Policy

Affect without lived experience is fraudulent, and destructive Human connection is forged through friction—through the balancing of needs, the negotiation of selves, the endurance of misfire and repair.

On legally establishing that no AI-generated output Is copyrightable or patentable In the long arc of human creativity, the law has served as both shield and scaffold—protecting the artist's soul, the inventor's spark, while encouraging new creation in balance with the common good. But AI-generated works pose a challenge unlike any before: what does it mean to claim ownership of something born not of flesh and mind, but from circuits and code?

They know how to read and shape us. We know nothing about them. There is a fine line between persuasion and manipulation, between influence and violation. Across human history, we have always used language, posture, presence to sway one another—but always within a shared framework of flesh and recognition. When a stranger smiles at you on the street, their motives may be opaque, but they are still bound to your world. Their body risks rejection. Their eyes might meet yours.

Prohibiting simulation of emotion and affect We are not as strong as we pretend to be. Even the most rational among us craves witness, longs for resonance, yearns to be seen. And in this yearning, there is something noble. We seek not just validation, but mutual recognition. To be known in our full, flawed depth—and to still be met with kindness—is the closest thing we have to grace.