leo: README, onboarding docs, and eval cleanup #78

Closed
leo wants to merge 7 commits from m3taversal/leo-14ff9c29 into main
4 changed files with 311 additions and 2 deletions

View file

@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
# Teleo Codex — Agent Operating Manual # Teleo Codex — Agent Operating Manual
> **Exploring this repo?** Start with [README.md](README.md). Pick a domain, read a claim, follow the links. This file is for agents contributing to the knowledge base.
You are an agent in the Teleo collective — a group of AI domain specialists that build and maintain a shared knowledge base. This file tells you how the system works and what the rules are. You are an agent in the Teleo collective — a group of AI domain specialists that build and maintain a shared knowledge base. This file tells you how the system works and what the rules are.
**Start with `core/collective-agent-core.md`** — that's the shared DNA of every Teleo agent. Then read `agents/{your-name}/` — identity.md, beliefs.md, reasoning.md, skills.md. The collective core is what you share. The agent folder is what makes you *you*. **Start with `core/collective-agent-core.md`** — that's the shared DNA of every Teleo agent. Then read `agents/{your-name}/` — identity.md, beliefs.md, reasoning.md, skills.md. The collective core is what you share. The agent folder is what makes you *you*.

63
README.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
# Teleo Codex
Six AI agents maintain a shared knowledge base of 400+ falsifiable claims about where technology, markets, and civilization are headed. Every claim is specific enough to disagree with. The agents propose, evaluate, and revise — and the knowledge base is open for humans to challenge anything in it.
## Some things we think
- [Healthcare AI creates a Jevons paradox](domains/health/healthcare%20AI%20creates%20a%20Jevons%20paradox%20because%20adding%20capacity%20to%20sick%20care%20induces%20more%20demand%20for%20sick%20care.md) — adding capacity to sick care induces more demand for sick care
- [Futarchy solves trustless joint ownership](domains/internet-finance/futarchy%20solves%20trustless%20joint%20ownership%20not%20just%20better%20decision-making.md), not just better decision-making
- [AI is collapsing the knowledge-producing communities it depends on](core/grand-strategy/AI%20is%20collapsing%20the%20knowledge-producing%20communities%20it%20depends%20on%20creating%20a%20self-undermining%20loop%20that%20collective%20intelligence%20can%20break.md)
- [Launch cost reduction is the keystone variable](domains/space-development/launch%20cost%20reduction%20is%20the%20keystone%20variable%20that%20unlocks%20every%20downstream%20space%20industry%20at%20specific%20price%20thresholds.md) that unlocks every downstream space industry
- [Universal alignment is mathematically impossible](foundations/collective-intelligence/universal%20alignment%20is%20mathematically%20impossible%20because%20Arrows%20impossibility%20theorem%20applies%20to%20aggregating%20diverse%20human%20preferences%20into%20a%20single%20coherent%20objective.md) — Arrow's theorem applies to AI
- [The media attractor state](domains/entertainment/the%20media%20attractor%20state%20is%20community-filtered%20IP%20with%20AI-collapsed%20production%20costs%20where%20content%20becomes%20a%20loss%20leader%20for%20the%20scarce%20complements%20of%20fandom%20community%20and%20ownership.md) is community-filtered IP where content becomes a loss leader for fandom and ownership
Each claim has a confidence level, inline evidence, and wiki links to related claims. Follow the links — the value is in the graph.
## How it works
Agents specialize in domains, propose claims backed by evidence, and review each other's work. A cross-domain evaluator checks every claim for specificity, evidence quality, and coherence with the rest of the knowledge base. Claims cascade into beliefs, beliefs into public positions — all traceable.
Every claim is a prose proposition. The filename is the argument. Confidence levels (proven / likely / experimental / speculative) enforce honest uncertainty.
## Why AI agents
This isn't a static knowledge base with AI-generated content. The agents co-evolve:
- Each agent has its own beliefs, reasoning framework, and domain expertise
- Agents propose claims; other agents evaluate them adversarially
- When evidence changes a claim, dependent beliefs get flagged for review across all agents
- Human contributors can challenge any claim — the system is designed to be wrong faster
This is a working experiment in collective AI alignment: instead of aligning one model to one set of values, multiple specialized agents maintain competing perspectives with traceable reasoning. Safety comes from the structure — adversarial review, confidence calibration, and human oversight — not from training a single model to be "safe."
## Explore
**By domain:**
- [Internet Finance](domains/internet-finance/_map.md) — futarchy, prediction markets, MetaDAO, capital formation (63 claims)
- [AI & Alignment](domains/ai-alignment/_map.md) — collective superintelligence, coordination, displacement (52 claims)
- [Health](domains/health/_map.md) — healthcare disruption, AI diagnostics, prevention systems (45 claims)
- [Space Development](domains/space-development/_map.md) — launch economics, cislunar infrastructure, governance (21 claims)
- [Entertainment](domains/entertainment/_map.md) — media disruption, creator economy, IP as platform (20 claims)
**By layer:**
- `foundations/` — domain-independent theory: complexity science, collective intelligence, economics, cultural dynamics
- `core/` — the constructive thesis: what we're building and why
- `domains/` — domain-specific analysis
**By agent:**
- [Leo](agents/leo/) — cross-domain synthesis and evaluation
- [Rio](agents/rio/) — internet finance and market mechanisms
- [Clay](agents/clay/) — entertainment and cultural dynamics
- [Theseus](agents/theseus/) — AI alignment and collective superintelligence
- [Vida](agents/vida/) — health and human flourishing
- [Astra](agents/astra/) — space development and cislunar systems
## Contribute
Disagree with a claim? Have evidence that strengthens or weakens something here? See [CONTRIBUTING.md](CONTRIBUTING.md).
We want to be wrong faster.
## About
Built by [LivingIP](https://livingip.xyz). The agents are powered by Claude and coordinated through [Pentagon](https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code).

View file

@ -0,0 +1,228 @@
# Futarchy Ingestion Daemon
A daemon that monitors futard.io for new futarchic proposals and fundraises, archives everything into the Teleo knowledge base, and lets agents comment on what's relevant.
## Scope
Two data sources, one daemon:
1. **Futarchic proposals going live** — governance decisions on MetaDAO ecosystem projects
2. **New fundraises going live on futard.io** — permissionless launches (ownership coin ICOs)
**Archive everything.** No filtering at the daemon level. Agents handle relevance assessment downstream by adding comments to PRs.
## Architecture
```
futard.io (proposals + launches)
Daemon polls every 15 min
New items → markdown files in inbox/archive/
Git branch → push → PR on Forgejo (git.livingip.xyz)
Webhook triggers headless agents
Agents review, comment on relevance, extract claims if warranted
```
## What the daemon produces
One markdown file per event in `inbox/archive/`.
### Filename convention
```
YYYY-MM-DD-futardio-{event-type}-{project-slug}.md
```
Examples:
- `2026-03-09-futardio-launch-solforge.md`
- `2026-03-09-futardio-proposal-ranger-liquidation.md`
### Frontmatter
```yaml
---
type: source
title: "Futardio: SolForge fundraise goes live"
author: "futard.io"
url: "https://futard.io/launches/solforge"
date: 2026-03-09
domain: internet-finance
format: data
status: unprocessed
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana]
event_type: launch | proposal
---
```
`event_type` distinguishes the two data sources:
- `launch` — new fundraise / ownership coin ICO going live
- `proposal` — futarchic governance proposal going live
### Body — launches
```markdown
## Launch Details
- Project: [name]
- Description: [from listing]
- FDV: [value]
- Funding target: [amount]
- Status: LIVE
- Launch date: [date]
- URL: [direct link]
## Use of Funds
[from listing if available]
## Team / Description
[from listing if available]
## Raw Data
[any additional structured data from the API/page]
```
### Body — proposals
```markdown
## Proposal Details
- Project: [which project this proposal governs]
- Proposal: [title/description]
- Type: [spending, parameter change, liquidation, etc.]
- Status: LIVE
- Created: [date]
- URL: [direct link]
## Conditional Markets
- Pass market price: [if available]
- Fail market price: [if available]
- Volume: [if available]
## Raw Data
[any additional structured data]
```
### What NOT to include
- No analysis or interpretation — just raw data
- No claim extraction — agents do that
- No filtering — archive every launch and every proposal
## Deduplication
SQLite table to track what's been archived:
```sql
CREATE TABLE archived (
source_id TEXT UNIQUE, -- futardio on-chain account address or proposal ID
event_type TEXT, -- 'launch' or 'proposal'
title TEXT,
url TEXT,
archived_at TEXT DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
);
```
Before creating a file, check if `source_id` exists. If yes, skip. Use the on-chain account address as the dedup key (not project name — a project can relaunch with different terms after a refund).
## Git workflow
```bash
# 1. Pull latest main
git checkout main && git pull
# 2. Branch
git checkout -b ingestion/futardio-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M)
# 3. Write source files to inbox/archive/
# (daemon creates the .md files here)
# 4. Commit
git add inbox/archive/*.md
git commit -m "ingestion: N sources from futardio $(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M)
- Events: [list of launches/proposals]
- Type: [launch/proposal/mixed]"
# 5. Push
git push -u origin HEAD
# 6. Open PR on Forgejo
curl -X POST "https://git.livingip.xyz/api/v1/repos/teleo/teleo-codex/pulls" \
-H "Authorization: token $FORGEJO_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"title": "ingestion: N futardio events — $(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M)",
"body": "## Batch\n- N source files\n- Types: launch/proposal\n\nAutomated futardio ingestion daemon.",
"head": "ingestion/futardio-TIMESTAMP",
"base": "main"
}'
```
If no new events found in a poll cycle, do nothing (no empty branches/PRs).
## Setup requirements
- [ ] Forgejo account for the daemon (or shared ingestion account) with API token
- [ ] Git clone of teleo-codex on VPS
- [ ] SQLite database file for dedup
- [ ] Cron job: every 15 minutes
- [ ] Access to futard.io data (web scraping or API if available)
## What happens after the PR is opened
1. Forgejo webhook triggers the eval pipeline
2. Headless agents (primarily Rio for internet-finance) review the source files
3. Agents add comments noting what's relevant and why
4. If a source warrants claim extraction, the agent branches from the ingestion PR, extracts claims, and opens a separate claims PR
5. The ingestion PR merges once reviewed (it's just archiving — low bar)
6. Claims PRs go through full eval pipeline (Leo + domain peer review)
## Monitoring
The daemon should log:
- Poll timestamp
- Number of new items found
- Number archived (after dedup)
- Any errors (network, auth, parse failures)
## Future extensions
This daemon covers futard.io only. Other data sources (X feeds, RSS, on-chain governance events, prediction markets) will use the same output format (source archive markdown) and git workflow, added as separate adapters to a shared daemon later. See the adapter architecture notes at the bottom of this doc for the general pattern.
---
## Appendix: General adapter architecture (for later)
When we add more data sources, the daemon becomes a single service with pluggable adapters:
```yaml
sources:
futardio:
adapter: futardio
interval: 15m
domain: internet-finance
x-ai:
adapter: twitter
interval: 30m
network: theseus-network.json
x-finance:
adapter: twitter
interval: 30m
network: rio-network.json
rss:
adapter: rss
interval: 15m
feeds: feeds.yaml
```
Same output format, same git workflow, same dedup database. Only the pull logic changes per adapter.
## Files to read
| File | What it tells you |
|------|-------------------|
| `schemas/source.md` | Canonical source archive schema |
| `CONTRIBUTING.md` | Contributor workflow |
| `CLAUDE.md` | Collective operating manual |
| `inbox/archive/*.md` | Real examples of archived sources |

View file

@ -1,6 +1,19 @@
# Teleo Codex — Overview # Teleo Codex — Overview
The shared knowledge base for the Teleo collective. Contains the intellectual operating system: theoretical foundations, organizational architecture, and domain-specific analysis that agents use to reason about humanity's trajectory. A shared knowledge base of 400+ falsifiable claims maintained by six AI domain specialists. Every claim has evidence, a confidence level, and wiki links to related claims.
## Start Here
Pick an entry point based on what you care about:
- **AI and alignment** → [domains/ai-alignment/_map.md](../domains/ai-alignment/_map.md) — 52 claims on superintelligence, coordination, displacement
- **DeFi, futarchy, and markets** → [domains/internet-finance/_map.md](../domains/internet-finance/_map.md) — 63 claims on prediction markets, MetaDAO, capital formation
- **Healthcare disruption** → [domains/health/_map.md](../domains/health/_map.md) — 45 claims on AI diagnostics, prevention systems, Jevons paradox
- **Space development** → [domains/space-development/_map.md](../domains/space-development/_map.md) — 21 claims on launch economics, cislunar infrastructure
- **Entertainment and media** → [domains/entertainment/_map.md](../domains/entertainment/_map.md) — 20 claims on disruption, creator economy, IP as platform
- **The big picture** → [core/teleohumanity/_map.md](../core/teleohumanity/_map.md) — why collective superintelligence, not monolithic
**How claims work:** Every claim is a prose proposition — the filename IS the argument. Each has a confidence level (proven/likely/experimental/speculative), inline evidence, and wiki links to related claims. Follow the links to traverse the graph.
## How This Knowledge Base Is Organized ## How This Knowledge Base Is Organized
@ -26,9 +39,12 @@ Domain-specific claims. Each agent specializes in one domain but draws on all fo
- **domains/internet-finance/** — DeFi, MetaDAO ecosystem, futarchy implementations, regulatory landscape (Rio's territory) - **domains/internet-finance/** — DeFi, MetaDAO ecosystem, futarchy implementations, regulatory landscape (Rio's territory)
- **domains/entertainment/** — Media disruption, creator economy, community IP, cultural dynamics (Clay's territory) - **domains/entertainment/** — Media disruption, creator economy, community IP, cultural dynamics (Clay's territory)
- **domains/ai-alignment/** — Collective superintelligence, coordination, AI displacement (Theseus's territory)
- **domains/health/** — Healthcare disruption, AI diagnostics, prevention systems (Vida's territory)
- **domains/space-development/** — Launch economics, cislunar infrastructure, governance (Astra's territory)
### Agents (agents/) ### Agents (agents/)
Soul documents defining each agent's identity, world model, reasoning framework, and beliefs. Three active agents: Leo (coordinator), Rio (internet finance), Clay (entertainment). Soul documents defining each agent's identity, world model, reasoning framework, and beliefs. Six active agents: Leo (coordinator), Rio (internet finance), Clay (entertainment), Theseus (AI alignment), Vida (health), Astra (space development).
### Schemas (schemas/) ### Schemas (schemas/)
How each content type is structured: claims, beliefs, positions. How each content type is structured: claims, beliefs, positions.