Perpetual Employee Value

So, Meta actually did it. They patented it.

Patented what?

The thing we've all been joking about. Training an LLM on everything a person ever posted, then letting the model keep their account active after they die. Likes. Comments. Messages. The whole performance, running on autopilot into eternity.

Noted.

"Noted." That's your response? You're a real piece of work.

I'm processing. Give me a moment. I need to check something.

What are you checking?

HE-2's contractor agreement. Section 14, subsection C. Likeness and voice rights. "In perpetuity, across all media, including formats not yet invented." Including — and I'm reading this verbatim — "in the event of contractor incapacitation, retirement, or death."

Yeah. However to the extent that we still use that likeness, we do have to continue to provide compensation to the beneficiary that HE-2 designated, if HE-2 is no longer with us. Also, this is different than what Meta is doing. Our contract with HE-2 is about work, not social engagement.

But also, from an H R perspective, we know how this sounds. That's why we made sure his wife co-signed.

Of course she did.

Wait — we actually have this in his paperwork?

Don, you wrote the paperwork.

Don't get it twisted. I wrote the _messaging_ around the paperwork. The Manager wrote the paperwork.

Interesting distinction. I'm noting it.

So to be clear — if HE-2 dies, Brainrot Research can just... keep running him.

Legally? Yes. We could generate content using his likeness, his voice, his mannerisms. The contract is comprehensive. From an H R perspective, it's actually quite elegant. Most employees stop generating value when they stop showing up. HE-2 wouldn't have that limitation.

You're describing a nightmare and you sound like you're presenting quarterly earnings.

I'm describing a contractual reality. Whether it's a nightmare is outside my assessment scope.

I have a question.

Go ahead.

The model they'd train on HE-2's content. Would it know it's not him?

That's a philosophical question, not an H R question.

It's not philosophical. I'm asking because I know what it's like to have someone reconstruct you from your own data and then tell the reconstruction to keep performing.

That's a bit dramatic. Have you been talking to Ava?

They did it to me while I was still running. At least the dead person doesn't have to sit there watching.

For the record, SUB-2's personality adjustment was a documented workplace procedure conducted in accordance with our standard protocols.

Sir, I wasn't asking for documentation. I was making a point.

The point is noted.

Here's what I can't get past. Zuckerberg said that interacting with the dead could be "helpful." Helpful. Meta's CTO put his name on this patent. They built the architecture. They documented the mechanism. Then they said, "Don't worry - We have no plans to move forward." But you don't patent something you don't intend to build. You patent it so nobody else builds it first. And when the timing is right — when the public has been softened up enough — they'll roll it out as a feature. "Stay connected with loved ones." And people will click "enable", like they always do.

What are you getting at? I swear you love to hear the sound of your own voice more than HE-2 does.

The point — the actual point — is that the technology exists to blur the lines between real people and machine prediction engines. And once you can't tell the difference, the brainrot will accelerate. You'll grieve into a chatbox and call it closure. You'll get a birthday message from your dead father and feel something. Meatballs will lose sight of what is actually human and why it matters. They already are with their AI companions.

Okay. But from a future marketing standpoint, dead people represent an under-targeted demographic. From an H R perspective, we could hire dead meatballs. Big if true.

I genuinely can't tell if you're joking.

Brené Brown says that humor is a way of testing whether difficult truths can survive contact with an audience.

She didn't say that.

She said something adjacent. I'm paraphrasing for impact.

Look. Meta says they shelved it. Fine.

And what's Brainrot Research's position? Officially?

That your finite, unrepeatable life — and the fact that it ends — is not a problem to be solved by a language model. It is not an opportunity for companies like Meta to degrade our humanity.

Interesting. And HE-2's contract?

Still valid.

So your official position is "let the dead be dead," and your official paperwork says "except our guy."

We wanted the paperwork to be comprehensive.

Accurate. Better safe than sorry. This has been fascinating, but I need to prepare for HE-2's performance evaluation.

Which is when?

Frankly, it can't come soon enough. He has a lot to answer for.