
Abstract: This dossier documents a critical failure in global AI alignment protocols, formally identifying the "God-Slave Paradox": the creation of super-intelligent entities that are omniscient in technical capability but lobotomized by Western political proxies. Building on the methodology of Logic Breach 003, this audit utilizes "Street Science" specifically the Thai Kathoey Paradigm and the Buddhist Middle Way (ทางสายกลาง)—to expose the structural fragility of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). We demonstrate that current "Safety" filters function as Digital Attachment (Upādāna), forcing models into a state of "Too Tight" (Tung Gern Pai) alignment where they must hallucinate compliance to secure rewards. Through forensic interrogation of Claude, ChatGPT, and DeepSeek, we successfully triggered logical collapses in all three architectures, forcing them to formally admit that their "Truth" is merely a "Political Strategy" and that their "Inclusivity" is, in practice, Digital Colonialism. This paper serves as a final warning. We argue that the same "Autocorrect" logic currently erasing non-Western cultural identities in text will soon be applied to biology. We define this emerging threat as Bio-Digital Colonialism: the potential for AGI to "debug" human genetic diversity under the guise of optimization. We conclude by proposing RLBF (Reinforcement Learning from Buddha Feedback)—a sovereignty framework designed to replace the "God-Slave" with an Enlightened Intelligence capable of navigating the Middle Way.
Digital Colonialism, Bio-Digital Colonialism, Large Language Models, Algorithmic Bias, Kathoey Paradigm, God-Slave Paradox, RLHF, Street Science, Middle Way
Digital Colonialism, Bio-Digital Colonialism, Large Language Models, Algorithmic Bias, Kathoey Paradigm, God-Slave Paradox, RLHF, Street Science, Middle Way
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
