6 ms·

Thoughts on Pope Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas

56 points by borracciaBlu 1mo ago

neves 1mo ago
It blows my mind that the Pope can say more relevant words about AI than American billionaires.
- NoboruWataya 1mo ago
  I think it's a matter of incentives. American billionaires are mostly highly financially exposed to AI, so are not really incentivised to say anything interesting about it except "it's great, you should buy it".
- Georgelemental 1mo ago
  Saying relevant words is part of the Pope's job description. Not so for billionaires
- jjtheblunt 1mo ago
  the Pope is an American billionaire at this point, in some Vatican sense.
  - leflambeur 1mo ago
    It is fascinating (this word doesn't quite capture sentiment, but the best I can think of right now) how any mention of the Catholic Church, on whatever specific topic — in this case, an encyclical about AI — triggers the immediate desire in some to go full ad hominem. "billionaire", "in some Vatican sense". Would you elaborate? This just sounds like such a low and lazy attack
    - jjtheblunt 1mo ago
      did you read the comment i responded to? not some ad hominem attack at all: the parent comment remarked the pope knew more about AI than American billionaires. The pope is American, is in charge of the Holy See, which has assets in the billions. Thus the irony of the comment to which i responded.
insane_dreamer 1mo ago
> The direction that AI takes is not written into the technology itself. It depends on our choices, on the institutions that host and underpin that choosing, and on our ability to manage innovation responsibly to serve the common good. This is such a key point -- the problem is that the $T that are being poured into AI are doing so for one purpose alone: ROI The choice has already been made, and it's the wrong one.
- doodlebugging 1mo ago
  I agree with your summary. Greed has won out over everything else.
  - albeebe1 1mo ago
    Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
    - krapp 1mo ago
      Greed is "good" for a few, clearly.
    - Terr_ 1mo ago
      We must be greedy for justice, greedy for kindness, greedy for people taking responsibility for their actions...
    - LtWorf 1mo ago
      There is no such thing as an evolutionary spirit.
    - smilespray 1mo ago
      You're quoting Wall Street (1987), but it's not clear whether you're in support of the sentiment or not. Plenty of people around here weren't born when that film came out.
    - salawat 1mo ago
486sx33 1mo ago
[dead]
EA-3167 1mo ago
On one hand I appreciate the considerate scholarship on display, and since there are so many Catholics maybe some will even listen to their purported leader. On the other hand I find any talk of greed, selfishness, manipulation and degradation of humanity... really rich coming from a pope. Maybe I'm supposed to forgive, but I'm not going to forget that they spent decades abusing, hiding abuse, trying to force abortion to the margins along with birth control even when HIV became an obvious pandemic. I'm tired of the leader of an organization that owns a whole city preaching poverty to the masses, even if this particular leader has better PR than most. Enough people have made these same points without the taint of that organization that I don't see this offering as necessary for the discussion, it mostly seems like a way to insert religion into something that simply doesn't require it. Faith can be a beautiful thing, personal and meaningful, but a giant organization with power and money is always going to be just that and should be treated with according suspicion.
- anon291 1mo ago
  Catholic nuns and religious were some of the first and only to help gay men during the AIDS crisis, so your moral pearl clutching is somewhat hyperbolical. Yes the church has particular moral beliefs you disagree. Join the club.
  - EA-3167 1mo ago
    I'm disinterested in their beliefs, only their actions. Their actions overall speak much more loudly of a callous disregard for life (see: HIV in Africa) and the wellbeing of their most helpless charges (children). I'm not damning Catholics here, I'm talking about the central political and financial entity at the heart of it only.
- AustinDev 1mo ago
  > abortion to the margins along with birth control even when HIV became an obvious pandemic. How are abortion and birth control at all related to HIV? I don't understand the connection.
  - 1mo ago
ryecrust 1mo ago
[dead]
Leeann1951 1mo ago
Always interesting to see older philosophical texts discussed here. Often find surprising parallels to modern tech ethics debates.
- NoboruWataya 1mo ago
  I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you, but Magnifica Humanitas was published earlier this year.
hydrox24 1mo ago
There is interesting debate about whether, and how much, LLMs were used to write parts of this encyclical. Generally encyclicals are written by a group of Cardinals and/or Bishops, with significant input from the Pope, so it seems possible that while the Pope's sections and speeches have been human-written, some of the other writers used LLMs in some capacity. The argument boil down to: Pangram seems to flag some sections, some sections have tells or AI smell, and despite being written in a similar register, previous writings of both the Pope and previous encyclicals are not flagged. I'm not sure that it's a disaster if parts have been AI assisted, but it's an interesting question to ponder, and would be interested in the HN view. Best post I've found arguing that there was LLM use: https://substack.com/inbox/post/199316613 https://substack.com/inbox/post/199316613 Australian startup apparently verifying (without much detail) that it's not: https://www.proudlyhuman.org/news-room/media-releases/pope-leo-xiv-s-writings-verified-by-proudly-human https://www.proudlyhuman.org/news-room/media-releases/pope-l...
- luckydata 1mo ago
  who gives a shit tbh, argue with the substance, not the style.
- NoboruWataya 1mo ago
  My view is that it doesn't really matter, and focusing on it is likely an attempt to distract from the substance of the encyclical, which could be seen as critical of AI insofar as it calls for stronger regulation and more conscientious use of AI. As an aside, I think the arguments put forward in the blog post you link are pretty weak, but again, getting into that would just distract from the actual points being made in the encyclical.
- fasterik 1mo ago
  The encyclical is not anti-AI, so there's not really any contradiction or hypocrisy if AI was used to write it. It's more of a criticism of the "technocratic paradigm" and the potential for abuse of power and lack of accountability.
- antihipocrat 1mo ago
  I have caught myself writing in a manner similar to LLM output. I put it down to reading so much of LLM content at work and online that it bleeds into my own style.. Nothing egregious like the "it's not this, it's that" pattern, but more subtle like the cadence and the balance of active vs passive voice. What I'm saying is that it's possible that some of these tells are becoming part of standard writing style now.

56 points by borracciaBlu 1mo ago

neves 1mo ago

It blows my mind that the Pope can say more relevant words about AI than American billionaires.

NoboruWataya 1mo ago
I think it's a matter of incentives. American billionaires are mostly highly financially exposed to AI, so are not really incentivised to say anything interesting about it except "it's great, you should buy it".
Georgelemental 1mo ago
Saying relevant words is part of the Pope's job description. Not so for billionaires
jjtheblunt 1mo ago
the Pope is an American billionaire at this point, in some Vatican sense.
- leflambeur 1mo ago
  It is fascinating (this word doesn't quite capture sentiment, but the best I can think of right now) how any mention of the Catholic Church, on whatever specific topic — in this case, an encyclical about AI — triggers the immediate desire in some to go full ad hominem. "billionaire", "in some Vatican sense". Would you elaborate? This just sounds like such a low and lazy attack
  - jjtheblunt 1mo ago
    did you read the comment i responded to? not some ad hominem attack at all: the parent comment remarked the pope knew more about AI than American billionaires. The pope is American, is in charge of the Holy See, which has assets in the billions. Thus the irony of the comment to which i responded.

insane_dreamer 1mo ago

> The direction that AI takes is not written into the technology itself. It depends on our choices, on the institutions that host and underpin that choosing, and on our ability to manage innovation responsibly to serve the common good. This is such a key point -- the problem is that the $T that are being poured into AI are doing so for one purpose alone: ROI The choice has already been made, and it's the wrong one.

doodlebugging 1mo ago
I agree with your summary. Greed has won out over everything else.
- albeebe1 1mo ago
  Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
  - krapp 1mo ago
    Greed is "good" for a few, clearly.
  - Terr_ 1mo ago
    We must be greedy for justice, greedy for kindness, greedy for people taking responsibility for their actions...
  - LtWorf 1mo ago
    There is no such thing as an evolutionary spirit.
  - smilespray 1mo ago
    You're quoting Wall Street (1987), but it's not clear whether you're in support of the sentiment or not. Plenty of people around here weren't born when that film came out.
  - salawat 1mo ago

486sx33 1mo ago

[dead]

EA-3167 1mo ago

On one hand I appreciate the considerate scholarship on display, and since there are so many Catholics maybe some will even listen to their purported leader. On the other hand I find any talk of greed, selfishness, manipulation and degradation of humanity... really rich coming from a pope. Maybe I'm supposed to forgive, but I'm not going to forget that they spent decades abusing, hiding abuse, trying to force abortion to the margins along with birth control even when HIV became an obvious pandemic. I'm tired of the leader of an organization that owns a whole city preaching poverty to the masses, even if this particular leader has better PR than most. Enough people have made these same points without the taint of that organization that I don't see this offering as necessary for the discussion, it mostly seems like a way to insert religion into something that simply doesn't require it. Faith can be a beautiful thing, personal and meaningful, but a giant organization with power and money is always going to be just that and should be treated with according suspicion.

anon291 1mo ago
Catholic nuns and religious were some of the first and only to help gay men during the AIDS crisis, so your moral pearl clutching is somewhat hyperbolical. Yes the church has particular moral beliefs you disagree. Join the club.
- EA-3167 1mo ago
  I'm disinterested in their beliefs, only their actions. Their actions overall speak much more loudly of a callous disregard for life (see: HIV in Africa) and the wellbeing of their most helpless charges (children). I'm not damning Catholics here, I'm talking about the central political and financial entity at the heart of it only.
AustinDev 1mo ago
> abortion to the margins along with birth control even when HIV became an obvious pandemic. How are abortion and birth control at all related to HIV? I don't understand the connection.
- 1mo ago

ryecrust 1mo ago

[dead]

Leeann1951 1mo ago

Always interesting to see older philosophical texts discussed here. Often find surprising parallels to modern tech ethics debates.

NoboruWataya 1mo ago
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you, but Magnifica Humanitas was published earlier this year.

hydrox24 1mo ago

There is interesting debate about whether, and how much, LLMs were used to write parts of this encyclical. Generally encyclicals are written by a group of Cardinals and/or Bishops, with significant input from the Pope, so it seems possible that while the Pope's sections and speeches have been human-written, some of the other writers used LLMs in some capacity. The argument boil down to: Pangram seems to flag some sections, some sections have tells or AI smell, and despite being written in a similar register, previous writings of both the Pope and previous encyclicals are not flagged. I'm not sure that it's a disaster if parts have been AI assisted, but it's an interesting question to ponder, and would be interested in the HN view. Best post I've found arguing that there was LLM use: https://substack.com/inbox/post/199316613 https://substack.com/inbox/post/199316613 Australian startup apparently verifying (without much detail) that it's not: https://www.proudlyhuman.org/news-room/media-releases/pope-leo-xiv-s-writings-verified-by-proudly-human https://www.proudlyhuman.org/news-room/media-releases/pope-l...

luckydata 1mo ago
who gives a shit tbh, argue with the substance, not the style.
NoboruWataya 1mo ago
My view is that it doesn't really matter, and focusing on it is likely an attempt to distract from the substance of the encyclical, which could be seen as critical of AI insofar as it calls for stronger regulation and more conscientious use of AI. As an aside, I think the arguments put forward in the blog post you link are pretty weak, but again, getting into that would just distract from the actual points being made in the encyclical.
fasterik 1mo ago
The encyclical is not anti-AI, so there's not really any contradiction or hypocrisy if AI was used to write it. It's more of a criticism of the "technocratic paradigm" and the potential for abuse of power and lack of accountability.
antihipocrat 1mo ago
I have caught myself writing in a manner similar to LLM output. I put it down to reading so much of LLM content at work and online that it bleeds into my own style.. Nothing egregious like the "it's not this, it's that" pattern, but more subtle like the cadence and the balance of active vs passive voice. What I'm saying is that it's possible that some of these tells are becoming part of standard writing style now.