Newsletter 8 min read

Practical imagination ⊗ What’s the matter with abundance? ⊗ The case for using your brain

No.351 — Copyright-aware AI ⊗ Aperture ⊗ The Longevity Economy ⊗ DeepMind holding back release of AI research

Practical imagination ⊗ What’s the matter with abundance? ⊗ The case for using your brain
Henri Cartier-Bresson Brie, France 1968. (I extended the sky, désolé Henri.)

Practical imagination

Pascal Wicht reframes imagination as a foundational human capacity essential for navigating complexity and shaping more just futures, rather than merely a creative faculty. He distinguishes imagination from creativity, positioning it as a deeper cognitive function that operates at the intersection of perception, memory, culture, and ethics. He argues that imagination allows humans to project beyond immediate perception, maintain contact with ambiguity, and construct meaning amid uncertainty. This capacity is socially shaped, influenced by culture, language, and social positioning—yet it remains marginalized, “often dismissed as vague or irrational, overshadowed by more easily quantifiable faculties.” In Wicht’s view, imagination must be reclaimed from narrow, instrumental understandings and cultivated as a collective, ethical, and political practice.

I’m about to start work on a project centered on imaginaries (more on that soon), so that part of the piece definitely drew my attention, and I love Wicht’s whole perspective on imagination and imaginaries. The latter he describes as inherently social constructs—shared sets of representations specific to social groups that include myths, religious concepts, utopias, and technological visions. They serve as collective reference points that allow for coherence in imagination, design, and innovation processes. His essay positions imaginaries as the “raw material” that gets realized in objects, works, and technologies. Even seemingly objective practices like financial policy rely on these imaginaries through their projections of future scenarios. Importantly, imaginaries are not neutral but function as “infrastructures of power” that can either reinforce dominant systems or challenge them. Wicht calls for decolonizing imagination by recognizing alternative imaginaries that exist outside white, masculine, technocratic frameworks—including indigenous cosmologies, Black speculative traditions, and feminist temporalities that offer more relational, embodied ways of envisioning possible futures.

Lastly, for those interested in curation and flâneur-like behaviour online might be interested to know that I initially followed the author for his fantastic AI-created images shared in his Whispers & Giants galleries. You never know where a couple more minutes spent looking around will get you.

Imagination, however, is something else entirely. It is not just the ability to make something new, but the capacity to hold together what is not yet fully known, to maintain contact with ambiguity and to construct meaning in the absence of certainty. It enables the projection of possibilities that cannot yet be tested, modeled or verified. […]

Meaning emerges through mediation: between a person, the object or event perceived and the cultural and historical frames through which interpretation occurs. Imagination is what allows that triangulation to function. Without it, unfamiliar experience remains unintelligible. […]

Practical imagination, then, is not a luxury. It is a cultural and political practice. It refuses the idea that the future is something to be predicted or owned. Instead, it understands the future as something to be imagined with others, through contradiction and against the assumptions of the present. […]

If the Enlightenment was a revolution in thinking, the survival of the human species may well depend on a revolution in imagination. This revolution would not center reason and mastery, but interdependence, care and the capacity to imagine otherwise.

What’s the matter with abundance?

In his critique of the book Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, Malcolm Harris questions their optimistic vision of solving societal issues through increased supply and innovation, suggesting it suffers from “commodity fetishism.” He contrasts their approach with David Schwartzman’s concept of “solar communism,” which advocates for a sustainable future powered by clean energy, while highlighting the need to address the destructive sectors of production, such as the military-industrial complex. Harris argues that achieving true abundance requires a shift in control over resources from the capitalist class to a more equitable, democratic governance. He expresses a desire for a deeper exploration of abundance, noting that the philosophy must grapple with critical issues, including the abundance or scarcity of war, to be genuinely transformative.

In short, I’d say he accuses the authors of trying to reorient the metaphorical car instead of wondering why / if we need a car at all. I’d also encourage you, once again, to read Deb Chachra’s How Infrastructure Works. The last few chapters run largely parallel to Harris’ and the Schwartzman’s thinking on solar.

The authors lament that America is “stuck between a progressive movement that is too afraid of growth and a conservative movement that is allergic to government intervention.” […]

“If we succeed in the near future to overcome the obstacles standing in the way of decarbonizing our global energy supplies by solar technologies such as wind power, we open up an unprecedented path to solar utopia.” […]

The Schwartzmans’ solar utopian credo:
We will solve the Energy Problem!
We will do it with EVERYONE in mind!
We will do it T-O-G-E-T-H-E-R!
We will do it in the 21st Century!

The case for using your brain — even if AI can think for you

Celia Ford wonders if our increasing reliance on digital tools is fundamentally altering our cognitive capabilities. Her exploration draws on diverse research, from philosophical frameworks like Clark and Chalmers’ “extended mind” theory to neuroscience studies showing reduced brain activity when we use external memory aids. She examines evidence that GPS navigation may affect hippocampal development, that people who search the internet feel artificially smarter, and that AI overuse might correlate with diminished critical thinking skills. Ford argues that the real concern isn’t necessarily outsourcing mundane tasks but surrendering intellectual autonomy entirely, especially as workplace expectations continuously expand to match technological capabilities.

Unsaid and intriguing to consider; if we extend our brains with tools outside of our skulls, what do we use this capacity for? Are there capabilities we might expand? The current trend is to give 80% of your work to AI (or 20%, or whatever) and then do five times more of the 20% that’s left. What if we make sure it’s five times more diversified thinking? Or, of course, what if we make sure to have 80% more time to live and de-escalate productivity/capitalism?

“We can notice the information disappearing from people’s brains after they know that it’s also stored outside,” said Sam Gilbert, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London. […]

What should concern us is surrendering our intellectual autonomy by letting devices think for us, rather than with us. And that’s precisely what appears to be happening with AI. […]

Insisting on avoiding the tools in front of you can mean failing to meet increasingly high expectations. “If I’m going to see my doctor,” said Fisher, “I don’t want them to only give me information they’ve memorized. I want them to have as many resources at their disposal as possible to find the correct answer.” […]

“Plagiarism, misinformation, and power imbalances worry me 100 times more than I worry that we might be losing our cognitive abilities by overusing technology,” Gilbert said. The real risk may not be that we outsource too much thinking, but that we surrender our agency to decide which thoughts are worth thinking at all.

I used to really like Tim O’Reilly’s thinking, then as I grew more critical of tech, I started to see him as too techno-optimist and pro-disruption. Now that AI is threatening his business model, he seems to have grown more critical, and also, for me, more relevant.

Here he discusses the need for AI companies like OpenAI to respect copyright laws and compensate authors when using their works for training large language models. He emphasises that generating derivative works that compete with original content is not fair use and argues for a system that tracks usage and pays royalties, similar to what O’Reilly has implemented on their own platform. He also expresses concern that without proper licensing and respect for creators’ rights, AI progress may lead to significant economic harm for authors. He envisions a future where LLMs can be trained responsibly on public content and licensed private content, promoting a fair and participatory content economy.

§ Aperture, by Special Projects. I really love this idea and preliminary implementation. The flip is brilliant! “Simply flip our case around and only a small portion of the screen stays accessible. Aperture distills your favourite apps down to their core: minimalist versions of your camera, music player, or messaging, helping you focus on what truly matters in the moment.” (All of their experiments are fascinating.)

Futures, Fictions & Fabulations

Algorithms, Automations & Augmentations

Built, Biosphere & Breakthroughs

  • Reimagining urban spaces for wildlife: from bin chickens to skyscraper falcons. “Rewilding urban spaces through green infrastructure, wildlife corridors, and biophilic design fosters biodiversity, improves air quality, and enhances residents' wellbeing.”
  • Zapping seawater to make carbon-negative building material “In a double whammy, the method sucks up carbon dioxide and upcycles it into a material that can be used to make concrete, cement, plaster, and paint.” (Not what “whammy” means, but you get the picture.)
  • An ode to my family’s e-bike. “Since the purchase, our commutes have become daily highlights. My daughter and I bond with each other and our community, and we get to appreciate the time outdoors, all while saving on car maintenance and mitigating our carbon footprint. But the e-bike has changed our life in many other ways too—some of them unexpectedly profound.”

Asides

  • Art as therapy: Swiss doctors prescribe museum visits. “Expanding the range of prescriptions for patients with mental health conditions and chronic illnesses to include strolls in public gardens, art galleries and museums.”
  • China’s SpaceSail is expanding where Elon Musk faces friction. “SpaceSail has launched around 90 satellites since last year. It is in talks with over 30 countries, with plans to have 648 satellites launched by the end of 2025, and 15,000 by 2030.” Wayyy too many satellites are planned.
  • One Minute Park. Your moment of zen. “One Minute Park allows you to visit parks from around the world for one minute each. These are just one minute videos, not webcams. Eventually the project will fill in all the minutes (1440) in a day. So far we have 217 minutes. You can create your own One Minute Park and contribute to the project.” (Via DD.)

Your Futures Thinking Observatory