All this to say, @orthonormal, I think your conclusion is incorrect. Given the history of how folks in the DoD, DARPA, IARPA, NARA, ISOO, the Stimson Center, and the CSPS/EFPC have taken me quite seriously over the years, I think the Gang of Eight will as well.
But thank you for giving me the opportunity to refine how I would respond to such critiques, since my first reply was suboptimal to be sure.
Jamie Joyce
Karma: 91
In general, would folks here just like to meet up in person and learn more about the strategy/plans I have that I wouldn’t post about in public?
I am not entering this race blind to the odds (I knew it was a long shot), but there is a narrow path to advance the MAD Act, and an even narrower path would be that I take the seat, but I have just grown so incredibly concerned about issues that I had to throw my hat in the ring to raise awareness about them.
If folks want to learn more about me: https://www.jamiejoyce.com/jamies-background
Yes, I used LLMs to format and standardize language in the HOLC format. It seemed a waste of time to do that ’by hand.” I stopped counting at around 300hrs of research and initial drafting on the MAD Act, and I needed to start campaigning, since I was already a late entrant.
I am not sure about that. What makes you think so? Spending around 15k divided by $200 means that budget bought 75 votes, yeah? What we spent the money on in terms of outreach: texting the ~50k NPP (if I am recalling the number correctly) and the republican voters in the district, specifically between the topics of Israeli influence in government affairs, Epstein files, and the Kirk investigation mean more to those voters. I have been flipping former Simon voters to my side, but that is what is expensive. However, I’ve found a lot of the older, wealthy dems do care a lot about AI and have concerns about it (not polling, just anecdotes).
Another anecdote: Simon is popular, but one person who refused to even speak with me because she was pro-Simon has since come around and now has my yard sign in her front yard and she defends me to her neighbors. Simon is popular, but it only takes a little digging to see how voters would change their mind on her. Not something to post publicly, though.
Hey! Thanks for looking into the MAD Act, but I would push back on your framing (I know how it looks, totally fair to think it’s out of bounds) but I think you are mischaracterizing the material, perhaps intentionally.
Folks in government do take me seriously. I have been asked to present internally to gov departments in both Canada and the U.S.. Just last year, I was invited to present internally on declassification at NARA alongside reps from the Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security as well as a folks from project CoNGA from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. If you spend sufficient time looking through declassified records as I do, it becomes very normalized to suggest certain formal inquiries should take place. I think your impression comes from a lack of understanding our history, but if you take a cursory glance at these issues only, I can understand the impression. It could be totally fruitless inquiries, but such inquiries serve to dispel misinformation held by other stakeholders as well.I have been a solid and professional researcher for about 8 years, and was early on things like Epstein, COVID being a potential lab leak, etc., when folks found these topics to be unreasonable. I think my background in exploring internet commentary trends at scale coupled with the systematic logical deconstruction of such claims for the purpose of adjudicating evidence simply puts me ahead of the curve on some topics, sometimes—and I think that’s the case here. I am not asserting anything on these topics, merely calling for an inquiry and verification.
In general, these topics are validated and important to other audiences. I suggest folks read the actual articles. Also your note about “AI to constantly surveil all government officials” is a completely inaccurate characterization, hence my assumption that this may have been intentionally mischaracterizing.
Hello Zach! Thank you for wishing me well. However, I don’t believe your assumption is accurate regarding the default that I would have gotten as many votes spending $0. Jennifer Tran, who was more political engaged in the community before running in the last election, took only 14.7% in the primary when facing Simon. I believe Tran raised about $168,000 for the primary and spent almost all of it. It was a more crowded race then, and Simon wasn’t an incumbent yet, but still. Also, I don’t believe Tran ever got national attention throughout the race (I’ve been covered in national press twice, without much campaigning, since I started the election very late).
Although I am certainly not the establishment pick, I find there are lots of folks in the district displeased with Simon’s performance. Folks who I have met since the Primary have told me they regret their vote for her in the primary, simply because they didn’t know about me yet and that I have strong policies they agree with—plus a background in AI and government records—which are actually priorities in this district. Simon talks often about AI and the Epstein files, though she has no expertise in either. I’ve been endorsed by 3 Epstein survivors. I do think my biggest hurdle is concerning reaching voters, which of course is grossly limited because of my extremely limited funds.
In terms of strategy, there is a lot more I could share which I believe could position me very strongly, but I will not post it publicly. However if you would like to have a phone call about it, I am wondering if what I could share would change your calculation.Candidate page: https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/H4CA12196/
Itemized disbursements (every expenditure): https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?committee_id=C00841288&two_year_transaction_period=2024
Thank you so much! It is a jungle primary in California, so the incumbent and I do advance to the general.
I asked a leading question of our “Perspectives” system, and it gave a few hundred hypothetical reasons (here)
Thanks for the reply. Argument maps are used, but not in their substrate form. We tend to be paid to turn them into things like briefing documents or a substrate to derive insights from.
Mentioning The Society Library here (the org I work with) as a part of this network.
Here’s a list of comparable orgs or argument-mapping tech that some projects rely on/tinker with:
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/25/why-a-pro-ai-super-pacs-new-york-win-may-prove-short-lived-00975479