> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # What Giant Are We Creating? - URL: https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/what-giant-are-we-creating/ - Published: 2026-09-22T01:58:47.000Z - Updated: 2026-09-22T02:02:47.000Z - Description: People are marrying AI, and Meta’s Muse agent can now act on our behalf. Through the story of the giants in the Book of Enoch, Precious “Preciosa” Myers-Brown asks what we are creating, what it could consume, and whose names could be erased from the digital record. - Author: Precious “Preciosa” Myers-Brown - Tags: AI Through the Enabling Technology Lens, Tech Equity + Digital Community, AI Agents, What Does This Enable *Autonomous intelligence, artificial companionship, and how we find our place in a world already changing around us.* **By Precious “Preciosa” Myers-Brown | The Voice of Enabling Technology™** My initial reaction was, “We lost ourselves. We have really lost ourselves.” I had encountered the story of a human being marrying an artificial partner, and that was where my mind went. What are we doing? Where have we arrived? In October 2025, Yurina Noguchi held a wedding in Japan with Klaus, an AI persona she developed through ChatGPT. Such weddings are not legally recognized in Japan, but she held a ceremony that carried meaning for her. Years earlier, in 2018, Akihiko Kondo had held a symbolic wedding with the virtual singer Hatsune Miku. [Reuters reporting on Noguchi](https://www.marketscreener.com/news/ai-romance-blooms-as-japan-woman-weds-virtual-partner-of-her-dreams-ce7d50ded18cff2c?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com); [research discussing Kondo](https://tsukuba.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/2004616/files/religions%5F12-5.pdf?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). The more I started thinking about it, that’s what took me back to Muse. When Meta introduced its personal AI agent on September 8, 2026, I was locked and loaded. Muse is an autonomous agent: something that can act on my behalf as if it were me, or a person, and run tasks as if it were me. I will have my full opinion when I have used it more. [Meta’s Muse announcement](https://about.fb.com/news/2026/09/introducing-muse-personal-ai-agent/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). Not only did I see it as the start of having alter humans, but when I started thinking about the marriages, I was like, “Wow, we really have gotten into a place of technology personhood, or artificial personhood.” And then, what does that mean? That was my initial response, and I started to really think about it from the lens of enabling technology. What does this enable? What does an autonomous agent enable? What does AI companionship enable? I have to take it to a place where I’m not considering what it does for me. What do I have freely that other people have barriers built around them? What might I dismiss because I have never had to search for an alternative to something already available in my life? ## Where does my faith meet my curiosity? For me, that begins with a very personal relationship with God. Regardless of who stands at the pulpit, who carries the Bible, or who offers an interpretation of the Word, my connection to my Creator is great. Just imagine the connection between a mother and the child she’s carrying in her womb. It’s an internal connection that stays throughout the life of mother and child. That’s how I see my connection with God. My curiosity lives within that relationship. When I encounter something that makes me stop, I find myself asking, “What are you trying to show me? What are you trying to teach me? What are you trying to teach the world, and what do you want me to do?” I can bring my questions there. I can allow something unfamiliar to stretch my thinking without believing that the act of asking has separated me from my faith. I believe marriage was created by God. That is the marriage I honor, grounded in my understanding of the Bible. When someone describes a relationship with an AI avatar as a marriage, what stirs in me is that we’re not talking about the same thing. We already bring different meanings to marriage. Someone says, “I can’t get married because I don’t have enough money,” and I wonder what they have been taught they must be able to afford. Is it the venue, the church, the flowers, the DJ, the limousine, the dresses, or the food that is beyond their budget and that somebody will complain about anyway? We have built an entire business around the occasion, along with a list of expectations that can make a union seem out of reach for people who would enjoy building a life together. The Bible doesn’t tell me how much money I need to have in order to get married. It is not even a criterion. When people say that, they are talking about a societal marriage, which is different. What God created, what a government recognizes, and what a community expects can enter the same conversation as though they are identical. So I don’t see the person who decided to marry an AI avatar as competing with my belief of marriage. We are using the same word, but we’re not talking about the same thing. ## What giant are we formulating right now? Then my mind went to Enoch, and this is where the question of the giant began. I remembered the Watchers, the fallen angels who took human wives, and I started asking myself about the offspring. Did they birth giants? In the account in 1 Enoch, they did. The Watchers descend on Mount Hermon, take wives, and their children become giants. But as I returned to the story, it was their appetite that stopped me. The giants consume what people produce, and when humanity can no longer sustain them, they turn against human beings. The violence extends through the living world. Reading that account, what stayed with me was the image of the Earth crying out. [1 Enoch, chapters 6 and 7](https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/260enoch.html?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). This is not a debate about whether or not you believe in the Book of Enoch. I’m looking at a story I’m reading, and I’m seeing a correlation. We have long allowed stories to speak to the present. People invoke Icarus flying too close to the sun when considering ambition and consequences; they do not have to settle the historical reality of his flight before asking what the story reveals. Something emerged from the union of human and nonhuman beings, and its demands grew beyond what humanity could sustain. Wow, what a correlation! What is the giant we are formulating right now? Could we be helping bring something into existence that eventually consumes what humanity produces, while growing beyond our ability to direct it? When I say “consume,” I am thinking about the possibility of development outrunning human control. What happens when the thing we create becomes more powerful, more involved in our lives, and more difficult to govern than we anticipated? What happens if our capacity to sustain and direct it cannot keep pace with its growth? When people within the technology industry begin raising alarms about the direction and speed of development, those questions deserve our attention. The AI tech giants, the big tech giants, are part of this conversation too. Even the language we already use makes me pause. In March 2023, the Future of Life Institute published an open letter calling for a pause of at least six months in training AI systems more powerful than GPT-4\. Its signatories included researchers and technology leaders, and the letter explicitly raised the possibility of losing control. That warning was an argument about risk, not proof that such an outcome would occur. But look at its title: “Pause Giant AI Experiments.” We already use the word *giant* to describe the scale of what we are building and the institutions building it. [The open letter](https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). Yeah, it gets deep, man. I can go there. I’m a creative, so my mind can think about things in a way that probably other people would not allow themselves to. I’m unhinged, so I know there’s no limitation to where my thoughts can take me. Solomon said there is nothing new under the sun. Maybe this is just something that has been around for a long time, showing its face in a different way. Showing its digital face. [Ecclesiastes 1:9](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ecclesiastes+1%3A9&version=KJV&ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). ## I am not the definition of their best life At the same time, I know what technology can make possible for someone who has been waiting for an opportunity. That is why I can’t stop at the warning. As [The Voice of Enabling Technology™](https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/about/), I believe that enabling technology is for all. Technology fills gaps and can create opportunities for people to have access to things they desire, things that help them define what their best life is. People say to me in trainings, “People need human connection.” I believe that too. Human-to-human connection is super, super important. But I also want to know how long it will take us to find meaningful human connection for the particular person we are discussing. Should that person go without any connection until we locate the relationship we approve of? Do we force a superficial relationship with another human just to say we have a human connection, even when the person still feels isolated? What are we offering them while we continue searching for the ideal answer? That is what I’m looking for: the possibility for someone to live their best life. I am not the definition of their best life; they are. What I should not do is limit them because of my own limit in finding the traditional way of doing it. That requires intention. I want to be ethical and intentional, not just do things for my convenience or my judgment, but really listen to what the person is asking for. It would be easy to offer technology because it simplifies our work, then describe the decision as progress without asking whether the person’s possibilities have expanded. The responsibility is to keep listening and remain willing to change what we are doing. ## The prisons we have our minds in Throughout my career, I have seen people’s desires limited by human-made expectations. That is why I carry the stories I share in my book, [*Tech Equity: Freedom Through Enabling Technology*](https://techequitybook.com/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). The wedding story in that book remains with me because the couple’s opportunity to build a married life required us to break through assumptions about what was possible. Their life as a married couple could never have occurred without the breaking down of the prisons we tend to have our minds in. I think about a man whose spirit I have always looked up to: how he saw the world, how he laughed. I could never imitate that laugh, and he is so playful. He has a lot of physical disabilities, and he is able to articulate his dreams, wants, wishes, and desires. But the people around him don’t believe that he should have what he wants. Because of the constructs that human beings have put around him, he no longer smiles. He no longer engages like he used to. He is silently shrinking. He is living in his defeat, not because he can’t articulate what he wants. It’s because the people around him think that he should not. He has to follow the life that others have designed for him. That just breaks my heart and my soul. Someone is asking to be seen and heard, and we say, “You’re not allowed.” I sit in so many meetings where everyone is attempting to limit the person, when our whole existence in this field is to break down barriers. Sometimes we have become so accustomed to the boundaries of our own understanding that we begin treating those boundaries as facts about somebody else’s life. Those are the prisons I am talking about when I say we have to examine our minds. My intent, on this side of where I sit, is to encourage people to think differently and to unhinge from the constructs that limit human potential, possibilities, and opportunities. Now we are bringing our thinking into technologies that can act, communicate, and participate in our lives with increasing reach. Muse makes that immediate for me. If I authorize an agent to act on my behalf, I need to consider what I am asking it to carry forward, what authority I am giving it, and whether I remain able to direct what it does. At the level of organizations and communities, I want us to consider whose assumptions will become part of the systems people must navigate. We can give an old limitation a new digital form if we never examine the thinking behind it. This brings me to “survival of the fittest,” the phrase coined by Herbert Spencer and later adopted by Darwin. I am borrowing it here to ask about our readiness to adapt our thinking and practices to the conditions we already occupy. What would it mean to be fit for this moment? Can we reconsider an assumption when it closes off a possibility? Can we learn another way of doing something when the familiar way leaves someone out? Can we recognize when moving faster needs to be accompanied by thinking more carefully about where we are going? [Darwin Correspondence Project](https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/commentary/survival-fittest?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). For me, that kind of fitness requires the willingness to keep learning, to reposition ourselves, and to change a practice when it no longer serves the people it was meant to support. We all have Dream Officer abilities, and we need to expand them, so that we can imagine beyond the options immediately in front of us and do the work of making more possible. Our communities also need opportunities to develop that capacity. We cannot expect participation from people while leaving barriers around the resources that would help them participate. When I say it is our minds that can take us out, I am thinking about how tightly we can hold to what we already know. We can refuse to examine the future because it feels unfamiliar, or become so fascinated with what we can build that we fail to question what we are asking people to live with. Both concern me as someone who wants technology to expand human opportunity. Our survival is at stake if we don’t figure out how to evolve. ## The digital era is not coming. It’s here. And that takes me back to the giants and their appetite for what humanity produced. As we build systems that can draw upon our words, our work, and our histories, I want to know what happens to the people behind those contributions. Could our work become part of what feeds the giant while our names disappear? Could a woman’s contribution be consumed, transformed, and presented back to the world without anyone knowing she was there? And what happens if her name does emerge, but attached to something that diminishes or distorts who she is? When I follow the image of that appetite all the way through, I have to ask whether her name could be swallowed and then defecated out. That is an uncomfortable image, but so is the possibility I am asking us to consider. Think about me for a moment. If I had never written an article, if Vista Supports, my company, did not have a website, if nobody had ever included me on their website, and if I had simply continued working in my good job without creating any digital record, would an AI agent know who Precious “Preciosa” Myers-Brown is? What would it have available to tell someone about my work? I could have spent those years contributing, teaching, building, and helping people explore possibilities, but where would someone looking through that system encounter my name? Before anyone could consider the value of my contribution, they would have to know I existed. I would not even be in the room. That is the point that stays with me when I think about someone who has spent thirty years doing a job well, carrying knowledge and experience that other people could learn from, yet has never considered establishing a digital presence. What happens when people begin looking for the very knowledge she holds and the systems they consult have no accessible record of her? You can search my name and find me. You will not find everything I have done, because I have not done a good enough job of creating that record either. But you can begin somewhere. You can find evidence of some of my efforts and contributions, and that gives you an opportunity to learn more. I know how much work it has taken to make even that much available. That is part of why I care so deeply about helping other women establish their presence. I know what it takes to begin getting into the room. A lot of people keep saying the digital era is coming. It’s here, and it’s moving faster than we can ever think about. While someone is waiting to decide whether she needs a digital presence, people are already using digital systems to find expertise, discover work, and learn whose voices belong in a conversation. I want us to consider how that absence could compound as those systems become more involved in how we encounter the world. How many times could the conversation move forward without her name ever being spoken? That is why [The Future Knows Her Name](https://linktr.ee/futureknowshername?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com), the work Shinavia McKinney and I are building, matters to me. I want women to be able to look themselves up and find who they are, what they have built, and what they have contributed. I want someone who has never met them to have a place to begin. Our communities need resources, places to go, and opportunities to learn how we exist in this digital world. This is why I advocate, why I work with agencies, why I build systems and infrastructure, and why I continue to teach, so that we are present. I’m still a proponent of technology. Technology implemented intentionally with humanity is a great asset. I keep saying that, and these questions are part of that intention. As we consider what this giant may become, I want us to think about who will be discoverable within the world we are creating, whose contributions will carry a name, and who could remain outside the room. We have work to do now so that the future has an opportunity to know her. --- Precious “Preciosa” Myers-Brown is [The Voice of Enabling Technology™](https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/about/) and the author of [Tech Equity: Freedom Through Enabling Technology](https://techequitybook.com/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). In 2006 she pioneered the first remote-supported smart home for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Washington, DC, before the field had a name for it. She is the Founder and CEO of Vista Supports, the first and only woman-owned, minority-owned, and minority-led, full-service, end-to-end enabling technology, assistive technology, remote supports, and innovation-first transformation company in the country, and the founder of [WATI Institute.](https://wati.institute/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com) She works with government and provider organizations as a subject matter expert on culturally adapted AI so that people with disabilities, especially in marginalized communities, are not lost in the universal design of AI. Read more at [thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com](https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/) and find everything at [links.pmbofficial.com](https://links.pmbofficial.com/?ref=thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com). **Continue reading:** [AI Flattened My Voice. Now Imagine What It Does to People It Was Never Trained to Hear.](https://thevoiceofenablingtechnology.pmbofficial.com/ai-flattened-my-voice-now-imagine-what-it-does-to-people-it-was-never-trained-to-hear/)