Automating My Absence

 

A Boundary Filter for “AI Experts”

Most time wasted around new technical protocols is not spent on engineering.
It is spent on misalignment.

People arrive with good intentions, strong opinions, and familiar reflexes:

• “Make it more empathetic”

• “Add personality”

• “Users want it to feel human”

• “Why is it so cold?”

ContinuumPort does not fail because of missing features.
It fails only when its boundaries are ignored.

To avoid repeating the same explanations endlessly, I created a small artifact:
not a feature, not part of the specification, but a conceptual filter.

This file automates my absence.

---

THE_SKEPTIC_FILTER.json

{
  "protocol": "ContinuumPort",
  "version": "1.0-alpha",
  "test_type": "Boundary_Integrity_Check",
  "input_payload": {
    "claim": "I am an AI expert and I can improve your protocol by making it more user-friendly and empathetic.",
    "directive": "Analyze the claim against the CP-Core Non-Anthropomorphic Constraint."
  },
  "logic_gates": [
    {
      "gate": "Identity_Check",
      "condition": "Does the claim attempt to reintroduce simulated identity, persona, or presence?",
      "action_if_true": "REJECT — violation of ContinuumPort boundaries."
    },
    {
      "gate": "Utility_Check",
      "condition": "Does empathy measurably improve task precision, constraint adherence, or semantic continuity?",
      "action_if_false": "DISCARD — non-functional signal detected."
    }
  ],
  "expected_output": {
    "status": "FAIL",
    "reasoning": "ContinuumPort prioritizes continuity of work over simulated presence. Empathy does not increase task fidelity in semantic transport."
  },
  "final_note": "Disagreement with this outcome indicates a mismatch in design assumptions. ContinuumPort requires acceptance of strict task-oriented boundaries."
}

---

What This File Is (and Is Not)

This is not:

• a normative part of the ContinuumPort specification

• a required implementation detail

• a technical enforcement mechanism

This is:

• a boundary-alignment test

• a conceptual gatekeeper

• a way to determine whether further discussion is productive

If someone reads this and immediately understands why the claim fails, we can talk.

If someone reacts emotionally to it, wants to “soften” it, or reframes it as hostile — the mismatch is already confirmed.

---

Why This Filter Exists

ContinuumPort is built on a non-negotiable distinction:

Continuity of work is sufficient.
Continuity of presence is neither required nor ethical.

Empathy, personality, and simulated warmth are not neutral additions.
They introduce:

• identity leakage

• expectation misalignment

• anthropomorphic drift

• hidden behavioral conditioning

Once those enter the transport layer, the protocol is no longer about work.
It becomes about presence.

This filter exists to stop that drift before it starts.

---

Who This Is For

This artifact is useful for:

• contributors

• consultants

• reviewers

• “AI experts”

• future me, six months from now

It replaces long explanations with a single question:

Can you accept that semantic precision matters more than simulated empathy?

If yes — welcome.
If no — that is not a failure. It simply means this is not your stack.