Matthew Kinsella, CEO of Infleqtion, explains how neutral atom quantum computing works at room temperature, and why the UK just put quantum clocks on military submarines. It's a heck of a ride.
Unlike superconducting or trapped ion systems, neutral atoms offer flexibility beyond computing: quantum sensing, atomic clocks, and RF detection all use the same underlying technology.
Matthew breaks down how lasers manipulate rubidium atoms into the coldest places in the known universe, the Rydberg state that enables entanglement, and why this modality is winning on scalability.
Key Topics:
How quantum clocks provide GPS-independent timing
Why submarines need atomic precision underwater
The difference between physical and logical qubits
Neutral atoms vs other quantum modalities (trapped ion, superconducting, spin qubits)
Hybrid classical-quantum computing workflows with NVIDIA
When quantum advantage becomes commercially useful (100 logical qubits)
Infleqtion's strategy: clocks, sensors, and computers from the same platform
Please enjoy the show.
Stay curious.
Keep Thinking on Paper.
Mark and Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
Timestamps:
(00:00) Trailer
(01:50) Why coordination matters: From internal strategy to GPS timing
(04:48) What is a quantum clock and how does it link to GPS?
(07:18) Nature's metronome: How atoms keep time with laser precision
(08:14) Room temperature quantum: Why neutral atoms don't need freezers
(12:38) The Rydberg state: Making atoms sensitive to the entire RF spectrum
(14:03) Quantum clock on a UK submarine
(17:06) Quantum in space: Voyager partnership and the International Space Station
(18:48) Hybrid quantum-classical workflows: How QPUs layer above GPUs
(23:18) Software layers: From laser control to developer applications
(25:32) Drug discovery example: GPU, CPU, QPU
(29:03) The bridge between classical and quantum: Memory architecture innovations
(31:54) How Quantum Clocks & Products Lead To Quantum Computers
(33:48) Nvidia
(35:42) Quality or Quantity of Qubits
(38:00) Quantum mechanics and free will: Does wave collapse prove consciousness?
Love it.
Thanks.
Eight billion uses of augmented reality happen on Snapchat every day. Salesforce uses AR to onboard new staff. In this episode, Thinking on Paper looks at what those two realities say about augmented reality in 2026.
Michael Guerin, CEO of Imvizar, starts in the post–Pokémon Go era. Snapchat delivers AR at massive scale, yet most users never label it as augmented reality.
If you use Instagram or Snapchat, you already use AR through lenses and filters. The technology works because it sits inside existing behaviour rather than announcing itself.
Salesforce reaches the same outcome through a different route. Guerin explains how AR replaces slide-heavy onboarding with a shared, QR-led experience. New hires move through the building, absorb the culture in context, and retain more than they would from another presentation.
This approach rests on what Guerin calls spatial storytelling.
AR now shows up in brand activations, tourist sites, museums, and sporting events, but quality depends on process.
Guerin starts with the site, then designs user movement. He places visuals, plans interaction, and writes narrative last. AR fails when it behaves like static video. It succeeds when movement and place carry the experience.
Imvizar sees its strongest results in museums and tourism. Guerin describes work at Spike Island, a former Irish prison, where AR places visitors inside scenes from the site’s past and draws emotional response directly from the space.
Please enjoy the show.
Stay curious.
Keep Thinking on Paper.
Mark and Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) The Story of Augmented Reality
(03:46) Snapchat & AR Post-Pokemon Go
(06:24) Snoop Dogg In A Wine Bottle
(08:12) Salesforce AR
(13:13) What Is Digital Storytelling?
(17:07) AR In Tourism
(18:25) Designing The Spike Island AR Experience
(22:49) How To Do AR Well
(26:26) Meta, AI And AR Glasses
(29:40) Privacy
(32:33) Mark's Terrible Thought Experiment
(33:58) What do we want humans to be?
Every Technology podcast predicts the future. For the last episode of 2025, Thinking On Paper is going backwards. And it's not even our own work, like Open AI scraping the internet for IP, we're borrowing (stealing) the learnings of Tom Whitwell.
Tom is a reformed journalist, reformed consultant and now designs electronic musical instruments. He wrote this blog on the 52 things he learned in 2025: https://medium.com/@tomwhitwell/52-things-i-learned-in-2025-edeca7e3fdd8
We choose our favourite lessons across AI, energy, labor, culture, psychology, and... checks notes... shrimps.
Some are encouraging. (air pollution deaths falling).
Some are weird. (the economics of human blood products).
Most sit somewhere in-between.
Please enjoy the show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive.
Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers, Mark & Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
Think On Paper with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz--
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Disruptors & Curious Minds
(01:15) Deaths From Air Pollution
(01:56) UK Tax Breaks Via Farms
(02:29) Meteorite Radio Stations
(04:03) Turn Mercury Into Gold
(06:10) Manipulative AI Apps For Nurses
(07:43) Bin Laden's Casio Watch
(08:31) Radioactive Shrimps
(08:53) Apple's Air Demo Cock-Up
(10:10) Does Jeremy Wear Crocs?
(11:13) What Is Raw Dogging
(12:00) Human Blood Products
(12:36) Relaxed Mowing
(13:20) Bugles At Funerals
(13:55) Robot Hands Need Fingernails
(14:40) First Names Affect Your Job
(15:27) Retrospect VHS
(16:04) Attractive Servers Earn More
(17:21) Hong Kong Phone Service
(17:33) McDonald's Loses First Place
(19:26) Shrimp Farming
(20:35) Peanut Allergies are Falling
(20:55) The Serial Killer Epidemic
(21:17) Namibian Politics
(21:50) Big Doors In LA
(22:40) Escape Your Mind With Writing
(23:43) HP Printer Ineptitude
(24:25) British Chaos
(25:20) Thank You Tom Whitwell
The machines do not need to wake up. The risk is the illusion of seemingly conscious AI.
When a generative AI system convincingly claims subjective experience, humans have no reliable way to disprove it. Consciousness is inferred, trust and emotional attachment fabricated. And the weak and susceptible get seduced by the illusion.
The danger is not a rogue superintelligence. It is a benign chatbot optimized for empathy, memory, and persuasion, interacting with people who are psychologically vulnerable and primed to believe what feels real.
This short Thinking On Paper episode is taken from our reading of Mustafa Suleyman’s - Microsoft AI CEO - essay on seemingly conscious AI.
Please enjoy the show.
And if you like what you hear, tell someone.
Cheers,
Mark and Jeremy
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
Quantum computing doesn’t make computers a bit faster. It changes what’s possible.
In this short episode, Joe Fitzsimons explains why quantum progress is so hard to grasp. Each additional qubit doubles the difficulty of simulating a system on classical machines, while the size of quantum processors has been scaling faster as industry accelerates development.
Put those together and you get growth that quickly breaks everyday intuition.
Joe grounds it with comparisons: early computers didn’t just speed up arithmetic, they unlocked tasks you could never complete by hand. Quantum computing, he argues, brings the same discombobulating level of impact.
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
When making music took heartbreak, a thousand late nights and bleeding fingers, effort, passion and belief took the rare few musicians to the top of the charts.
Now AI lets anyone write a song, taste becomes more vital than it ever was. And it was always pretty important. But that's only part of the new reality of the music industry. In today’s show, Mark and Jeremy Think On Paper with Nicholas Ponari - investor, guitar player, and Chief Operating Officer at Overtune - about how to credit the right musicians, how the bass player, drummer and producer get paid and how AI musicians can exist alongside human melody makers. Nicholas also explains the vector mathematics of Overtune (https://www.overtune.com/) - convert stems into vectors in high-dimensional space, measure the “distance” between inputs and outputs, and use those weightings to decide who contributed what, who gets paid, and where influence stops being meaningful enough to count.
Please enjoy the show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive. Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers, Mark & Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
--
Take your Technology thinking beyond.
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
TIMESTAMPS:
(00:00) Trailer
(00:59) Why music feels like “magic”
(04:51) Overtune’s real customer: vocalists who can’t produce
(07:51) The hard problem: attribution, not “make a song”
(08:05) Why the easy button fails
(12:49) Training on licensed music and where the ethics line sits
(16:08) Who gets paid: splits, volume, and realistic expectations
(18:32) How attribution actually works: vectors, thresholds, and cutoffs
(20:44) Can scraped music ever be fixed after the fact
(27:07) Interactive music, live coding, and the future of performance
(29:14) The Kevin Kelly question: what do we want humans to be?
China produces over half of the world’s lithium-ion batteries and more than 90% of all neodymium magnets. They are the core ingredient in Teslas, drones, robots, and every electric motor you interact with daily. America makes...burgers.
China also mines 70% of global rare earths and processes 85–90% of them. The Electric Stack is Chinese.
In this episode of Thinking on Paper, Mark and Jeremy read Packy McCormick’s Not Boring Essay: The Electric Slide to understand the history, economics and technology of the electric stack. Because if it can go electric, it will go electric.
The story of the Electric Stack - and the slide - begins in 1973 with the oil crisis. Everyone’s favourite oil company, Exxon, funded early lithium battery research by Stan Whittingham. Stan’s batteries exploded.
Enter John B Goodenough, the man with the best name in technology. He has a voltage breakthrough. Akira Yoshino joins the show and stabilises the technology further. Sony get a whiff and use them to shrink the Handycam. It’s the Alpha product that makes lithium-ion batteries a global product and a commercial goldmine.
Elon Musk and Tesla take up the EV mantle. Tesla’s early cell-pack experiments, coupled with Panasonic’s partnership accelerate the progress.
Battery maker A123 in the United States collapses. China eventually acquire it for a fraction of its value.
The Beijing Olympics becomes a turning point: BYD test large battery systems in buses across the city, gaining a lead that CATL and BYD still hold today.
Then come the magnets. Neodymium magnets were discovered in 1983 in parallel by Masato Sagawa in Japan and John Croat at GM. They powered the boom in hard drives, then drones, then the emerging humanoid robotics market.
Today, China produces nearly all of them.
America is playing catch-up, does it stand a chance?
Please enjoy the show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive. Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers, Mark & Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
Timestamps
(00:00) The Electric Stack
(02:13) Beginnings: War, The Oil Crisis & Stan Whittingham
(03:46) The Song Handycam: Lateral Thinking With Withered Technology
(05:06) Tesla, Elon And Handycam Batteries In An EV
(06:46) China Buys US Battery Company A-123 At A Carboot Sale
(08:40) China, The Olympics And The Serendipity of Battery Technology
(11:37) Faraday And The Birth Of Neodymium Magnets
(14:26) The 3.5 Inch Neodymium Magnet Alpha Product
(16:46) Magnequench
(18:16) Drones, Ukraine And The Magnet War Machine
(20:16) Politics, Rare Earths And 'The Future's Too Important' T-shirts
The median US income is $68,000. Only 13% of the US workforce earns a salary; everyone else is paid by the hour or hustling in the gig economy. The median home price is $440,000.
Housing is unaffordable because the system is built to extract value rather than create stability.
“Affordable housing” is a great idea. But flawed. It relies on outdated subsidies, wage assumptions that no longer hold, and ownership models that extract rather than stabilise.
Chris Moeller joins Mark and Jeremy to Think on Paper about an alternative: stable living.
Stable living is a model built on long-term security instead of short-term yield. It separates land from structures, brings ownership back to residents, and uses impact capital, industrialised construction, and better coordination technology to rebuild the fundamentals.
Please enjoy the show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive. Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers, Mark & Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
Timestamps
(00:00) Trailer
(03:19) Challenges of Homeownership
(05:46) The Housing Market Dynamics
(08:29) Technology's Role in Housing Solutions
(10:41) Innovations in Construction
(12:29) Financing Housing for All
(15:06) Reimagining Ownership Models
(16:30) Technology's Role in Food Access and Coordination
(18:43) Adaptive Reuse in Real Estate and Community Development
(19:58) Commercial Real Estate Challenges Post-COVID
(23:15) Infrastructure Needs for Sustainable Living
(25:31) Global Community and Local Solutions
(26:45) Stable Living for Civil Servants and Community Heroes
(28:20) Creating Stability and Long-Term Impact
What is consciousness? We're reading Irreducible, Federico Faggin's incredible book on quantum information based consciousness, to find out.
Do we agree with it? Quantum based panpsychism? A conscious universe run by quantum conscious units called Seities? Not sure yet.
Only in the last hundred years, with the advent of quantum physics, have we made great strides in understanding the nature of reality. We have, in fact, discovered that matter — which seems solid and compact — is instead made of vibratory energy. During the last 20 years, we have understood that everything is made up of quantum information.
However, there's still no theory capable of giving us a vision of the world that is consistent with both general relativity and quantum physics. In this book, I put forward the hypothesis that the universe has been conscious and had free will forever.
Please enjoy. And share with a conscious friend.
Cheers,
Mark and Jeremy.
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
How do brands build trust when the internet has decayed into into AI-driven slop and tripe? The systems that once promised connection now work as mirrored cages, feeding your biases, hiding your real customer, and distorting the truth.
Nick Richtsmeier, founder of CultureCraft and writer at Damns Given, argues that brands now live inside engineered distortions. Funnels collapse. Neutrality is impossible. And AI is being layered onto a system already built to extract rather than empower.
In this conversation, Nick joins Mark and Jeremy to Think on Paper about:
Why brands operate inside algorithmic cages
How information distortion shapes every customer interaction
Why mass neutrality fails and perspective becomes strategy
How modern marketing hijacks curiosity
Why platforms hoard customer insight inside black boxes
How influencers stand in for trust
Why network-based growth outperforms funnels
Why analog tactics and patient capital are becoming competitive advantages
This episode tracks the widening distortion gap, the limits of AI-driven marketing, and the slow, analog tactics required to build something real inside an internet optimised for extraction.
If platforms are collapsing into noise, where does trust come from?
Please enjoy the show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive. Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers, Mark & Jeremy
PS: Please subscribe. It’s the best way you can help other curious minds find our channel.
--
Be our internet friend:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
Timestamps
(00:00) Trailer
(01:00) Disruptors & Curious Minds
(02:00) Mark Has A Trust Issue
(02:42) What Is Trust?
(07:14) How Deep-Tech Brands Build Trust?
(09:38) Steve Jobs And Selling A Feeling
(10:00) The Cult Of Silicon Valley
(10:35) Was the Internet Ever Not Shit?
(15:05) What Is The “Distortion Gap”?
(20:11) Reducing Your Digital Marketing Spend
(21:45) Analog Marketing
(23:40) Why the Marketing Funnel Never Really Existed
(25:08) VCs, Capital And The Comfort Zone Of Risk
(27:04) Analog vs Digital: What Actually Creates Meaningful Connection
(28:40) How the TikTok Generation Uses the Internet Differently
(32:40) Your Curiosity Is Being Hi-Jacked
(35:22) What Are Load-Bearing Inefficiencies?
(40:47) The Importance Of Resilience in a World Of Entropy
(42:29) What Do We Want Humans To Be?
AI can answer your questions faster than any human. It can write your emails, help you code, and shape the way you see the world - and the people in it. But from the very beginning, AI was designed to deceive you.
This is the story of asking and answering questions, of the difference between being born to think and being built to think. Ultimately, it’s about the power of questions: how they connect us and divide us, where curiosity meets manipulation, and why we may be losing the muscle for real wonder in the age of prompting.
Pia Lauritzen Thinks On Paper with Mark and Jeremy Gilbertson. She’s asked and analyzed over 30,000 questions from people across languages and cultures.
She’s a philosopher, TEDx speaker, Forbes writer and a philosopher of the question. Tune in and you’ll learn why we default to “what” and “how,” why “why” is so rare (and so radical), and how every question transfers responsibility.
And then we go to the bible. Who asked the first question? And what can we learn about Adam and Eve and the pesky snake that changed the course of fictional humanity.
There are dancing with question analogies, the dispelling of myths - adults don’t lose their questioning instincts, they just hide them. Because of fear, ridicule, ego.
And finally, once the stage has been set like a Shakespearean play, the crux of it all: AI can’t think for you; blank pages matters; struggle is not a bug but a feature, and how the real test isn’t in the machine, but in your ability to hold onto what makes questioning, and not-knowing, uniquely human.
Please enjoy the show. And click subscribe, it’s the best way for other curious minds like you to find our show.
And remember: Stay curious. Be disruptive.
Keep Thinking on Paper.
Cheers,
Mark & Jeremy
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Trailer
(03:28) 30,000 Questions & the What/How Bias
(07:38) Questions That Connect vs Questions That Manipulate
(09:59) Do We Really Lose Our Curiosity?
(14:21) How to Start Better Conversations
(18:40) Conversation as a Thinking Space
(19:46) Why We Lead with Polarising Topics
(20:35) How School Trains Us to Have Answers, Not Questions
(22:22) Rethinking Education in the Age of AI
(25:22) AI in the Classroom: Tool, Threat or Opportunity?
(30:07) Why AI Can’t Help Us Think
(32:55) The Essence of Technology, AI Deception & the Turing Test
(38:17) What Could Humans Be in an Age of AI?
What makes neutron stars so fascinating that they once fooled astronomers into thinking they were aliens?
In this episode of Thinking On Paper, we sit down with Katia moskvitch, science journalist and author, to explore the wild discoveries and cosmic mysteries around pulsars and the densest objects in the universe.
Why were neutron stars only theoretical for decades, and who first imagined their existence? How did Jocelyn Bell Burnell, a then-PhD student in 1967, discover these cosmic lighthouses using a homemade radio array of wooden poles and copper wire—and why did her supervisor, not her, end up with the Nobel Prize?
If you enjoyed the episode, please like, subscribe and share so more curious minds like you can find our channel.
Cheers,
Mark & Jeremy
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
Everyone thinks they are a great driver. Most drivers think they can judge a safe overtake. They can’t.
In this Thinking On Paper shot, Barry Lunn breaks down the sensor technology that sees eight cars ahead, detects velocity before brake lights appear, and intervenes when the driver is about to make a mistake.
Radar, not cameras, not lidar, could be the backbone of next-generation driver assistance. We get into how millimetre-wave signals bounce around traffic, how machines detect danger long before humans register it, and why more than half of global crashes are rear-end collisions that could be prevented with earlier insight.
We also examine what this means for trust: why people resist hands-off driving yet quickly rely on a system that prevents the accidents they didn’t even know they were about to cause.
Please enjoy. And check out our full length technology interviews if you like what you hear.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
What if someone handed you the recipe for a quantum computer? In this episode, that’s exactly what happens.
Coleman Collins of IonQ breaks down DiVincenzo’s criteria, (a checklist proposed by physicist David DiVincenzo) the five capabilities any physical system needs before it can call itself a quantum computer.
There are five criteria.
Mix them all together in a serving bowl and these let you perform any quantum computation you wish.
You now know the foundation behind every major quantum architecture, from superconducting circuits to trapped ions.
Cheers,
Mark and Jeremy.
Keep Thinking On Paper.
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
Radiation-hardened space electronics don’t get splashy headlines, but nothing in orbit works without them.
Starship, the ISS, Amazon’s Project Kuiper, Starlink... the whole caboodle depends on hardware that keeps running when the vacuum, extreme temperatures, and radiation of space would annihilate your laptop plug on Earth.
The extreme environments of space are no place for trial and error with the small things.
Danny Andreev, CEO of Sunburn Schematics, designs those systems for real missions. In this episode of Thinking on Paper, he walks you through what actually keeps spacecraft alive: particle-induced faults, gate-driver failures, thermal shock, and the methods space companies use to mitigate the risks.
We go from chip-level physics to the industrial picture: why the next phase of space isn’t glossy renders but an off-world supply chain built from proven terrestrial machinery, cheaper short-lived satellites, and megawatt-class power standards that mirror EV infrastructure.
It’s an unromantic, inside-the-factory look at how space becomes an industry rather than a spectacle.
Please enjoy the show. And subscribe. That's the best way to help other people find the channel.
Cheers,
Mark & Jeremy.
--
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Thinking On Paper Trailer
(02:59) The Role of DC to DC Converters in Space
(03:46) Challenges of Power Systems in Space
(05:30) Designing for Reliability in Space
(07:13) The Impact of Radiation on Electronics
(08:52) Testing and Validation of Space Electronics
(11:03) Environmental Challenges for Space Electronics
(12:28) Success Rates and Lessons Learned
(15:22) The Importance of Music in Space Missions
(22:30) The Future of Space Exploration
(25:23) Building a Lunar Economy
(27:51) Power Conversion in Space
(31:57) Exciting Developments in Space Technology
(35:13) Philosophical Insights on Space and Life
--
Say hello! Connect more technology dots with us elsewhere:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
If the military had been using AIs in 1983, everyone would be dead. Machines will never be conscious, and that animal instinct saved the world.
This is the story:
On 26 September 1983, Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov sat in a Soviet early-warning bunker watching computers tell him that US nuclear missiles were on their way.
The data said “launch.”
His intuition said “wait.”
Petrov chose to override the system and, in doing so, probably saved the world.
In this Thinking on Paper Book Club short, Mark and Jeremy use the Petrov story as a live case study for one of Federico Faggin’s core arguments in Irreducible: information is not the same as consciousness.
Across a few minutes, they unpack:
Why Petrov’s decision shows the gap between mechanical rule-following and conscious judgment
How “information makes consciousness” sits at the center of Federrio Faggin’s new consciousness theory
Why AI systems that only flip 1s and 0s can’t replicate intuition or qualia. In other words, why AI will never be conscious.
This is a short from our 13-part Book Club on Federico Faggin’s Irreducible.
If you’re interested in AI, consciousness, and the limits of information theory, listen to the full episode for more on information, consciousness, and why Faggin thinks consciousness is irreducible.
Cheers,
Mark and Jeremy.
Keep Thinking On Paper.
--
We like you. Connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
Don Norman gives the clearest, most accessible explanation of humanity centered design there is. He invented the concept, after all.
In this Thinking On Paper short, the Godfather of Design lays out the foundations of why design must expand beyond the individual user and account for society, the planet, and long-term impact.
The core idea is simple: designing for individual users is no longer enough. “What’s wrong,” he says, “is what’s left out.”
Every digital product relies on a physical product. Power systems, infrastructure, data centers, electricity. You can’t ignore these systems when designing a new product.
Designers need to widen their frame. Traditional human-centered overlooks environmental and social consequences.
The hidden costs of digital technology show up far from your phone, laptop, car or magic pen.
Humanity Centered Design teams work with communities instead of imposing solutions. They focus on long-term impact more than short-term convenience.
Don Norman is a legend. He argues that the future of design depends on understanding how products influence society, policy, and the planet, not just usability.
The conversation moves from principles to practice: what sustainable design looks like, how to design without repeating “colonial” patterns, and how to build technology that strengthens communities instead of weakening them.
“We’re all together,” Norman says, summing up his approach.
The responsibility is collective, and so is the impact.
Please enjoy the show.
And share it with a friend.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
--
Watch On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@thinkingonpaper/videos
Can humanoids dance? Or will the billions of Tesla human robots choose to forgo such technological frivolity?
Philip Johnston is CEO of Starcloud. They build data centers in space. You'll have seen them trending on Twitter recently as their first satellite was on the recent Space-X Falcon 9 launch. You can track it orbiting the Earth.
This is a short from our much longer conversation. Which you can listen to once you've had a flavour of it.
Alternatively, check out our other Thinking on Paper episodes. There is something for every curious mind. From space electronics and personal AI, to spin qubits, IBM quantum computing and a book club.
Cheers,
Mark and Jeremy
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
AI agents can read feeds, make decisions, coordinate with other agents, and even speak on your behalf.
In this short conversation, Andrew Hill breaks down what an agent actually is, why every company is racing to build them, and how close we are to personal agents that manage our schedules, explain our thinking, and interact with other people’s agents without us in the loop.
The discussion pushes into a harder question: people are already sharing their most intimate details with AI. At what point do these systems become better relationship partners than other humans?
If agents are about to represent us online, what does that mean for trust, privacy, and everyday interactions?
This episode gets into the shift that’s already underway, and where personal AI agents could go next.
If agents end up knowing us better than anyone else, who are we really talking to?
Rock on.
Cheers,
Mark & Jeremy
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz
To survive in space, you don’t just need engineers. You need a musician. Ideally, a guitarist. Fortunately, the technology for this exists.
Jeremy and Mark think on paper with physicist and CEO of Sunburn Schematics, Danny Andreev. What starts as a question about electrical engineering and power supplies in space, turns into human psychology and Mars Mission survival.
Elon, are you listening?
🎸 Could Jeremy's 1969 Vibrolux guitar amp actually work in space? What modifications would it need to play on the moon?
🎸 Why analog amps shrug off radiation.
🎸 How studies on submarines and Arctic bases show that having a musician changes how crews handle isolation
🎸 Mars needs musicians, comedians, and people willing to risk dying in space so the rest of us don’t have to
This isn’t a gear review. It's about culture, space, guitars and the human condition.
Rock on.
Cheers,
Mark & Jeremy
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz