Pope Francis Calls for Binding Global Treaty To Regulate AI (reuters.com) 71
Pope Francis has called for a legally binding international treaty to regulate AI, saying algorithms must not be allowed to replace human values and warning of a "technological dictatorship" threatening human existence. From a report: The pope made his call on Thursday in a message for the Roman Catholic Church's World Day of Peace, which is celebrated on Jan. 1. The title of the message, which is traditionally sent to world leaders and heads of institutions such as the United Nations, is "Artificial Intelligence and Peace."
[...] "The global scale of artificial intelligence makes it clear that, alongside the responsibility of sovereign states to regulate its use internally, international organizations can play a decisive role in reaching multilateral agreements and coordinating their application and enforcement," Francis wrote in the message. "I urge the global community of nations to work together in order to adopt a binding international treaty that regulates the development and use of artificial intelligence in its many forms," the pope said.
[...] "The global scale of artificial intelligence makes it clear that, alongside the responsibility of sovereign states to regulate its use internally, international organizations can play a decisive role in reaching multilateral agreements and coordinating their application and enforcement," Francis wrote in the message. "I urge the global community of nations to work together in order to adopt a binding international treaty that regulates the development and use of artificial intelligence in its many forms," the pope said.
ok... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is stupid. Now religious figures are talking about statistical models as if they required spiritual help. Didn't the Treaty of Tordesillas show them their intervention is useless? Maybe proclaim a crusade against AI? We can call it "taking the corpus" when you join in.
Re: (Score:2)
It is one thing to have regulations about the protection of privacy and how AI-based services are offered to the public.
It is quite another thing to expect regulation to stop technology from advancing.
Throttling AI development in the West is handing the lead to China.
Re:ok... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes this is stupid but not because he's a religious figure. There's not much religious about him. He's a politician with an agenda that has little to nothing to do with religion.
I'm an atheist but I can tell the difference between this pope and the truly religious people I've met.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I like this pope. He actually follows the teachings of Jesus. But what he has to say about AI is irrelevant.
Re: ok... (Score:2)
Does he get nailed up on a cross?
Re: (Score:2)
I know many younger Catholics in America that wish he was....
Re: (Score:3)
Which is a rare feat nowadays considering Evangelicals are calling Jesus a liberal, weak, and "woke" [newsweek.com] (whatever that means).
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that fits because Pope Francis is also liberal, weak, and woke.
Re: (Score:3)
What teachings may that be? Jesus had a pretty hard stance against figures like the pope in his own day and the state. This pope is a socialist that can't even condemn child abuse in his own church.
Re: (Score:1)
Jesus was also a socialist. So we’re in agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
What teachings may that be? Jesus had a pretty hard stance against figures like the pope in his own day and the state. This pope is a socialist that can't even condemn child abuse in his own church.
Except that has has condemned "child abuse in his own church," for that matter, he has condemned child abuse in general.
From 2018 [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I like this pope. He actually follows the teachings of Jesus. But what he has to say about AI is irrelevant.
Actually, he has spent decades studying an artificial intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
You're all a bunch of ignorant idiots.
For one, you've all missed that he has a scientific degree from college.
Re: (Score:2)
For one, you've all missed that he has a scientific degree from college.
Pope Francis received a philosophy degree from a Jesuit religious college. Is that what you consider a scientific degree? Sounds more like religious studies to me.
Re: (Score:2)
His original undergraduate degree was in chemistry.
Re: (Score:2)
I took college chemistry, too. That doesn't make me a pope.
Re: (Score:2)
Just shows he might have more of a science background than he lets on.
The job of Pope is about protecting the Deposit of Faith, and about explaining Truth with Reason. Pope Francis is particularly bad at it, but he's by far not the first to be particularly bad at it. In 2000 years, there have been plenty that are worse.
Technological danger (Score:2)
This is stupid. Now religious figures are talking about statistical models as if they required spiritual help.
When they were talking about nuclear destruction it wasn't that the bombs needed spiritual help, it was that the situation was dangerous.
I think this is religious figures talking about the danger of a technological advance.
Which they tended to do historically, so it's not at all inconsistent and arguably in their wheelhouse to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Not usually in a positive way, though. Think Galileo.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it wasn't all negative. A good deal of modern agricultural and project management dates back to Cistercians, who were brilliant farmers and managers. Their innovations largely weren't on the level of invention, but rather in organization and planning, and they tamed large portions of Northern Europe (of course, then we can talk about the loss of biodiversity that comes from cutting down forests and draining swamps to plant crops and raise livestock, so no innovation is neutral).
Ultimately the Galileo
Re: (Score:2)
This is stupid. Now religious figures are talking about statistical models as if they required spiritual help.
It is stupid if you frame it as direct comments on LLM functionality. If you view it more charitably, as The Pope talking about importance and contribution of morality and culture into decision making, then it makes a lot more sense.
The fundamental issue with the AI is human laziness. Humanity will defer a lot of decision making to the AI and when it inevitably fail for some reason, be it due to its limitations or bad data, it will continue spewing mistakes and nobody may be watching. Unlike humans, that
Re: (Score:1)
He's just jealous of his AI doppleganger, https://magisterium.com/ [magisterium.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I asked the AI Pope about this:
Q: What does Catholicism teach about AI theologians?
A:Catholicism teaches that theologians who study Artificial Intelligence (AI) should combine faith with learning and wisdom, uniting theology with the modern sciences and human knowledge 1. These theologians should be well-versed in the individual disciplines of AI and adequately prepared theologically to confront the epistemological questions that arise from the relationship between faith and reason 2. The Catholic Church r
Re: (Score:1)
Can't wait to hear what greta thumberg has to say about this.
Re: ok... (Score:2)
He's worried we will create AGI. This is arguably an overblown worry but putting that aside the church's fear is probably that we will decide intelligence isn't that special and therefore God isn't that special for creating it. If you can do it by accident then who cares?
Um... stay in your lane, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
I really, really hate to commit the logical fallacy of attacking the source rather than the message, but good lord... the number of reasons why you should not listen to this guy and his organization opine about anything regarding legality, morality, technology, or just general twenty first century relevance is long. Might as well as Stevie Wonder about picking among colour swatches.
The fact that I might be in agreement with large parts of this position is irrelevant. I probably agree with some of the things Martin Shkreli has to say. That doesn't mean I want to hear from him on anything, ever.
Re: (Score:3)
I really, really hate to commit the logical fallacy of attacking the source rather than the message, but good lord... the number of reasons why you should not listen to this guy and his organization opine about anything regarding legality, morality, technology, or just general twenty first century relevance is long. Might as well as Stevie Wonder about picking among colour swatches.
The fact that I might be in agreement with large parts of this position is irrelevant. I probably agree with some of the things Martin Shkreli has to say. That doesn't mean I want to hear from him on anything, ever.
That's one take. The other is slightly more frightening. The Church sees the current obsession with AI among the technical crowd as semi-religious in nature, and are ready to start fighting back. As someone watching this somewhat closely, while trying to remain somewhat dispassionate about it, that take doesn't appear to be completely wrong. The concept of God and worship were replaced with greed long ago for the vast majority of western ideologies. The Catholic Church adapted by making greed central to its
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, he's just jealous of https://magisterium.com/ [magisterium.com], which actually does a superior job of being Pope
Re: (Score:2)
The Catholic Church adapted by making greed central to its own religion....
Greed has been THE central tenet of the Catholic Church from the very beginning.
Re: (Score:2)
The Catholic Church adapted by making greed central to its own religion....
Greed has been THE central tenet of the Catholic Church from the very beginning.
Probably true. I was thinking in terms of Christianity in general, which the Catholic church built on. It's a bit hazy whether the Catholic Church was the bringer of greed, or simply picked up where the other sects of Christianity were at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
AI promises MORE than any religion; tweak the right genes and you don't die, who needs an afterlife if you are immortal?
No more work - the machines of the AGI will do it all
No more world hunger - the AGI generates plenty for all
AGI will deliver on all the promises in this life that religion promises in the next life.
Consensus building is worthwhile (Score:3)
Whilst there are many reasons to ignore the comments of the pope, the reality is that his comments could be helpful in creating a consensus to do something about AI. So there's no justification for being quite so dismissive.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Whilst there are many reasons to ignore the comments of the pope, the reality is that his comments could be helpful in creating a consensus to do something about AI. So there's no justification for being quite so dismissive.
As a recovering Catholic. I can confidently say there are more than enough reasons "for being quite so dismissive."
If I want to know about protecting pedofiles, I'll ask the pope. Every other thought he has is of no importance to me, and should not be important for anyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
"No justification for being quite so dismissive" - not true. As I said, I think there are plenty of reasons to be dismissive.
What you're doing is inviting them to the table for expediency - i.e. they have an audience and a platform, so they're welcome to agree with you.
I don't disagree with leveraging expediency. But that doesn't mean I'm not justified in my view as well.
Re: (Score:2)
The best someone in his position can do is say "hey fellow catholics, we know nothing about subject X, but you should listen to guys Y and Z about this, because they know what's up".
The catholic church releasing statements about things they know fuck-all about is just dangerous and perpetuating their attempted influence across all walks of life. It's insidious.
Re: (Score:2)
Even that is too far, you're saying the pope should designate 'experts' in any field? The pope needs to stay out of it, protect the people in his church against (and rule by example, thus not participate in) sexual abuse, speak out against the excesses of the state (eg. FBI designating Roman Catholics as dangerous terrorists) rather than participate in it (he's removed 2 cardinals for speaking out against him), he could have something to say about Islamic terrorism etc and the overall lack of religiosity in
Re: (Score:2)
That ship sailed a long time ago [bbc.com].
speak out against the excesses of the state (eg. FBI designating Roman Catholics as dangerous terrorists)
Northern Ireland doesn't ring a bell?
rather than participate in it (he's removed 2 cardinals for speaking out against him),
He's the head of the organization. He can remove who he wants. Are you saying a CEO can't have someone fired for speaking aga
Too simplistic (Score:2)
'Considering Christians have killed more people in the past two years than any other group'
To blame church leaders for the behaviour of some people who claim the status of 'Christians' is as reasonable as blaming all atheists for the murders of Mao and Pol Pot.
Fantasy land again (Score:5, Insightful)
' international organizations can play a decisive role in reaching multilateral agreements and coordinating their application and enforcement'
Yeah - right. If North Korea or even China decided they weren't going to play nicely, who is going to stop them. For those who don't remember, North Korea was signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - but went ahead and built nukes anyway, and nobody did anything about it. So why should we play the game this time; creating AI is far easier and less visible than making preparations to build a nuke.
Re: (Score:2)
Binding Global Treaty To Regulate Religion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that there is no civilization anywhere in the world that is free of murder is a strong evidence that it is a necessary component of building a society.
The fact that there is no civilization anywhere in the world that is free of corruption is a strong evidence that they are a necessary component of building a society.
The fact that there
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a better idea, how about a binding global treaty to regulate Religion! Like AI, religion presents questionable information as facts and such information can be harmful, even causing wars.
Careful; religion is just science fiction.
Sure, in many cases the fandom have gone overboard and started taking the content as being true, with horrific results. But do we really want to deprive ourselves of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Dune and The Murderbot Diaries and The Culture, The Expanse, and Aliens and ET and bloody Back to the Future just to reign in a couple books some folks are {cough} L. Ron Hubbard {cough} taking too seriously?
Legally Binding Internationally? Not possible (Score:1)
And CCP wants this 'Legally Binding'. They will ignore it while others abide.
I, for one, (Score:2)
religion should not be regulating laws (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
laws are a religion, but in a different form. Quantum science is mostly religion. Call out the problems as they are: Spiritualism, Christianity, Muslim faith etc Spit in the face of reality for the convenience of "answers" without proofs. Without thought.
Its ok to believe sometimes killing someone is wrong. Its NOT ok to believe your imaginary friend told some dude to write this down on stone tablets thousands of years ago, and that's why you cant let Grandma die with dignity because she is wasting away fro
Isn't this deflection of his own responsibility? (Score:4, Insightful)
Some old quote about how it's easier to see a splinter in the eye of another than a log in one's own comes to mind.
As Catholic pope, this idiot has the authority, power and duty to clean house; to make the Catholic church *anything* but a safe haven for sex offenders who abused the trust of others and raped children; who were then shielded from investigation and reassigned. Within his organisation he's expected to be treated as having The Direct Line to a Literal Omnipotent God. These badly needed changes to help heal the ruined lives of innocents have not happened; had they happened, it would have made headlines the world over.
This is the public relations equivalent of a stage magician drawing attention to one part of an act with performance so as to conceal something else. This an entirely ordinary weak and arrogant man surrounded by extraordinary pageantry and he is not talking about about AI but serving the entrenchment of continuing interference with the pursuit of a justice he could facilitate... but refuses to.
He's no more deserving of dignity or respect than anyone photographed with Jeffrey Epstein with a crying child in the background.
Re: (Score:2)
It's dissapointing. He caters to the crowd that will never listen or respect the Church instead of helping the faithful.
It makes it really hard to think the Church belives the sacrements are important when they withhold them for over a year during covid.
After a raucous year of headlines and panic... (Score:2)
Never trust ANY person... (Score:3, Insightful)
...who claims to speak for god
Right after... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sister Miriam Godwinson has something to say (Score:2)
"Will we next create false gods to rule over us? How proud we have become, and how blind."
Whose values? (Score:2)
algorithms must not be allowed to replace human values
Says the man who wants his invisible sky-daddy to overrule human values anyway.
And where did your values come from? (Score:2)
All criminal law is the imposition of someone's morality. The only question is whose - and why that particular one is chosen. Remember: child abandonment was endemic in the Roman Empire until the Christians caused attitudes to change.
In other news... water still wet (Score:2)
Prejudices (Score:2)
AI = Computing Power + PREJUDICES