news

His section on modern day slavery is actually rather good.

This distorted view of the human person is reflected today in various forms of servitude directly linked to the digital economy. Nothing in the world of AI is immaterial or magical. Every seemingly immediate and flawless response is the result of a long chain of mediation, involving vast networks of natural resources, energy infrastructure and, above all, people. A significant part of the digital economy’s functioning relies on the silent work of millions of people engaged in essential yet largely unseen activities, such as data labeling, model training and content moderation, often involving disturbing material. In many cases, these workers are young people, predominantly women, working under demanding conditions for minimal wages. Added to this invisible labor is the even harsher work of extracting the resources required for the production of the devices and microprocessors on which AI depends. In some regions of the world, children and adolescents work in dangerous conditions, crushing the materials from which rare earth elements are extracted. The bodies of these people are scarred, injured and worn down so that computational flow may continue uninterruptedly. Furthermore, criminal networks use online platforms, messaging systems, anonymous payment methods and profiling techniques in order to recruit, control and transport victims of trafficking — very often minors — reducing men and women to “data” to be tracked and “packages” to be moved around within the same digital circuits that support much of the global economy. This reality deeply challenges the moral conscience of our time. It is not enough to invoke efficiency, nor to celebrate the benefits of innovation, if they are built on a chain of exploitation that remains deliberately hidden. If technology promises emancipation, yet produces new forms of global subordination, it stands in contradiction to the fundamental principle of human dignity.

He even apologies for the Church supporting slavery.

Yet neither can we deny or diminish the delay with which both society and the Church came to denounce the scourge of slavery. In antiquity and the Middle Ages many individuals and even ecclesiastical institutions had slaves. Already in the early modern period, the Apostolic See of Rome, responding to requests from Sovereigns, intervened several times in order to regulate and legitimize forms of subjugation, and, in certain cases, the enslavement of “infidels.” [174] It was only in the nineteenth century that a formal, absolute and universal condemnation of slavery was clearly articulated, notably under Pope Leo XIII. [175] This development offers a clear example of the Church’s growth in understanding the perennial truths of Revelation that she safeguards. Although there was not always consistency in practice — given that slavery was long tolerated before being unequivocally condemned — there has been a continuous affirmation throughout history of the dignity of every human being, created in the image of God, even if it took eighteen centuries for its full incompatibility with slavery to be explicitly recognized. This constitutes a wound in Christian memory, one from which we cannot consider ourselves detached. [176] It is impossible not to feel deep sorrow when contemplating the immense suffering and humiliation endured by so many in stark contrast to their immeasurable dignity as persons infinitely loved by the Lord. For this, in the name of the Church, I sincerely ask for pardon.

The burgerland pope

As someone who has expressed some discomfort at the left’s occasional meme-ish appreciation of the Catholic Church… I am developing an appreciation of Leo to some extent. Francis I felt was a master at saying things that the western press would latch onto as “woke” but once you scratched the surface, would be revealed as not really all that different from the past. I think Francis was well aware of this and used it to make himself seem like more of a progressive force than he actually was. He was partly sincere, sure. But he also knew how to phrase a sound bite that would appear one way, but hide something else that wasn’t quite what the sound bite implied. Better than his predecessors, but that’s such an incredibly low bar.

Leo, on the other hand, has actually made fairly enlightened statements like this on AI; or when he mentioned that the focus on sexual sins should be placed well below a focus on justice and helping others. And when he does speak, it seems like the meaning is plain without any need to guess at what exactly he’s getting at. I like that about him. A straight-shooter, even if he represents a regressive institution.

You know what, at this point I'll take a Butlerian Crusade if that's what it takes

In reality, a just society requires a vigilant State and civil institutions that are capable of overcoming the singular mentality of efficiency, and of ensuring that resources, creative solutions and regulations favor the most vulnerable.

the state has been the opposite of that, bro, for 40 years, let it go.

In that vision, the fullness of life is equated with having more, reducing weakness, eliminating uncertainty and exerting total control.

which is fine aspiration to have for humans, unfortunately, that aspiration is only allowed for bourgeoisie

*bro hadn't mentioned sanctions once, but did spend his time about nebulous cybersecurity, jihadi operatives and criminal networks. oh well, feely sections about humans are fine