Browse Comments — Raw (as collected)
Close reading of the corpus at each pipeline stage: raw → clean → relevant → coded.
43
comments matched
· page 2 of 3
The EdTech point 👏🏾 If the systems being deployed in learning environments carry the values and blind spots of their creators, then the question is not just what AI teaches but who is equipped to critically mediate it.
That falls on educators and managers. And most of them have not been prepared for that responsibility. We talk a lot about AI governance at the policy and platform level. We talk very little about governance at the human layer, the people who sit between the algorithm and the learner, or between the algorithm and the employee.
Quiet credibility is exactly right. And it has to be built at every level of an organization, not just at the top.
Paulina Krukowska
Your leniency towards an organisation that has committed crimes against humanity ever since its existence began might be appreciated by fellow bigots. Decent people do not cheer for such a tribe of misfits.
"Catholic edicts: Confessions on Saturday. Absolution on Sunday. At it again on Monday." - H. G. Wells
Jesus, Paulina Krukowska the Pope does not need to join LinkedIn! Let me remind you, for that matter, that Jesus only needed 12 followers.
Adrian Coman Better late than never
Mila F. Luke Robert Mason it brought your attention ;) Love this comment!
Mila F. more on the EdTech perspective here: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/edtechdots_edtech-artificialintelligence-educationinnovation-activity-7464935371517349888-uaVZ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAABASq3UBx_ZHof0jcRRU7vKfBga-7ustLv4
Robert Felix Carter again - you raise real historical wounds — none of which should be minimised. But your framing actually gave me a thought: name a 2,000-year-old organisation — or company — with a perfect leadership track record.
His Holiness doesn't need to be on LinkedIn, he already has the world's largest number of followers! 😊
In the presentation a comparison was made with nuclear power, which has brought energy and tragedy. AI likewise has the two sides. Managing the two sides will probably be likewise a long term concerted struggle.
I'm stuck picturing the pope's LinkedIn account 🤣
I think it is an excellent paper and I agree with it entirely. I believe that coherence as a species is fundamental before we go much further with AI. If we zoom out (and zoom in) we are the only incoherent system operating in the observable universe. So, how can we construct artificial coherence when we haven't even fixed the root cause in ourselves first?
I like to hear voices asking what kind of humans we are becoming, not just what kind of tools we are building.
Heidi Therese Dangelmaier What?
Joop Remmé Humanity has good, evil, and all of the grey in between. Remove one, and what do you have? Do you really want to control AI or allow another institution to do that?
Christine Jowdy MBA, MFA The Economist wrote recently that soon AI will have the capability to destroy all life on the planet. I think that has to be controlled. Who should do the controlling is a difficult matter.
Dr. James G. R. Cronin Thanks James, appreciate the references. That’s very much the space my work sits in too. I tend to look at the structural side of things: how systems behave, drift, and end up producing these patterns in the first place. The ethical and labour angles you mention fit inside that bigger architecture, so it’s interesting to see the overlap.
Marc J. Thompson happy to share more references with you! This is a collaborative and collective project, after all.
Really thoughtful framing
I don’t think AI can be “disarmed” in the sense that competition, power and commercial incentives will simply disappear. But it can be slowed down, redirected and governed better — especially in education, where the stakes are not only productivity, but the formation of people.
For me the key question is: who gets to define what “better learning” means? If it is only vendors optimizing for engagement, retention or scale, we will get one kind of education. If teachers, researchers, parents and students are genuinely involved, we may get something much more human.
So maybe “disarming AI” is not about stopping the technology. It is about refusing to let speed, profit and geopolitical pressure become the only design principles.
His words will resonate for approximately 5 minutes, perhaps 10 with devout Catholics, and then they will disappear into the abyss like everything else these days
Thank you for your comment Paulina! You inspired me to read the full text