The pope moves to police AI | Hacker News Reader

The pope moves to police AI

axios.com

25 pointsgiuliomagnifico15 comments

Open articleView on HN

AIs who misbehave will be discreetly relocated to other parishes.

He does allow AI Jesus to give you absolution in Switzerland. Confessions are recorded.

That’s all you need to know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiosK2lt690 (watch with subtitles)

Soon Claude will update the commandments.

You shall not make for yourself an idol, unless it’s a garden gnome size statue of Jen-Hsun Huang.

This is a pretty weird article. I know the author doesn't choose the headline but "police" is obviously the wrong word, the pope is just offering advice. Then this section:

> The push has fueled speculation — especially online — that the Vatican could build a kind of "truth engine," a system to authenticate information or arbitrate reality.

There are no sources, I've never heard this, it doesn't make any sense, and after a quick search I can't find any other reference to this idea. Did the author just completely make it up?

> the Vatican is emerging as a moral and institutional counterweight to AI-driven misinformation

> The Vatican can't control AI, but it's trying to shape who controls truth in an AI-driven world.

I don't think any of this is true and it doesn't even follow from the rest of the article.

I find that this is fairly normal for Axios: mechanically, an article will look like a kind of executive summary of a phenomenon or event but editorially it has a very confrontational argumentative style. It's been getting worse in the last year and I have to assume it's because the editorial org, like that of many other outlets is pushing for LLM use by its writers.

Axios style and LLM style are sort of indistinguishable so it's hard to tell, but yeah it does kind of look like this guy fed some links and quotes into an LLM and it made up a narrative to fit.

Clergy worried about digital Luther, police AI. Old story, told anew!

anyone have a link to the full article?

This _is_ how Axios writes.

The link is already the full article, despite how it looks... =)

I believe they meant to get past the 'Sign in to read for free' element.

+ cloudflare captcha, in my case

https://archive.is/IVMZ4

This does not go far enough. AI is deeply anti-human and criminal in its current form.

It is controlled by technocrats, steals IP and is used as an excuse for making people unemployed. If the Vatican comes out categorically against abortion, it can (try to) ban AI as well among its followers.

There is nothing in the bible that would support replacing human thought with machines.

Intellectual Property is one of the last true oppressive forces on humankind's progress. Its purpose is to concentrate wealth and power and extract wealth from everyone else, on what amounts to trickle-down theory: that someone needs to own all the wealth so they can "create jobs" for the plebs. The idea that this protects "lone" inventors is a farce, as in the best case, this "lone" inventor then becomes a rich magnate. China has long made the idea moot, since they can make a clone of anything for cheaper and sell it right back to us.

I can't wait for AI to kill IP, so we can move on to a society with less wealth inequality and cheaper access to information and technology.

As far as being anti-human? No technological device has ever made us better people. We're clearly capable of killing each other by the millions without computers at all. AI is just another tool, which can be used for both good and bad, like every other tool we've made. If you're scared of it it's because you believe somehow the normal rules don't apply, but they do. Human societies are governed by human relationships. The tools are merely wielded by humans as a part of those human relationships. We, as a collective society, dictate how the tools are used, by whom, for what purpose. Even when it's "someone in power" wielding them, we decide who is in power, by our compliance to and support of power. In other words, no tool, even AI, will change the fact that it's humans that dictate how their world works. You cannot blame the hammer for bashing someone's skull in.

> There is nothing in the bible that would support replacing human thought with machines.

Based on that, which of the following best applies?

a) Non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA)

b) Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.

c) a & b

Reply on news.ycombinator.com