An open research prototype
Use a six-step method to examine your control over an information practice and the exposure it can create.
One line rises. Then it branches.
A diagram of the split itself.
Choose an information practice of your own. Work through six steps, in order, and keep a record of what you can and cannot establish.
You may stop at any step. Recording is optional. A stopped run cannot support claims about steps nobody completed.
One run holds two kinds of knowing. Attend works at the sense door, where awareness of your own attention and body can become insight. Read and Trace work on the system, up the ladder from data toward wisdom. The digital and embodied parts of a life are integrating, and the seam between them is what the two tracks are there to show. Why two tracks
Read the full methodName who the practice affects. Record what evidence exists, and one result that would count against the method.
Before a testRun the practice frame before assigning a condition to the system. These are prompts for self-observation, never scores or labels for other people. Attend belongs to the person; a model cannot perform it.
Open the practice frameAsk whether the material is understandable, reachable, adaptable, and traceable. Name the unit, set, denominator, and time window before counting. Keep the four measures separate.
Open the access scorecardTrace information from each contributor to where it accumulates. Read consent, attribution, and value return separately. Do not average the bands or produce a combined score.
Open the extraction checkRecord the baseline, the change, the intended benefit, a plausible new harm, the consent the change requires, the observation window, and a review date. Observe the cost as well as the result.
Read the adaptation guidanceRecord what happened, including disagreement or an unmeasurable result. Private learning and refusal may end without a public report. Only cleared reports enter the public ledger. One reply from the maintainer is there for the asking, at no cost.
Open the field-test templatePureLand has one maintainer-side, AI-assisted partial dry run and no independent field trial. The current evidence does not show that the method works.
The instruments have no reliability or validity result. Missing evidence stays unmeasurable.
Read the full evidence recordThe assessor examined seven public surfaces, recorded separate access and reciprocity readings, and found a tension between traceability and intentional deletion. One adaptation was executed; follow-up remains open.
FT-001 cannot separate the method's effect from familiarity, time spent, or the extraction check alone.
You can keep your learning private. A public report requires its own rights and consent decisions.
Try it privately. Keep nothing. One pass through the same six steps, at the smallest size that still asks the questions. No worksheet, no record, nothing to submit. Start here if you want to know what the method asks of you before deciding whether to record anything.
Read the private pathUse a worksheet for the six steps, with links to each instrument. Begin with your own practice and keep the result at the scale the evidence supports.
Open the self-guided packetExamine your own use of language models with the bounded model-use packet. The model asks questions in step order. Attend stays yours.
Open the model-use packetWork with Isaac through a Field Pilot. The offering is the one description of the pilot and its terms.
Read the pilot termsRead the argument, then follow the inquiry into its evidence. Each document has one job. GitHub holds the canonical record and its revision history.
Isaac Rubinstein maintains the project and holds merge and release authority. That concentration remains a project risk.
Explore the repositoryThe synthesis draws on Buddhist practice, evaluation, body-based practice, technology theory, and information systems theory. Its mappings are original synthesis, not Buddhist doctrine, clinical categories, or validated measures. The name establishes no lineage relationship to Pure Land Buddhist traditions. Read the thesis and the provenance record.
The repository contains methods, templates, and public-safe records. Participant material stays outside it. Recording, retention, reviewer access, publication, research use, AI processing, and model training require separate decisions.
A repository license does not grant participant permission. Withdrawal may stop future uses the project controls; it may not retrieve copies already distributed.
Read the rights and consent guide