Digital Strategy, Content, and AI Since 2009
President Trump renamed artificial intelligence after a mind no one has built.
Executive Order 14434 gives today’s ordinary AI the name researchers reserved for an intellect beyond ours, and the minds who defined that word were not in the room. Basil C. Puglisi traces superintelligence from Turing and Good to Bostrom and shows how the order skips the AGI rung. The rename is a bad joke if superintelligence is far off and dangerous if the fears are right.
Human oversight of automated systems is older than AI, and current AI practice still falls short of it.
This paper traces human oversight and accountability from the cybernetics literature of 1948 to Article 14 of the EU AI Act, then separates Responsible AI from AI Governance. It sets out Checkpoint-Based Governance, where a named human holds binding authority to accept, modify, or reject an AI output and leaves a record, and it proposes the studies that would test it. It closes on the Growth OS, a future of work in which AI amplifies people instead of replacing them.
A blind professional asks AI to describe a chart. The paper asks whether that use is assistive technology.
This working paper names the function Artificially Intelligent Disability Assistance (AIDA) and gives a three-prong test for when a use of general-purpose AI qualifies. It runs seven cases, from blindness and speech loss to post-traumatic stress, and it names the case the test excludes and the dissent it has to answer.
A woman applies for a car loan on a Tuesday morning. Before a human being reads her name, a model has scored her, a ranking system has chosen what she sees, and a classifier has flagged her scan.
She met artificial intelligence roughly a dozen times before lunch, and none of it said a word to her. This is the story of what AI actually is, told in the order it happened, from the era when humans wrote every rule through machine learning, deep learning, the transformer, language models, agents, and embodiment. It ends where the sequence was never resolved: nobody settled who holds authority over the decisions.
The major AI literacy frameworks name governing and managing AI as a competence and stop short of measuring it. This working paper introduces the Human Enhancement Quotient, a behavior-anchored instrument that scores the governance relationship between a human authority and a machine capability inside a working decision process, with a universal floor keyed to irreversible consequence and an audit record reviewable on appeal.
In 2009, a blog post about social media. Today, over twenty white papers, three published books with two more pending, and the operating architecture for human-AI collaboration that the industry is still figuring out how to build. This past week, after publishing post 1001, I noticed basilpuglisi.com had crossed one thousand published articles. A thousand […]
Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Development of the Human Enhancement Quotient (HEQ) and Augmented Intelligence Score (AIS) Executive Summary (PDF here for Mobile Users) Augmented intelligence, as defined by Gartner, is the recognized partnership model of humans and AI enhancing cognitive performance together. Organizations have invested heavily in that model. No cross-platform, behavior-anchored, governance-integrated instrument exists […]
