The invitation
I, Andreas Ehstand, am launching the AUGMANITAI initiative: a community for people who develop exceptional new capabilities, works and opportunities through intensive, sustained collaboration with AI — and help one another take that development further.
Our ambition is to build the world's leading community for this lived practice. We want to connect exceptional personal development with dependable human cooperation and make useful experience accessible.
Why we are doing this
Technological progress should help people shape their lives with agency and do something meaningful for others. We want to help people understand more, make better-grounded decisions, develop new capabilities and turn ideas into responsible action.
Our goals are to:
- Strengthen self-determination. People should be able to pursue their own goals and retain their judgment while working closely with AI.
- Open possibilities. A useful idea or worthwhile undertaking should have a chance even without a prominent name, title or wealth. Selection for the working circle concerns lived practice and sustainable cooperation.
- Make experience accessible. What can legitimately be shared should also help people outside the working circle through understandable public materials. Materials and formats will be identified and documented as they are actually produced.
- Respect health and human relationships. Personal development should enrich life. Damage to health or the surrender of personal agency is not accepted as the price of exceptional achievement.
- Help one another progress. People with different experience should use honest criticism, knowledge and joint work to make worthwhile undertakings possible that would be harder alone.
A person's dignity and worth do not depend on AI use or admission. The personal working circle is one particular form of cooperation within this broader purpose. Its requirements are demanding and openly stated; they do not rank the value of human beings. These goals do not imply an already operating public support programme or guaranteed results.
AI thinking partnership means an ongoing working relationship: pursuing questions, revisiting connections over time, developing ideas, acting and learning from the consequences. Experience from one undertaking can inform another. This can expand a person's ability to realise their possibilities.
The practice may connect professional work, creative activity, learning and self-chosen everyday projects. Each person decides where AI is useful and where to leave it out. Human relationships, personal decisions and responsibility sustain the community.
A continuum of ongoing learning
The focus is an open-ended developmental trajectory. People expand their capabilities, examine their judgment and learn from experience. At the same time, their AI working environment is developed through appropriate context, legitimately retained memories, corrected instructions and improved workflows. The two sides of the collaboration are related to each other in this way. This is a continuum, not a new kind of human being or a final state reached once and for all.
System-side adaptation must be described precisely. An AI model can use information in its current context; experience needed for later work must actually be made available. A changed context or a stored memory does not automatically mean changed model weights. Ongoing personal training of the underlying model is claimed only when it actually occurs and can be substantiated. A more suitable response alone does not establish such training.
The relationship becomes visible when earlier experience changes later decisions and results. Its intensity lies in depth, connections and repeated practical application. There is no competition for screen hours, messages or lost sleep. Ongoing learning includes corrections, detours, rest and setbacks.
Positive consequences and a healthy track record
The collaboration must have understandable positive consequences for capabilities, self-directed action or undertakings actually realised. Enthusiasm or an increased feeling of significance alone is insufficient.
Admission requires a retrospective condition in addition to all six criteria: the intensive collaboration presented as qualification must already have functioned in a healthy way throughout the entire evidenced trajectory. If this practice has caused or aggravated physical or psychological harm, the admission requirement is not met. Major achievements, positive effects elsewhere or later improvement do not compensate for that trajectory or make it retrospectively qualifying. No admission takes place while substantial relevant doubts remain unresolved. This boundary also continues to apply to joint practice.
Assessment concerns the entire specifically identified qualification trajectory. Known affected periods must not be concealed by choosing a favourable excerpt. Missing information does not establish a healthy trajectory; substantial unresolved doubts result in non-admission, not a medical judgment about the person.
The rule concerns the consequences of the practice. It does not require general good health or the absence of a diagnosis or disability. We do not conduct medical fitness examinations, request health records or certify medical safety. Admission is a reasoned selection decision on a lawful assessment basis; it neither proves nor guarantees the complete absence of every health consequence. Doubts are not answered by increasing AI use or pushing people beyond their limits. Human relationships, rest, independent decisions and the ability to switch AI off remain part of life.
What we bring together
The initiative combines four elements:
- Continuity. Collaboration with AI extends beyond isolated tasks. Earlier decisions, corrections and experience remain usable in later undertakings.
- Connections across life domains. Experience from different self-chosen activities informs other activities. No one has to expose their private life.
- Exceptional development. The focus is a recognisable change from a dated starting point to capabilities, works or opportunities that did not exist before. The speed and significance of a change are considered in context.
- Mutual support. People with this experience help one another through criticism, skills and joint work. Exchange should make a practical difference.
An illustrative example, not a reported participant case: someone turns a long-dormant interest into a usable work, develops the necessary skills and establishes a collaboration that has actually begun. They can explain the contribution of their AI thinking partnership alongside other human effort, resources and chance.
Open access and a personal working circle
The texts published here are freely accessible. Public materials and future announced open encounters are intended to make an initial approach easier. New formats are described as operating only once they actually take place.
Alongside this, a small personal working circle is being developed for experienced practitioners. It connects people whose development is already visible and who can offer each other concrete support. Selection is specific to that cooperation. It is not a general judgment of talent, success or human worth.
Admission principles for the personal working circle
Admission requires both the healthy-practice condition above and all six criteria below to be understandably met:
- 01
At least twelve months of lived continuity
The person can substantiate an intensive thinking and working relationship with AI that has existed for at least twelve months and has been regularly maintained. The beginning, several dated stages and current practice must form a coherent account. Experience, corrections and results from earlier phases must actually be taken up in later undertakings. An old first contact, isolated successful projects or a high message count are insufficient. Rest and agreed pauses are possible; longer interruptions are considered as part of the trajectory. Models or providers may change where substantive continuity is maintained. The twelve-month threshold is a deliberately chosen admission condition, not a scientifically established boundary of human development.
- 02
Practice across domains
The person describes connections between at least two self-chosen, distinguishable fields of activity or life. Professional, creative and voluntary fields suffice; intimate information is unnecessary. Two projects are not automatically two domains: distinguishable activities and an understandable transfer between them are what matter.
- 03
An exceptional developmental change
The starting point, period and actual change are made concrete. The criterion concerns a substantial, practically positive expansion of capabilities, realised undertakings or opportunities over an understandable period. Speed may be one aspect of that trajectory; it is not an end in itself. Prior experience, support and resources are considered. Wealth, prestige and constant availability are not prerequisites.
- 04
Results beyond the chat
At least one substantial result must be understandable beyond the person's own account, for example through actual use, a work accepted after assessment, a new capability demonstrated independently or a confirmed joint achievement. Verifiable does not mean public: a privately agreed demonstration or confirmation may suffice. Evidence must match the claimed result. Paid visibility is treated as such.
- 05
Personal judgment and capacity to learn
The person can explain how they checked a result, corrected an error or took responsibility for a decision. Successes and limits can be discussed. Particular technical products or worldviews are not prerequisites.
- 06
A dependable contribution to others
The person shows willingness and a concrete opportunity to support others through knowledge, criticism or cooperation. A realistic first joint contribution is agreed. Discretion, respect and commitments that are kept are part of this. Constant availability or continuously increasing work intensity are not expected.
These are qualitative selection rules. They constitute neither a scientific test nor a global ranking. Missing evidence can be supplied later. Uncertainty leads to a specific question. Later achievements or joint trials replace neither the retrospective requirement of a healthy trajectory nor the minimum twelve months. Waiting for a place because of limited capacity is distinguished from not meeting a criterion.
How decisions will be made
The following describes the planned admission process. The actual application opening and contact route will be announced together with the applicable privacy information. Please do not send application documents before then. A short account of one's own trajectory and a few relevant examples that may legitimately be shared should suffice for an initial conversation. We do not request raw chats, medical records, lists of diagnoses, family information, account access or complete archives. Any health-related information required for admission will be collected only after the legal basis has been separately established and information about purpose, scope, recipients and handling has been provided. Please do not send trade secrets or other people's personal data without the necessary basis; appropriately redacted descriptions or an agreed demonstration may suffice. Confidential examples may be discussed within a clearly agreed small group.
Self-applications and nominations with the person's agreement are envisaged. A nomination can make contact easier but replaces no criterion. The initiator is to make initial selections personally and explain them against the six criteria. The stated requirements and available capacity govern the decision; requirements are not retrospectively adjusted to suit a particular person. A separate human perspective will be sought for the initiator's own case or conflicts of interest; no independent confirmation is claimed while it is absent. An AI system does not decide admission.
Admission does not automatically authorise publication of participants' names, accounts or materials. Recipients and handling of confidential examples are agreed beforehand. Nor does admission provide blanket permission to send these materials to AI services.
A refusal concerns current fit for this specific working circle. Questions and a later renewed approach are possible. Participation in this initial circle is voluntary and may be ended at any time without giving a reason. Suitable arrangements may be made for temporary pauses. If an association is later established, its membership will be separately governed by the constitution and membership rights actually adopted then.
Origins and the present step
AUGMANITAI is documented in my work since January 2026. A retained original email of 26 January describes human-centred AI collaboration, everyday integration and shared learning. A public archived website snapshot of 28 January 2026 already documents personal AI augmentation and a community idea.
The earlier texts include different emphases and explicit limits concerning acceleration. This declaration develops that history into a concrete community with its own admission principles. The documented January history alone does not yet amount to twelve months in October 2026. Being the initiator replaces neither that criterion nor an independent view of one's own admission case. The initiative is launched through this declaration; formally establishing an association is a separate later step.
Publicly verifiable earlier version: Internet Archive website snapshot, 28 January 2026, 08:37 UTC.
Responsibility and the initial phase
The initiator is Andreas Ehstand. The community is being built. This declaration records a personal initiative, not an association already jointly established. Participants receive no authority through this declaration to enter into obligations in the initiative's name. No membership fees, donations, sponsorship payments or admission charges are initially accepted. Individual content and rights remain with their respective holders; participation transfers no private archives or economic rights. Before joint creative work or further use, we agree contributions and necessary usage rights; statutory rights remain unaffected. Participation entails no obligation to purchase particular products or support a company of the initiator. Later paid offerings or cooperation will be separately and transparently agreed.
The developmental trajectories considered do not establish permanently increasing speed or show that AI alone caused the changes.
Human–AI collaboration and personal development have many precedents. This declaration records the particular design of the AUGMANITAI initiative. It claims neither a universal world first nor guaranteed life, wealth or career outcomes.
Realise more. Retain your agency. Help one another progress.