Live data from Hacker News

Magnifica Humanitas

vatican.va

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same thing though. AI is largely a service provided by companies Yes yes I know, open source models exist, yadda yadda I think it's safe to say the overwhelming amount of AI usage in the world today is gates by corporations though. The vast majority of people will barely configure their own OS nevermind managing their own locally hosted open source AI instance

Open source models don't exist. Open-weight ones do, which are more equivalent to freeware than free software.

Fair enough, thank you for the correction

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#342

I would love for the Pope to answer this question: If a technology existed that reduced the cost of producing a critical thing (think food, housing, medical care) down to near zero, however, it made the humans currently building the thing redundant, should we build it? Would it be okay to use the hyper-optimization power of Capitalism to build such a technology faster? Before someone yells at me about this not being…

The Catholic Church has at present no answer to that question. The contemporary political-economic stance of the Catholic Church is based on economic liberalism and capitalism and maintaining a just balance between capital and labour, as indeed mentioned in the encyclical itself.

I don't think anyone has an answer to that question at present, honestly.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is certainly the more interesting question, the unfortunate reality is that the ideological complex of capital (even if weakening, and no longer effectively reproducing itself) is still strong enough that most in the West can't even imagine a better world (other than "less bad capitalism"), much less think about how to get there. Consequently messages like the above are of great value in moving more people…

Well, in that case, my "how" has always been along anarchistic lines: establishing parallel forms of resource distribution, establishing habits and communities of mutual aid, and in doing so, delegitimizing and rendering obsolete the State, capitalism, and systems of hierarchy. Fun techcentric utopian speculation about this: Cory Doctorow's "Walkaway" and Ruthanna Emry's "A Half-Built Garden." Essentially, can we lev…

I'm all in favour of grassroots experimentation and a search for something to improve upon, and then replace capitalism. This is how capitalism itself came about and spread, though we can argue about how much it was imposed after it ceased being the underdog.

What I am weary of is that such experimentation, and the energy it generates, will eventually be overtaken by the next iteration of people who want to stop nibbling at the margins and break a few eggs already, some sort of anarchist revolutionary vanguard. Much like with communism, skilful opportunists with a thirst for power will be all too happy to take over this energy and direct it toward building the next totalitarian regime, one which will of course claim to be rendering the State obsolete, but will be about as anarchist as North Korea is a people's democratic republic.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#344

The overarching message is that builders should deeply consider the impact of what they're building on civilization. "Technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it." Therefore builders "bear a particular ethical and spiritual responsibility" because "every design choice reflects a vision of humanity." The questions shouldn't just be 'can we buil…

The Roman Catholic Church has a lot of things wrong with it, now and in the past, but it’s a human institution older than almost any other, and it’s composed of a lot of very intelligent people. Agree or disagree with them, but a papal encyclical is almost always worth reading and understanding.

Indeed. And because of it’s age and outlook its view is very far back and very far forward.

The casual reference to a 135 year old encyclical that dealt with the seismic shift of industrialisation took me quite aback for a number of reasons.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#345
post #288

The overarching message is that builders should deeply consider the impact of what they're building on civilization. "Technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it." Therefore builders "bear a particular ethical and spiritual responsibility" because "every design choice reflects a vision of humanity." The questions shouldn't just be 'can we buil…

The strange part is how moral responsibility somehow always lands on the builders... the people with the least leverage... while the funders get to ask the ethical questions. Weird!

No, we don't have to take the funders' money; that's what having professional standards means. Nobody would excuse a doctor performing unsafe procedures because they "needed the money". Engineers were jailed for the Volkswagen emissions tampering scandal and nobody would excuse them for needing to take funders' money.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, I didn’t claim I subscribe to reason. I believe that I behave as if I would however I don’t think humans are too rational. There is just nothing divine into the world. The Old and new Testaments have very little I personally find insightful. Write their content in contemporary language and they are a collections of (extremely dry) folk stories. Which is fine, but I wouldn’t rely on it for anything other t…

Grimm's Fairy Tales also have had an important impact on your culture. No one is asking you to believe in anything, but it's self-limiting to refuse to engage with works of historical/cultural importance.

You’re projecting or misinterpreting my comments. I didn’t say anything regarding the content I engage with.

However I reject the idea that engaging with religious texts is insightful and something to promote

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#349

So the guys at Anthropic convinced the Pope to write a hype piece for them. Next-level grifting right there.

Readers apparently think this comment is a joke. Not entirely:

https://religionnews.com/2026/05/22/why-anthropic-is-helping...

The vigilance the Pope calls for is appreciated, but never underestimate lobbying. If he had called for an outright AI moratorium or ban, that would be clear. But this encyclical leaves room for "adjustments", i.e., boiling the frog slowly.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#350
I find it difficult to see how even the measured words from the pope can actually enact this changed needed to 'disarm' AI. The forces behind the armament/war of AI development are innate to the qualities of our governance systems, capitalism, and human behavior, and AI itself.

None of these will go away until something breaks catastrophically, when it will be too late. And even then it will be short repose from another iteration for as long as we are in the digital information age.

There are only two steady end states that I see... either a global surveillance totalitarian system under the industrial complex, or, a radical change of the environment in which the aforementioned can be sustained.

> 110. Finally, I would like to employ the expression “to disarm,” which is close to my heart. Disarming AI means freeing it from the mentality of “armed” competition, which today is not limited simply to the military context, but is also an economic and cognitive phenomenon. This entails a race for ever more powerful algorithms and larger datasets, driven by the desire to secure geopolitical or commercial dominance. To disarm means discrediting the assumption that technical power automatically confers the right to govern. To disarm does not mean rejecting technology, but preventing it from dominating humanity. It means freeing technology from monopolistic control and opening it to discussion and debate, therefore making it human-friendly and restoring it to the plurality of human cultures and ways of life. Our task today is not only ethical or technical. It is ecological in the deepest sense, for it concerns a new dimension of our common home. AI is already an environment in which we are immersed, as well as a force with which we must engage. For this reason, merely regulating it is insufficient; it must be disarmed, welcoming and accessible.

Post reply on HN