The Many-Body Problem of the Data Centre

Breakthroughs in large language models and multimodal generation technologies have propelled the digital reconstruction of human mental traits, emotional patterns, and long-term memory from science fiction toward engineering practice. Yet current research and industry practices at the intersection of AI and digital humans remain hampered by fundamental conceptual ambiguities: the essential differences between next-generation intelligent agents and traditional virtual humans, the construction pathways for digital entities possessing self-identity, and the core technical and ethical challenges confronting this domain all demand urgent clarification. This paper systematically examines the transformative logic underlying the transition from traditional virtual humans to the Soul Computing'' paradigm, driven by frontier AI technologies. We first analyze the evolutionary patterns of human consciousness and memory mechanisms, reassessing the core value of massive multimodal digital fragments in the reverse reconstruction of individual mental worlds. On this basis, we formally delineate the academic connotations of narrow and broad Soul Computing for the first time, clarifying its academic boundaries and essential distinctions from Affective Computing, Historical Reconstruction, and Mortal Computation. We argue that Soul Computing systems must architecturally construct an Intensional'' core rather than serving as purely ``Extensional'' functional carriers, thereby enabling the fundamental transition of AI from toolhood to living agency.

We argue that AI-saturated markets are likely to create Veblen-good premiums, which we term human-provenance premiums, for verified human presence, and hence AI governance should treat human-provenance verification as labor infrastructure. Generative and agentic AI systems lower the cost of many standardized cognitive, creative, and coordination tasks, weakening the scarcity premiums that have supported much middle-tier knowledge work. We argue that this pressure may produce an asymmetric barbell-shaped structure of value capture in advanced economies: high-volume synthetic production controlled by owners of AI infrastructure at one pole, and scarce, high-status human labor valued for verified human presence at the other. We advance three claims. First, AI compresses the value of standardized middle-tier labor by making good-enough synthetic substitutes scalable at low marginal cost, hollowing out the middle of the skill distribution currently categorized by knowledge work. Second, this compression reallocates demand for human labor toward work valued for its visible human character. We term this performative humanity and distinguish three forms of labor: relational presence, aesthetic provenance, and accountability. Third, as these premiums depend on credible verification, AI governance should treat human-provenance systems as labor infrastructure rather than as luxury authenticity labels. To evaluate hybrid human-AI work, we propose constitutive human presence as the relevant standard: human labor retains premium value when human judgment, attention, accountability, authorship, or relational participation is not incidental to the output but constitutive of what is being purchased.

The life sciences and health research have started to benefit from artificial intelligence, which raises ethical concerns that are real but, we argue, not special. Any science should be governed by values that rest on how the human brain is built and socialised rather than anything distinct to artificial intelligence. Importantly, the human brain has a different, much less costly computational architecture than these machines. This is achieved through the orchestration of a global neuronal workspace, and through reward best described not as a quantity to be maximised but as a continuous cycle of wanting, liking and satiety. As such, this creates the deep tension running through the ethics of the human person, between the universality of ethical judgement and the diversity of morals. The brain networks of the global workspace and emotion are universally shared, but the diversity of content is shaped by epigenetic appropriation of the particulars of the physical, social and cultural world, which makes every person unique. Still, if we were to build machines on these principles rather than the present unaffordable reward maximisers, the question of their governance would change from restraint to upbringing. We set out the institutions such a future would require, together with the questions that remain open.