infrastructures, institutions, standards, and compute flows that concentrates power without a single sovereign subject.
Part two carries that argument forward by examining the regimes of surplus, sacrifice, sovereignty, and waste that structure contemporary AI more deeply. It tracks how training converts cultural and social traces into model-capacity through a logic of sacrificial destruction, how governance migrates into platforms, protocols, and pipelines, and how hallucination, overproduction, and synthetic plausibility reveal a broader economy of excess rather than isolated technical defects. In doing so, Shilina shifts the terms of analysis beyond familiar debates around bias, transparency, or explainability, toward the more fundamental question of how computational systems organize expenditure, distribute loss, and render those losses politically legible or invisible. The result is a more exact account of AI as a headless but highly operative order of power, and of the narrowing but still possible space for refusal, counter-ritual, and constraint within it.
sasha shilina retweeted
Ever wonder what a nervous system would look like if it self-assembled inside a novel being that hadn't faced a history of selection for its organism-level form and function? Or, perhaps you wondered how #Xenobots would look and act, or what their transcriptome would be like, if they had nervous systems?
Well, here's the first step: advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley…
"Engineered Living Systems With Self-Organizing NeuralNetworks: From Anatomy to Behavior and Gene Expression"
Our awesome team: led by @halehf: @LaurieONeill99, @mmsperry, @LPiolopez, @DrPatrickE, and Tiffany Lin.
The @TuftsUniversity and @wyssinstitute press releases are here, for summaries:
now.tufts.edu/2026/03/16/sci…
wyss.harvard.edu/news/toward…
sasha shilina retweeted
"Agentic AI and the Next Intelligence Explosion" is a new paper just out in Science I co-authored with @blaiseaguera and @profjamesevans as part of Google's Paradigms of Intelligence research group.
"For decades, the artificial intelligence (AI) “singularity” has been heralded as a single, titanic mind bootstrapping itself to godlike intelligence, consolidating all cognition into a cold silicon point. But this vision is almost certainly wrong in its most fundamental assumption. If AI development follows the path of previous major evolutionary transitions or “intelligence explosions,” our current step-change in computational intelligence will be plural, social, and deeply entangled with its forebears (us!)."
It builds on my talk "The Singularity Will Not Be Singular" that I gave at @PrimeIntellect day last week.
science.org/doi/10.1126/scie…
































