Unpacking Listener 9's email

[Lauren Bello]

If you weren’t around for the Resistance hunt on 6/30, you can catch up on this thread: https://thelustexperience.com/forums/topic/i-do-not-submit-live-video/

We never really got around to unpacking Listener 9’s email, mostly because the big Resistance reveal came right after that and overshadowed everything. The text of the email was, minus instructions:

Noah Sinclair realized that Stacey’s stolen code, referred to as “IT” was being rolled out in a beta phase. This beta phase included the unintentional appearance of “shadow” profiles that several forum members referred to and that Stacey brought up in the iConfidant meeting.

Noah hoped that making this knowledge public would make his wife, Sarah Sinclair who, at the time appeared to be trying to control him and his antics of excessive drinking and debauchery, back down.

The AI song that Noah posted was another warning to all parties that he had direct knowledge that The Investors were firing the original creators because they believed their modifications to the IT code could potentially replace some of their duties when controlled or contrived scenarios needed to be created.

Their future plans for this modified code are still unknown at this time.

Noah appears drawn to several esoteric Egyptian items and seems to hold them in almost a ritualistic regard. The reason for this is still unclear…

Thanks to @nothenrygale for his concise interpretation on Slack: “The Investors stole [Stacey’s] code as a means to try to remove unnecessary people from the project as a sort of cost cutting measure. Basically DLB and CS, but potentially more. Noah was also being replicated by her code to put out a more ‘on brand’ image when he’d go off the rails.”

What I was trying to understand was, why did Noah think that going public with this knowledge would make Sarah leave him alone? Was his point just “they’ve got a perfect AI version of me, who cares if I go off the rails”? Why not just say that to her in words? Why involve the rest of the world in it? Why was he warning “all parties” – what did he think he’d get out of it? Was he just trying to prove that he had dangerous knowledge and should be respected?

I’m not sure where to begin with the hint that NOAH is the one who’s obsessed with Egyptian items.

[Kevin]

Thanks for digging into some stuff that got overlooked, @daela. I totally missed this email.

Noah Sinclair realized that Stacey’s stolen code, referred to as “IT” was being rolled out in a beta phase. This beta phase included the unintentional appearance of “shadow” profiles that several forum members referred to and that Stacey brought up in the iConfidant meeting.

I do wonder how much of this was actually stolen. We know The Investors got involved with iConfidant, and this email shows that it was much earlier than we were introduced to it, but I assume they didn’t invest in Stacey without some stipulation that they could use her code.

Noah hoped that making this knowledge public would make his wife, Sarah Sinclair who, at the time appeared to be trying to control him and his antics of excessive drinking and debauchery, back down.

I’m not really sure what the point of this would be either. If The Investors were backing Stacey, this hardly seems like blackmail material. They could have easily headed it off if they had wanted to. “Yeah, we invested in some code, tried it out on the forums, and it did some weird, but harmless stuff. Carry on.”

The AI song that Noah posted was another warning to all parties that he had direct knowledge that The Investors were firing the original creators because they believed their modifications to the IT code could potentially replace some of their duties when controlled or contrived scenarios needed to be created.

I disagree with @nothenrygale that this would be a cost cutting measure. Presumably DLB and CS were being coerced in some way and removing them from the project helps to eliminate potential loose ends. It also makes sense that they could be replaced by code if they were just generating ideas and scenarios, no real in person action is required, so most people would have no idea (if the code worked the way it was supposed to).

I’m not sure how well an AI version of Noah would work as The System appeared to be based on actual in person consultations and already had steps documented. On top of that, Sarah was the one responding to the emails and keeping The System functioning. So how does replacing Noah work? I guess maybe some combination of whatever they were trying with @taysavestheday and Stacey’s code. That at least enables video recordings that look and sound like the person they’re attempting to replicate. Still wouldn’t extend to anything in person though, from what we’ve seen.

Why was he warning “all parties” – what did he think he’d get out of it? Was he just trying to prove that he had dangerous knowledge and should be respected?

I’m not sure of this either. If everything had been working effectively, maybe this would have been frightening, but it doesn’t appear that Stacey’s code ever worked quite like it was supposed to. Otherwise, what did he have other than that The Investors had used that code on the forums?

[Author]

Posts