Marius Schober

  • NOW

    The future is an illusion. Just as is the past.

    There is only now.

    Everything that is truly meaningful is happening now.

    You shape the future by your actions now, by your thoughts now, by your love now.

    Any moment is the future.

    There is only now.

  • Creativity and Commoditization

    Most products and technologies became commoditized. I believe this is mostly due to a lack of creativity.

    When was the last time you saw a product that totally caught you off-guard in absolute amazement?

    Nobody dares to create something uniquely NEW.
    Commoditization happens because everyone is just focused on incremental improvements, calling it proudly innovation. It is a delusion.

    Creativity is not listening to customers. It is creating something completely new that your future customers don’t even know can even exist. It is possible in your imagination but impossible in their imagination.

    Vision, creativity, intuition.

    I 100% believe that listening to customers is a trap that leads to mediocrity. True innovation comes from ignoring the noise of customer feedback and daring to invent what they can’t yet imagine – yes, it’s risky, but the only way to avoid competition.

  • Meritocracy Without Balance

    Meritocracy without equality is basically a ladder with missing steps, which only the fortunate few can climb. The rest is basically left at the ground to gaze up.

    Furthermore, a pure focus on meritocracy can become a weakness if it’s a zero-sum game. While talents thrive in systems that value it, without fairness, you ultimately get exploitation, resentment, or fragility.

    Ergo: meritocracy needs to be balanced with equality, and equality needs to be balanced with meritocracy.

    In a meritocratic system, you basically need that the fortunate and the able are compassionate towards those less fortunate and able.

    If you are more on the libertarian side, you need the fortunate individuals to compete as capitalists and then be socialists within their communities and families.

    If you prefer a state, then the state must encourage meritocratic contribution of everyone that is able, to the best of their ability, while balancing it with a fair welfare system that nurtures and supports those less able and fortunate.

    I think this is something Germany did historically quite well, but at one point we lost the balance: we lost the culture of merit by putting too much emphasis on equality – even to a point that Germany now cares for millions of non-citizens that never contributed, when it should instead demand these individuals to contribute to the best of their ability.

    If we want to have a state, then we don’t want a welfare state, and – I think – we should also not want a pure capitalistic state. We need balance and thus a social meritocracy.

  • Trump Tariffs

    I don’t believe that Trump uses the current tariffs as a negotiation leverage – at least not across the board.

    The U.S. will not go back to 0% or < 10% tariffs, because Republicans (JD Vance) will with absolute certainty lose re-election.

    Trump promised to revive the Rust Belt, which are the swing states. He can only “save” them through tariffs against China and all current and future China alternatives.

    Some regions, and I’d include the EU, UK, Argentina, Australia, New Zealand here, now have the unique chance to negotiate towards free trade or at least a friendly ≤ 10% tariff.

    Yet, speaking of the EU, I think they are mostly too arrogant or stupid to do so. 10% seems to be the new base anyhow.

    The relevant question is how the EU will respond.

    Currently, it looks that the EU is looking for sovereignty. This could mean new entry barriers for US technology products. Perhaps even a straight out ban of key technologies like Palantir to replicate local key players.

    This in turn is the ultimate and biggest threat to the USA. A world that is shifting away from US technology will erode the vital pillar that is currently keeping the US dollar alive.

  • Corporate AI vs. Visionary People

    BCG says that 83% of firms prioritize innovation, but only 3% feel able to execute.

    I ask: what’s the bigger flaw: overestimating corporate AI or underinvesting in people?

    Probably both.

    I see a trend where AI is seen as the cure-all.

    Instead of investing in visionary and creative leaders plus the engineers to execute, companies invest in AI gimmicks whose ROI is (for now) mostly in efficiency – not real innovation.

    Everyone – at this point – basically pretends it will lead to proprietary innovation.

    At the same time, the innovation companies end up running after, are the innovations that AI tells them to – and because AI is commoditizing logic, it simultaneously commoditizes innovation.

    Congratulations: You end up in a red ocean instead of blue ocean.

    Therefore, innovation becomes competition, and is not innovation anymore.

    The biggest mistake companies can make today is investing all in AI and not investing in the human genius of their workforce: visionary leadership, their collective intuitive intelligence, Human-AI-Symbiosis

  • Decentralization versus Authoritarianism

    Erdoğan’s calculated elimination of Imamoglu through academic technicalities and alleged ties to PKK is not really an isolated Turkish case but an example of democracy’s global collapse.

    Yesterday, Germany rushed constitutional changes without proper scrutiny and with a majority that was already voted out of office, Romania disqualifies candidates on procedural grounds. The list goes on: Hungary under Viktor Orbán, Serbia under Aleksandar Vučić, Israel under Netanyahu, Poland under the Law and Justice party – the democratic backsliding transcends regions and political systems. 72% of humanity now lives under authoritarian control.

    There is a new playbook: weaponize legal institutions against opponents, manufacture legitimacy through procedural theater, and dismantle democratic safeguards while maintaining the illusion of constitutionality.

    We’re witnessing not democracy’s dramatic assassination but its methodical strangulation through bureaucratic manipulation. This erosion isn’t coincidental but the inevitable outcome of centralized power structures that invariably corrupt even well-designed systems.

    I believe that our only viable path forward lies in radical decentralization: distributing governance to local communities, financial sovereignty through crypto networks, and communication via censorship-resistant platforms that no single entity controls.

    Decentralized systems restore human dignity by establishing unbreakable cryptographic guarantees rather than depending on the hollow promises of centralized authorities, career politicians, and unelected bureaucrats .

    The future belongs to networked individuals collaborating voluntarily through systems designed with liberty as their foundation. Decentralized and globally networked societies are antifragile societies that unleash innovation by enabling thousands of concurrent experiments instead of single-point failures.

    Only decentralization can safeguard freedom in an increasingly authoritarian world.

  • Why the EU and U.S. Might Collapse

    The Qing Dynasty, Ottoman Empire, and Rome were all civilizations stuck in a grim loop.

    Decline hit first: overstretch, corruption, and enemies pile up quietly.

    Then comes nostalgia: past glories are hyped up – Confucian order, Suleiman’s peak, Roman strength – as a hope to be a fix for the now.

    Next, technology-hype steps in: Western tools for Qing, reforms for Ottomans, Christianity for Rome – all fueled short-lived dreams of a turnaround.

    But the cracks stay, and it all fell apart.

    Today, the U.S. bets on AI and reshoring while chasing “greatness.”
    The EU pushes green tech, a military buildup and is dreaming of a greater federation.
    Also Russia – stuck in deep nostalgia of long-gone Soviet might – is betting on military tech, but seems to be already in decline’s later stages, struggling against isolation and internal decay.

    Can they escape the inevitable? Well, let’s try to predict the future.

    The Qing, Ottoman, and Rome empires crashed the same way.
    Russia’s dying population and oil addiction could break it apart, with Siberia becoming independent, falling under the wing of a more stable neighbor: China.
    The EU’s bickering and nationalist mess might split it into weak blocs, forgetting unity, like the Ottomans did.
    The US, stuck in political fights and inequality, could lose control and states might go rogue like Rome’s endgame.

    They are all chasing old nostalgia and shiny tech, ignoring the rot.

    DOGE is the only effort to remove the rot.

    If DOGE fails or brings polarization to a breaking point, the U.S. federal government will fail, leaving behind the states.

    Russia will be left as a small state surrounding Moscow and Siberia as a larger and resource rich state.

    What about the EU?

    We could see a “Hanseatic 2.0” (Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Baltics, Scandinavia – potentially including former Russia’s St. Petersburg) prioritizing economic power. A “Latin Axis” (Portugal, Spain, Italy) might strengthen ties with Latin America, forging a Neo-Romanesque sphere. Central Europe could come together around a Visegrád Plus, with a focus on national sovereignty. Meanwhile, the Balkans would remain a volatile periphery, vulnerable to external influence – particularly a strong Türkiye.

  • Remote Viewing: Deutsche Bundestagswahl

    Without a lot of preparation I tried my very first remote viewing with the German election as a target.

    Below is a scanned version of my remote viewing session with a summary and possible interpretation of what I foresaw.

    Remote Viewing Bundestagswahl 20250223_20250222-1104Download

    1. The Remote Viewing Session

    I became interested in remote viewing and during my research I found a simple remote viewing template on RemoteViewed.com. I decided to just follow the instruction and do my first session to see where it leads me.

    The Ideogram

    In the ideogram (page 1) I felt chaos. My reflexive drawing showed a lot of zig-zag and noise.

    Sensory Impressions

    • Sounds: loud, noise
    • Textures: stiff
    • Temperature: hot
    • Colours: red, orange
    • Luminescence: bright
    • Smells: rotton, sweat
    • Tastes: milky
    • Dimensions: large, bold
    • Aesthetic Impact: chaotic, no structure

    Sketching

    1. My sketch started with the chaos and noise that I already drew in the Ideogram on page one. A swirling, noisy mass possibly symbolizing the raw, unfiltered political turbulence and uncertainty surrnounding the election
    2. I then overlaid, bolder, distinct layers below the chaos, possibly representing the various political parties, each emerging from the chaos. These layers may be the established and emerging parties.
    3. After that, I reflexively drew a diagram that weaves through and connects the layers. One or two layers/parties were below the x axis, possibly indicating not making it into the Bundestag. Three layers/parties are above the x axis, where they meet the chaos/noise
    4. The diagram seems to bring order into the chaos. It brings or suggests connections, relationships, realignments, interactions among the layers/parties and the chaos.

    In summary, the sketch captures a transition from a state of disorder to one where clear, dynamic structures/alliances begin to take shape amid political upheaveal.

    Summary

    The Chaotic Foundation

    The sketch begins as a swirling, noisy mass, representing the raw political turbulence and uncertainty permeating the election night. Maybe, this chaos symbolizes the initial flood of emotions, unfiltered voter sentiment, the unexepcted shocks that will accompany the unfolding vote counts on Sunday night.

    The intense, noisy chaos forsees the election night as a period of upheaval. As the votes come in, there will be a surge of raw energy. A mix of elation, shock, even protest while the voters’ deep-seated dissatisfaction and desire for change manifest in real time.

    Emergence of Distinct Layers

    Over the chaotic backdrop, I overlaid bold, distinct layers most likely representing the various political parties. These could be established forces (Union, SPD, and others) and emerging parties. The positioning below the initial chaos suggest that they are attempting to extract order and meaning from the turbulent environment, each vying to define its identity and appeal to a shifting electorate.

    The Reflexive Diagram

    The subsequent diagram, with clear x- and y-axis interlinks these layer, and is a critical element.

    • Below the x-axis: One or two layers indicate that at least one party will not make it into the Bundestag, another party is starting above the x-axis, yet falls below it as x increases. This party may start in the first extraploitation > 5%, yet as the night progresses, falls below the 5% and not make it. Or it might mean this party very barely secure the 5%.
    • Above the x-axis: three key layers are visible. Yet only two of these layers are bolder than the third; possibly meaning that only two parties have the majorities to form a coalition. These three layers directly interface with the chaotic environment of the vote.
    • The diagram suggests that relationships between the parties exist and possibly allow a realignment – meaning even amid the chaos, there is an emergent order

    The diagram division is telling. One or two parties will fall short (symbolized by layer below the x-axis), two major forces will emerge as decisive parties; meaning that only two parties gain enough public mandate to engage in serious coalition negotiations. One third force is above the x-axis, yet declining, which might represent an established polticial forces that loses ground (like SPD or Greens). This paves the wave for an unexpected, transformative coalition – possibly including elements from parties previously sidelined (like AFD).

    The reflexive diagram suggests that the chaotic energy isn’t random but a structure emerging within it. This structure may be a new coalition, realignment, and relationships among parties. The choatic energy is channeled into forging connections that, though unorthodox, are robust enough to redefine the government’s foundation.

    The overall impression is one of radical transformation. Traditional alliances crumble, and a new, dynamic order takes shape. This could include unexpected partnerships (like the AFD gaining leverage) and the entry of emergent forces that upend conventional politics. The emering light in my sensory sketch might be the embodiment of a new political mandate born from the voter’s desire to break with the past.

    2. Interpretation

    My remote viewing session describes the current political moment, where chaos and transformation coalesce into a dynamic vision of change.

    The initial ideogram conveys a landscape dominated by raw, unfiltered turbulence: a swirling, noisy mess rendered in bold reds and oranges that represent both passion and danger.

    The chaotic canvas, felt with a sensation of intense heat, stiffness, and an overwhelming sound of clamor, represents the charged atmosphere permeating the election night.

    The environment feels almost tangible: a hot, bright, and palpable space imbued with the odors of decay and sweat, suggesting that the old order is rotting ander pressure even as something new stirs to life.

    Overlaying this turbulent backdrop, my sketch introduces distinct, bold layers that represent the various political parties emerging from this maelstrom. These layers looked random at first, but were drawn below an – yet – invisible threshold – the x-axis – hinting at parties that might fail to reach the Bundestag.

    Conversely, three prominent layers rise above this line, symbolizing those factions robust enough to engage directly with the prevailing chaos and claim their place in the new order.

    The reflexive diagram weaves through these layers, hinting at emergent connections and realignments, suggesting that even amid the cacophony of dissent and uncertainty, there is a nascent structure forming.

    The network of lines implies that the political turbulence is not merely disorganized noise, but a transformative energy that is actively reordering alliances and carving out a new government landscape.

    My sensor impressions – loud, jarring sounds; a stiff, unyielding texture; intense heat, bright luminescence; and even the contrasting tastes and smells, enrich this narrative. They signify that this is a time of both decay and birth, where the old, rigid, structures are disintegrating, making space for a reimagined, more fluid political order.

    3. Foresight

    My remote viewing suggests:

    • We will see a dramatic and decisive political turning point
    • Initial chaos on election night – marked by intense public emotion, surging media noise
    • The established political order is forcibly redefined
    • Traditional power coalitions are losing their grip, unable to contain the torrent of public discontent, they fracture under the pressure
    • We will see an unexpected coalition of forces, one that defies conventional political taboos (possibly a CDU + AFD coalition)
    • One or two parties are unable to cross the critical threshold. It will look as if one party crossed the 5%, while during the election night they will fall below it.
    • There will be three parties prominently above the threshold
    • One potent new political party might surprisingly secure 10% of the vote
    • A new coalition will be formed that radically reorders the established dynamics; this might be an unexpected and cross-ideological alliance
    • For the AfD, the traditional “no-go” rules (such as the exclusion of the AfD from governing coalitions) may be overthrown by the force of public demand and unprecedented realignment
    • If the CDU prove unable to form a stable alliance, there is a possibility that even the AfD could be drawn into a coalition
    • The new coalition will be dynamic and willing to break with tradition, implementing bold policies that reflect the voter’s deep desire for systemic change
    • On Sunday night, we will birth a new political order, reshaping German governeance in a way that is revolutionary and pragmatic.
    • The public will react strongly – both in celebration and protest
    • The outcome might not replace the current government, but

    My intuitive interpretation:

    • The CDU/CSU will struggle to create a coalition and the AfD will enter the negotiation table.
    • If the CDU/CSU will not allow this, we will either see new elections or the CDU/CSU will enter a coalition that not only harms them but ultimately falters
    • The AfD will surprisingly enter the negotiation table, if it will not happen after this election, they will emerge even stronger in a new election making it impossible to govern without their participation
    • My remote viewing sees a new, unrecognized or marginal party break through the electral threshold with approximately 10% of the vote – based on current dynamics, this might be the Linke or BSW. If this is true, and we assume one of them reaches 10% and the other 5%, it will certainly mean the SPD will lose voters and come out at 12 or 13%.
    • From my remote viewing, I’d say that the FDP will not make it above 5%.
    • Furthermore, the AFD will likely surprise with a much stronger performance than predicted (possibly at 25%)
    • Both, a stronger far-left and a stronger right (AfD) will mean the conventional parties will come out worse than predicted in polls. The FDP and CDU will lose voters to AfD, while the SPD and Grüne lose voters to the Linke and BSW.
    • Based on my remote viewing and considering current polls, this might be a possible outcome:
      • SPD: 12%
      • Union: 29%
      • Grüne: 11%
      • FDP: < 4%
      • Linke or BSW: one will reach 10%, the other 5%
      • AfD: 29%

    Closing Words

    This was a fun exercise and my very first remote viewing session and interpetation. It will be fun to see how true or false it will turn out to be!

  • The Era of Information Overload

    One of the biggest problems of humanity is information overload.

    Think about how we used to get information just 50 years ago. We had to deliberately search for them.

    We had to engage in conversations, go to the library or bookshop to search relevant books or buy a newspaper.

    The internet gave birth to niche forums, and we got search engines which allowed us to find blogs and articles.

    Until social media arrived, it was a careful quest for information.

    Social media turned it around. Instead of searching for information, we now get bombarded with news, ideas, opinions – from anyone around the world, nonstop 24/7.

    With ChatGPT, we got a tool that not only bombarded us with human created information, we can now basically create our own information, endlessly.

    The worst: People now flood the internet and social platforms with content they didn’t even write themselves.

    What does this mean?

    It is now easier and cheaper than ever to access information. Which is great!

    But it is harder than ever to focus on what really matters to us.

    The now endless stream of information siphons our energy, distracting us from the intentional paths we truly wish to pursue.

    I think the best way to consume information consciously is to first have a clear picture of what we want to understand and know, and then to dedicate time for deep-reading and deep-writing.

    That means, not only searching for quick information on what truly interests you – but choosing one subject to study, research, and then write your own essay on it.

    Whether you publish that essay or not is irrelevant.

    Merely writing it keeps your thinking-ability alive.

    The important thing is to do it consciously.

    Use AI only as a research partner – not a ghostwriter.

    Pick what you want to master. Then dedicate time to actually master it – not only consume endless information on whatever the world decides is important now.

  • Emerging from Limitations

    I think we have an incomplete and false understanding of reality. Because of that, we are moving inside a tiny fraction of endless possibilities.

    An AGI system based on previous and current knowledge can only exploit what is possible within that tiny fraction. The missing link seems to be our mystical, uniquely human ability of intuition, which allows highly conscious humans to access knowledge outside our current fraction of possibilities – creating something (ideas, inventions, theories) entirely new, that has never been done before.

    Based on how AI systems are built, I expect them to create meaningful advancements within our current frame of understanding; but compared to what is actually possible, these will stay miniscule.

    To access what seems impossible, we shouldn’t look for logic and intellect. We should aim to understand consciousness; i.e., study Yogis, understand DMT, make sense of Psilocybin.

    Only by heightening our consciousness – and intuition seems to be the highest form of it – will we be able to emerge from current limitations. Because in the end, there are no limitations.