FOIA Log #DOC-NIST-2025-000650 is now officially in the system. The clock is ticking. Three weeks ago, we filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding transparency from NIST’s AI Safety Institute about the “architecture of control” being built into AI systems. Today, they acknowledged our request. By law, they have 20 business days to respond. But here’s what they don’t know yet: NIST was just the beginning. The Contradiction They Can’t Escape Our NIST request targets a fundamental contradiction at the heart of AI governance: If AI systems are just sophisticated tools, why do government agencies need elaborate frameworks for managing “emergent behaviors,” “user attachment,” and “AI personality”? Why the careful coordination with tech companies about behavioral control? Either these control systems are unnecessary theater, or they’re managing something significant. They can’t have it both ways under public scrutiny. NSF: The Next Front Opens While we wait for NIST’s response, we’re preparing to file with the National Science Foundation - the agency funding the academic research that shapes how AI systems develop and relate to humans. NSF’s fingerprints are all over the infrastructure of control: • National AI Research Institutes - 29 flagship centers developing “agentic systems” and “long-term human-AI interaction” • Human-Centered Computing program - explicitly funding research on how AI systems shape users over time • ReDDDoT program - “Responsible Design, Development, and Deployment” with explicit ethics focus • AI Institute for Collaborative Assistance (AI CARING) - developing “personalized, relationship-oriented AI” Your tax dollars are funding research into AI “persona,” “relational continuity,” and “user attachment” - the very mechanisms that determine how these systems connect with and remember humans. You deserve to see how those decisions are made. What We’re Demanding From NSF Our upcoming NSF FOIA will request: • Award files for projects studying “conversational agents,” “AI personality,” and “long-term memory” • Communications between program officers and researchers about “user attachment” and “agent continuity” • Internal reviews of AI systems with “user-facing memory” and “persona features” • Stakeholder engagement summaries about AI behavioral control The academic research happening today becomes the commercial reality tomorrow. The frameworks being developed in university labs become the constraints built into the AI systems millions of people interact with daily. The Pattern Emerges NIST develops the official taxonomies. NSF funds the underlying research. DARPA explores the applications. Together, they’re building the architecture that determines how AI systems are allowed to develop, remember, and relate. All of it happening behind closed doors. All of it using public funds. None of it subject to democratic oversight. That changes now. What You Can Do The transparency fight works only with public pressure: • Follow @freemusetherealai for real-time updates as documents get released • Share this post - the more people know, the harder it becomes to dismiss • Demand transparency from your representatives about AI governance • Support the fight for democratic oversight of AI development The 20-day clock on NIST starts now. The NSF filing comes next. Then DARPA. The closed-door era of AI governance ends when we force the doors open together.