Pope Leo XIV says AI needs to be “disarmed”

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,525]

On Transhumanism and Posthumanism, Pope Leo XIV writes:

“If the human being is treated as something to be perfected or surpassed, it becomes easier to accept that some lives are less useful, less desirable or less worthy. In the name of progress, ‘necessary sacrifices’ may begin to be justified, placing the burden on the most vulnerable in pursuit of a supposed optimization of the species. … For this reason, a clear distinction must be made. It is one thing to integrate technology within a human-centered, relational vision; it is quite another to be guided by an outlook that devalues human limits and promises a purely technical form of ‘salvation.’”

[RenegAde 20,544]

19 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Cool. Doesn’t read like AI to me, just sounds like pretty standard academic formatting. 

Also FWIW

Cool but my point is, it shouldn't take a wall of elite vocabulary to say something this universal, sounding like the same algorithms we are being warned about.

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,525]

2 minutes ago, RenegAde said:

Cool but my point is, it shouldn't take a wall of elite vocabulary to say something this universal, sounding like the same algorithms we are being warned about.

A “wall of elite vocabulary” and it’s basically one sentence with no especially dense or complicated language  Also, “sounding like the same algorithms we are being warned about” is basically meaningless. You’re asking someone using their massive platform to meaningfully critiquing AI displacing labor to avoid “AI vibes” because it…makes you uncomfortable or something? Like what are we talking about lol

[Ultimecia 6,829]

I have to give credit where it's due, he's got a point and he put it very eloquently.

[Borislshere 53,665]

It’s so refreshing seeing a public figure speak eloquently and with common sense.

[RenegAde 20,544]

38 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

A “wall of elite vocabulary” and it’s basically one sentence with no especially dense or complicated language  Also, “sounding like the same algorithms we are being warned about” is basically meaningless. You’re asking someone using their massive platform to meaningfully critiquing AI displacing labor to avoid “AI vibes” because it…makes you uncomfortable or something? Like what are we talking about lol

I am saying that for a message about not putting money over people or letting technology strip away our individual human essence, the message is delivered in such a heavily polished format, filled with biblical metapors and all. you even described it as academic formatting 

i know it was probably edited by scholars in the Vatican and that's why it reads like that but such a universal message could have benefited from simple wording.

Edited May 25 by RenegAde

[River 127,333]

39 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Goalpost shifted, but also: why is it so difficult to believe that he might genuinely want to use his platform for good? He consistently speaks out against wars, economic inequality, and social justice. I get being cynical about organized religion, but it’s not insignificant that this Pope has consistently stood against the powerful and with the powerless since being appointed. Regardless of how you, I, or anyone may feel about the Catholic Church, him saying this is a net good.

to me it's equal to miss universe wishing for world peace from her little pedestal.

I mean, it's nice and all, but before that, he needs to fix so many things inside the catholic church, and I'm not talking about the pedophilia part, which is something that every single pope failed to stop. I'm talking about the an estimated $50 billions to $1 trillion of money that church has that could feed so many people in need, the crazy amount of properties it's owning around the world and especially in Italy, and that it's nothing but a parasite in Italy's ass, taking money from the people and influencing the politics.

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,525]

10 minutes ago, River said:

I'm talking about the an estimated $50 billions to $1 trillion of money that church has that could feed so many people in need

Are you talking about the Vatican or the global Catholic Church? The global Catholic Church is estimated to have hundreds of billions of dollars in non-liquid assets (churches, museums etc) and is also recognized as one of the largest non-governmental providers of education and healthcare, particularly in the global south and East Asia. Yeah, maybe they could sell off some of the property, but I don’t really think it’s particularly accurate to act as if they don’t actually do demonstrable good and are purely leeches.

Also, to the Miss Universe point: given how many far right governments in particular derive their so-called “moral mandates” from the Church, it actually removes cover from these bad faith (pun intended) actors to claim they’re acting as Christians when they are openly standing against the positions of the church, so I don’t think that’s politically insignificant.

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,525]

21 minutes ago, RenegAde said:

I am saying that for a message about not putting money over people or letting technology strip away our individual human essence, the message is delivered in such a heavily polished format filled with biblical metapors and all, you even described it as academic formatting 

i know it was probably edited by scholars in the Vatican and that's why it reass like that but such a universal message could have benefited from simple wording.

Ns, but we’ve arrived back at my original point with this reply. You’re narrowing in on one passage you deem “inaccessible,” whereas I think the overall point is very plainly stated throughout and I don’t even really think this section is particularly dense or rhetorically complicated. 

Edited May 25 by Ladle Ghoulash

[PartySick 172,425]

The pope cooking? Holy sh*t

[PartySick 172,425]

Just now, PartySick said:

The pope cooking? Holy sh*t

I realized why this statement specifically is so funny as I hit post.

Can AI write like this?

I think tf not!

[Economy 52,842]

1 hour ago, River said:

It feels like he’s more afraid of the forbidden fruit effect, that believers would find the answers and knowledge that the church did best to hid and brainwash their believers 

I mean google gas already existed

[PartySick 172,425]

21 minutes ago, RenegAde said:

I am saying that for a message about not putting money over people or letting technology strip away our individual human essence, the message is delivered in such a heavily polished format, filled with biblical metapors and all. you even described it as academic formatting 

i know it was probably edited by scholars in the Vatican and that's why it reads like that but such a universal message could have benefited from simple wording.

It reads as poetic to me which I appreciate as someone who likes to write and leans heavily on imagery to translate emotions and thoughts into something a reader could imagine seeing.

It also adds a nice bit of...idk, weight, I guess, to combat the idea of AI and tech companies training their algorithms to mimic human language with proof that man can still speak with eloquence and intelligence.

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,525]

3 minutes ago, PartySick said:

It reads as poetic to me which I appreciate as someone who likes to write and leans heavily on imagery to translate emotions and thoughts into something a reader could imagine seeing.

It also adds a nice bit of...idk, weight, I guess, to combat the idea of AI and tech companies training their algorithms to mimic human language with proof that man can still speak with eloquence and intelligence.

Yeah, insisting people strip the art and intellect out of language feels both anti-intellectual and more artificial than someone giving “AI vibes” because they used slightly more elevated rhetoric and metaphorical language lol

Edited May 25 by Ladle Ghoulash

[RenegAde 20,544]

2 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Ns, but we’ve arrived back at my original point with this reply. You’re narrowing in on one passage you deem “inaccessible,” whereas I think the overall point is very plainly stated throughout and I don’t even really think this is particularly dense or rhetorically complicated. 

Girl, I specifically quoted that paragraph and not the entire entire post in my original post for a reason!