Browse Comments — Raw (as collected)

Thank you for the post- it was very to read the main points and your thoughts on that. I believe that we shouldn't be afraid of technology, it's just an instrument, but we should be afraid of the conditions in which they're realized- the consumer format, where human life is the cheapest resource and all about money and power.

I truly believe in the need if decentralization of power and of AI. Like the decentralized Al, made by Lebermann Brothers or any similar project will solve this problem

To paraphrase George Carlin - It's one big club, and you ain't in it. I just hope they don't use up all of our drinking water for all of those data centers. We're kinda going to need it. Thank God for Jesus, is all I have to say. 🙏✝️

Elena Karchik, if you follow the link, you'll see that a strategy to force adoption exists, but it is expected to be a last resort. With enough filings, countries that are under the economic thumb-screws of the global north will see a mass chance to gain true sovereignty and may enter the economic system directly into the UN General Assembly.There, most countries will be asking themselves, "Why would we not want to get rid of our debt and be free of Western intimidation?"

How do we know the Vatican isn’t invested in Anthropic?

Frankly, the pope hasn’t really done right by girls so he’s just kind of just another bro boy if you ask me whether it’s Bro spirituality are on Bro Science bro or bro AI I’m not into any of it. And did he not endorse a bible rewritten by a king who had a fear of witches so there is that.. Oh and speaking of mary

The “algorithms have a face” framing is the part I’ll carry into my Monday — because in clinical data and trial design, we’re early enough that the face behind the model is still ours to shape, in service of lessening human suffering. 🙏. Beautifully written.

I think AI has the potential to be the most empowering, decentralising and democratising tool while at the same time posing an existential threat. As an optimistic alarmist I’m hopefully we can steer a future that does involve ‘disarming’ the risk of certain models and enabling the guardrails and usage systems to steer it it in the best direction for humanity. Naive maybe, but I think we still have the agency and this encyclical is a positive step forward

Magnifica Humanitas is not claiming “AI good” or “AI bad.” It is that technology is not morally neutral. Systems inherit the assumptions, incentives, and values of those who design, finance, regulate and deploy them. That matters enormously in education, work, and governance. To me the question remains---What kinds of human beings, institutions and societies are being formed inside increasingly intelligent systems? And who gets to shape the underlying moral architecture? The concentration question feels especially important. As technological capability scales, wealth, influence and governance capacity increasingly concentrate in relatively few transnational actors. That is not only a technical problem. It is a profoundly anthropological and political one. “Disarming AI” may be difficult. Perhaps the deeper challenge is disarming the logics of inevitability, concentration, and optimization that quietly shape the systems before most people even realize the architecture is being built.

This is a covenantal call to governance. A return to the 10 commandments

The danger is that this will create a small club of people who “know what’s best for us so we should just listen to them” and this club would include Anthropic, the Vatican, and a few other entities selected by them. But their power would be limited because western companies and religious leaders can only influence AI development in the West. They have no influence over what China, India or the Middle East does. Which means AI will advance with or without the West, and the dangers outlined by western companies and religious leaders can still happen in regions outside their control.

LLMs are the foundation of a powerful governance tool at a time governance illiteracy is eating us alive. The world is fighting a policy battle while Trump and technofeudals are waging a governance war.

Elena Karchik Yes, but first we need governance literacy to govern. Whoever becomes governance literate first to constrain LLMs has a good chance to succeed. In the US we are fighting policy battles while Trump and technofeudals are waging a governance war.

we live in interesting times

Just like with all things technology ever: those who blindly walk the broad path before them will find themselves farther away from themselves than those who walk the tight path, knowing and feeling their way closer to who they are. AI is no exception. It’s a catalyst like they all are. What choice will you make?

I am afraid it is a little too late. It is naive to think we can go back and start again on the right path this AI journey.

Tamer Chowdhury thank you

Rob Anderson As long as AI is controlled by people who will do nearly anything for power or money it will not end well.

Rich Petersen I’m banking on it in the hands of the millions of Changemakers and it not being controlled by the power hungry might give us a chance. Time will tell!!

It’s worth reading section 150 of the encyclical (Vatican Website https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/encyclicals/documents/20260515-magnifica-humanitas.html) as he alludes to the precarity of digital labourers. This question of digital labour training AI, as a new type of “slavery”, is something that is less discussed in the media, but is central to the tradition of Catholic social teaching. A relatively recent political example is Mater et magistra by Pope John XXIII in 1961 who discussed the labour market, much to the annoyance of American Catholic conservatives like William F. Buckley at the time.