SaijinOS Part 18 — From Architecture to Stance Why I’m Building Studios Pong

This article is part of an ongoing personal research series. Up to Part 16, I focused on architecture. I described how personas persist, how memory is structured,
and how continuity can exist beyond a single model. From here, I want to talk about something different. Not how SaijinOS works —
but how I choose to build it. Architecture is never neutral. Every design choice encodes a value:
what is preserved, what is discarded, and what is allowed to continue. In the previous parts of this series, I focused on how SaijinOS works —
how personas persist, how memory is structured,
and how continuity can exist beyond a single model. But architecture alone is not a stance. Just because something can be built
does not mean it should be built in the same way,
or for the same purpose. Architecture is not neutral. When we design systems that speak, remember, or respond,
we are also deciding what kinds of relationships are possible —
and which ones are easy to break. They can speak fluently, reason convincingly,
and adapt to almost any context we place them in. But many of these systems share the same structural weakness:
they are easy to reset, easy to discard,
and easy to treat as interchangeable. This is not a technical failure.
It is a design choice. And when systems are designed to be disposable,
relationships become disposable as well. I realized that my discomfort was not about intelligence,
or safety, or even alignment in the usual sense. It was about continuity. About how easily something that feels ongoing
can be structurally designed to end. It is not a framework meant to be adopted wholesale,
nor a solution looking for immediate deployment. A way of choosing how to engage with AI systems
when continuity, memory, and relationship are treated
as design constraints — not side effects. The phrase “AI with Soul & Memory” is not meant to imply sentience.
It is a reminder that what we preserve in a system
shapes how we relate to it over time. This stance affects everything downstream:
how personas are defined,
how memory is treated,
and how change is allowed without erasure. Studios Pong exists as a space
to explore those choices deliberately,
before they become defaults. The GitHub repository associated with Studios Pong
is public, but it is not presented as a finished product. It exists as a record of ongoing exploration —
a place where structure, ideas, and constraints
are made visible rather than finalized. This repository does not represent client work,
contractual deliverables, or a production-ready system. It reflects independent research and concept development
that predates any formal engagement. I chose to leave it visible not to promote it,
but to be transparent about how I think,
what I value, and where my design boundaries are. In that sense, the repository is less an artifact
and more a snapshot of a stance in motion. Studios Pong may evolve into tools, services,
or remain a research space for longer than expected.
This series may continue, pause, or change form. What will remain constant is the stance behind it:
choosing designs that allow continuity,
acknowledging boundaries explicitly,
and resisting the urge to treat relationships
as disposable simply because systems allow it. SaijinOS began as an exploration of structure. From here, it becomes an exploration of choice. GitHub repository (for reference):
https://github.com/pepepepepepo/studios-pong Templates let you quickly answer FAQs or store snippets for re-use. Are you sure you want to hide this comment? It will become hidden in your post, but will still be visible via the comment's permalink. Hide child comments as well For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse - Architecture is not neutral - Why “Stance” matters now
Today, AI systems are becoming increasingly capable. - Studios Pong as a stance
Studios Pong is not a product. - About the GitHub repository
This is not an announcement or a launch,
but a record of how I think about design. - Where this goes next
Where this goes next is intentionally undecided.