The PST Framework · Looikos

0. The one-line

Every person you'd sell to or serve is stuck, to some degree, in a cycle of suffering inside their particular problem-story for the problem your solution addresses. PST models that world fully, names where they're stuck, and offers the transformation across to the cycle of growth. Problem → Story → Transformation.

The complexity feels infinite, but it's finite, and it's the same finite structure for a customer, the person who sits on your side of church, and the douchebag who cuts you off in traffic. They're all in the cycle of suffering; the only question is how.

1. Echolocation: model the world, do not light the wall

Demographics and psychographics are a lamp that lights only the patch of wall closest to it. PST pings instead. You send questions into the customer's whole world and reconstruct the room from what comes back, the way a bat builds a cave from echoes or an alien-grade submarine fuses many waveforms into one read of water it can't see.

Ping the whole ecosystem around the person. That means their economy, micro and macro; their customer's world (your buyer is someone else's seller), several layers deep on both sides; and the supply chain, the logistics, and the flow of money and blame.
Read it like an institutional M&A firm reads a target: the pain, the valuation, the entire cycle and ecosystem, where the leverage sits, what it costs to carry the problem and what it costs to fix it.
Hold it as a graph, then a metagraph. Echolocation produces relationships, which don't drop cleanly into rows. Model the customer's world as an n-dimensional structure (more vectors and perspectives than a human can visualize), rendered in 3D because that's the best we can do from inside three dimensions; the Metagraph of Looikos page covers the structure.

2. Problem: the cycle of suffering

The cycle of suffering is the loop most people walk, most of the time (roughly 95% of people, most of their lives). It runs as engineering data, not a moral failing:

Pain arrives (an injury, a trauma, a challenge).
A new fear gets installed in response. Fears are an investment, and most people run a terrible portfolio: invest too heavily in fears with no return and they chip away at identity.
The fear drives avoidance, which produces an unfavorable outcome.
The outcome produces shame (the belief that you're bad, not that you did a bad thing). Shame is unbearable, so it gets buried.
Denial / cope. Mask the shame: blame the government, the economy, the feminists, the patriarchy, all of them. The one move forbidden, the red line, is accountability, because accountability means turning around and facing the buried shame and admitting the fears you let in cost you control. People won't do it.
The refusal opens a blind spot / miscalculation, which produces the next disadvantageous action, response, or behavior.
That produces more pain (often self-inflicted), and the loop closes, usually compounding into deeper injury and lost valuation.

3. Story: how the belief structure was built

The "Story" is the belief structure the suffering loop runs on, and the chain that produces behavior:

Emotional experiences (repeated) → belief structures → actions / behaviors / responses → results → habits → personality → anchored in the pursuit of certain character traits.

Three readings of the chain carry the weight:

Actions, behaviors, and responses are the only things a person controls (barely), and they're the only route to different results. Everything downstream (habits, personality, character) follows from them.
The belief structure matters more than its origin, at first. Everyone wants to talk about where the belief came from, but the leverage starts with the structure, so understand it first (you do dive into origin later, and it gets intimate: the family's particular flavor of dysfunction, the cortisol-soaked childhood, the grooming that taught a child everything was their fault before they had the vocabulary to name it, the dawning question of who was actually the narcissist). That goes intimately deeper than any demographic.
The layer that gets skipped because it's uncomfortable: where they fucked up, the shame they hold, where their identity was internally altered in a way that hurts so they run from it (unworthiness is the canonical example). Cognitive biases live thick in here.

4. Transformation: the cycle of growth

The cycle of growth is the alternative to installing a new fear when pain hits. Its hinge is courage, the same separation point between destructive and constructive emotions that David Hawkins' scale of emotions marks. The sequence loops upward:

Truth. The courage to look for the truth, which is uncomfortable, can uproot relationships and beliefs, and is often more painful than the lie. It doesn't leap out like Santa looking for cookies; you have to go find it.
Responsibility. Take ownership of your reaction to everything that has happened to you (even what genuinely wasn't your fault). Your reaction is the one thing that is yours.
Healing. Healing is painful, the way a deep sports massage tears through the knots, or relearning to walk after spinal surgery over 12-18 months. Whether it's a spine, a heart, a grieving soul, a business hemorrhaging money, or a relationship that lost its spark, healing hurts, which is why it all starts with how a person processes pain.
Forgiveness. Here you apply the truth (ready vs willing vs able). Forgive yourself for the could-have / would-have / should-have; let go of the prior verdict; stop being judge, jury, and executioner over your existence; have the humility to learn from it. That opens your eyes to new truths, which loops back to responsibility and truth, the cycle turning upward this time.

Fewer than 10% of people spend considerable time in the constructive/post-growth emotions (about 5% there, 5% getting there). The operational consequence is that most content must focus on the negative emotions, because that's where most people are. Life is trench days out there.

5. The emotional substrate

The suffering loop and the growth cycle both run on emotion, so the framework needs a precise, shared model of the emotions themselves rather than a vague gesture at "feelings." The firm maintains an archive of 130-plus emotions broken down in excruciating detail inside the internal knowledge graph, and the reason it lives in the graph rather than in any one person's head is the same reason everything else does: every agent that retrieves from it inherits the identical understanding. A backend agent, a copywriter, and a QC agent all reason against one definition of shame, one definition of unworthiness, one definition of courage, instead of three private approximations that quietly diverge.

The organizing scale is David Hawkins' ontology of the emotions, the quantification of states across a single finite scale. The firm uses it descriptively, not metaphysically: the woo-woo around it is set aside, but as someone who works full-time in data visualization, I value it because a finite, ordered scale is what lets you build a model around otherwise-slippery concepts and render them. On that scale, courage is the load-bearing landmark. It's the separation point between the destructive band (shame, guilt, fear, the fuel of the suffering loop) and the constructive band (the territory of the growth cycle), which is why the entire transformation in section 4 hinges on it and on nothing else.

The payoff is in entity analysis. When our platform ingests a chunk of media, it pulls the facts, statistics, beliefs, and claims, and it also tags where each concept sits in the suffering-or-growth cycle and where it lands on the emotional scale. A piece of content, a customer transcript, or a competitor's one-star review can then be read for the emotional position it occupies and the direction it's pulling the reader, as well as for what it says. PST is built to act on that emotional vector, and demographics and psychographics throw it away.

6. How it is built (the technical realization)

PST works in practice only because this infrastructure makes the modeling cheap:

The metagraph (Goertzel's convergence of Navier-Stokes / Bellman / Schrödinger into a shared structure that enables a self-improving system at scale) holds the world-model; the Metagraph of Looikos page covers it.
Graphiti is the temporal (bi-temporal) database: facts, concepts, and topics carry validity windows, which is what "the time before you knew the truth vs after" requires. Each persona gets a full RPG-style profile (data points, attributes, properties) that stays dynamic and queryable.
Pydantic-as-IR (Scatter Model, "what happens when you apply too much weaponized autism to Pydantic") uses Pydantic models as the intermediate representation, so one typed model serves every backend.
Cheap open-source models carry the bulk modeling. My current example is MiniMax M3 (multimodal text+image, ~500k context, roughly Opus-4.7-grade, ~1/5 to 1/20 the price of SOTA, call it ~20% worse). For open-source you mostly need 128-256k context; 256k is phenomenal, and M3 offers ~500k. It's cheap enough to model the hell out of everything. (I gave the model name and specs out loud, so verify them at build time.)
3072-dim vector embeddings are the native lingua franca (text, image, and video all embed into the same space).
3D visualization in Three.js / Remotion (and shaders / WebGL when warranted) renders the n-dimensional model in the best form humans can navigate.
The agent harness, the setup that runs the AI agents, is just YAML, markdown, and JSON under the hood: descriptions, profiles, keywords, tags, relationships, SOPs, evaluation loops, observability, durability/CI.
The meme / humor system (a worked example): robots are bad at humor but brilliant at logic, and a joke broken down to its logic plus a healthy world-model can be reverse-engineered (autistic humor, good enough). The system ingests 20-30 currently viral memes a week, an agent researches each one and writes a report anchoring it to emotions, situations, history, lore, core entities, and timelines in Graphiti, and then the system recreates the meme in-brand. The result is logical and grounded in the creative.

7. Application (why it is devastating, and the stance)

PST is built into WikiDesignCo (the platform that lets us apply it from our side with almost no additional effort) and surfaced through brands like ContentFactory (video advertising and cinematography via Higgsfield as the creative studio, Claude Code interacting over MCP, an insight/reference-image platform, evaluation loops, the agent harnesses, observability and tracking, durability/CI pipelines, known costs). That infrastructure makes every asset relatively simple to customize for a specific person's specific problem: every animation, joke, headline, introduction, call to action, ambient landing-page background, dashboard, slide and pitch deck, customer-service response, and technical tutorial.

The stance is engineer, not visionary-fuck-off: no selling empty ideas for real money. Design the schematics, build the thing, ground every claim. PST converts as hard as it does for two reasons: it reaches layers that demographics and psychographics never see, and that depth is now cheap to operationalize.

8. How to apply PST to each asset breakdown

For every brand and every one of its 5+ personas, run these five steps:

Echolocate the world (ecosystem, M&A read, the metagraph slice).
Locate the Problem (which station of the cycle of suffering they're stuck at, and the fear portfolio driving it).
Reconstruct the Story (the belief structure and the emotional-experience chain that built it, then the origin, including the uncomfortable shame/identity layer).
Design the Transformation (the courage-truth-responsibility-healing-forgiveness path the asset walks them across, calibrated as a crossable bridge, not a mugging, per Echolocation).
Bias the content to the negative emotions where most of the audience actually lives, while showing the growth cycle as the other side.

Related reading: the Echolocation essay (PST in my voice), the Metagraph of Looikos, the ecosystem overview with its audience discipline and three-angle model, the 130-emotions knowledge graph, and the Hawkins ontology used descriptively.