This approach to intentional communication—grounded in cryptographic signatures and verifiable authorship—quietly reflects deeper insights from both consciousness theory and quantum theory, even though it does not explicitly depend on them.

From consciousness theory, it borrows the recognition that entities capable of expressing intention—by signing events—can be treated as having subjective experiences, at least within the system. Each signed event is a declaration of perspective, a trace of volition, not unlike the minimal signal of awareness.

Similarly, from quantum theory, it takes inspiration from the idea that events are inherently unique and only become meaningful when observed or measured in relation to a broader context. In this model, the social layer—where trust, meaning, and truth emerge—is akin to the classical world: a macroscopic phenomenon arising from many discrete, probabilistic actions aggregated and interpreted by observers. Social reality, then, is not embedded in the protocol but arises on top of it, as an emergent, intersubjective construct.

Importantly, this model makes no claim to being a theory of consciousness, nor does it presume to implement or simulate quantum mechanics. Rather, it acknowledges these frameworks as metaphors that help us respect the boundaries of what such a protocol can and cannot do. It does not assume anything about the moral value, truthfulness, or reality-status of the messages it transports. Instead, it provides a neutral, accountable substrate where such judgments are left to intentional agents operating in the social domain. In doing so, it reinforces the principle that integrity of expression—not interpretation—is what a communication protocol should guarantee.

This post and comments are published on Nostr.