Your Undivided Attention - “Magnifica Humanitas:” Pope Leo’s Clarion Call on AI

Episode Date: July 2, 2026

Since stepping into the Papacy, Pope Leo XIV has been a forceful voice pushing back against the anti-human path we’re on with AI. In May, he released “Magnifica Humanitas,” a sprawling encyclical warning of the dangers to human dignity and agency posed by runaway AI. Tristan had the incredible opportunity to meet with the Pope ahead of the encyclical's release.  In the modern world, you’d think we would have developed governance structures to deal with powerful new technologies like AI. It's worth asking why a 2,000-year-old religious institution is the only one standing up and loudly declaring that the default path is unacceptable.  In this episode, Tristan and Aza discuss what it was like for Tristan to be at the Vatican, why this is such a critical step toward a pro-human future, and how we can build on the momentum of the Pope’s call to action. Your Undivided Attention is produced by Center for Humane Technology. You can find a transcript of this conversation on our Substack. RECOMMENDED MEDIA The Pope’s encyclical, “Magnifica Humanitas” RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES The Tech-God Complex: Why We Need to be Skeptics What Do We Mean by Humane Tech?Corrections: Tristan said that Pope John XXIII gave his radio address weeks after the Cuban Missile Crisis. It actually occured during the crisis. Tristan paraphrased the full quote from Pope Leo's encyclical on AI disarmament. Here is the full quote: "Disarming AI means freeing it from the mentality of “armed” competition, which today is not limited simply to the military context, but is also an economic and cognitive phenomenon. This entails a race for ever more powerful algorithms and larger datasets, driven by the desire to secure geopolitical or commercial dominance." Aza slightly misquoted Dr. King Jr. The full quote begins "The means by which we live have outdistanced the ends for which we live." The delegates for Bretton Woods came from just 44 countries, not "hundreds" as Tristan said.     Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hey, everyone. Welcome to your undivided attention. This is Tristan Harris. And this is Azorescan. So today on the show, we're going to talk about a very extraordinary opportunity that we had to participate in the release of the Vatican's recent encyclical on AI called Magnifica Humanitas or Magnificent Humanity. And really, this is about, you know, Pope Leo, forcefully coming out to say the default package. that AI's on is wrong and we need to move to a pro-human future. And Tristan, you actually went to the Vatican. You were there. You met the Pope ahead of this encyclical release. Yeah, it was a pretty special opportunity. We got invited to participate in a conference of the Vatican called Preserving Human Faces and Voices. The conference, you know, really hosted some of the top academics, responsible tech voices. People actually passed podcast guests like Joy Bull and Weenie from

Algorithmic Justice League and who was in the film Coded Bias. Eli Parriss. who's a friend and has the organization new public, which thinks about how do you do new public social squares online that are actually positive and humane for humanity. But I think the thing that we brought was how, there's kind of two distinct conversations about AI. And one is, you know, how do we preserve what it means to be human in the age of AI, which is some of the deeply human work at CHT?

How do we preserve our cognition, our relationships, you know, our relationship to ourselves, our interiority? And then there's this, this other conversation really about the arms race for artificial general intelligence, and a deeper reason of like, why is all this happening? And this is what we did with the social dilemma, which is it's not about the attention hacking. It's not about just polarization. It's about the deeper driver of so long as there is a competition or an arms race for attention, you're going to get all the problems that we saw in the social dilemma. And the same thing is true

of AI. So as part of going to the Vatican, you got to do a screening of the AI doc. And I'm just curious just on like what were the reactions what was that like yeah i think the first feeling was people were quiet and there was a kind of flooredness i think people were unsettled and like whoa that's just a lot to metabolize um and it's interesting to note that even if you are a person of faith and you're connected to that sacred connection to god and your life is oriented that way that this is a you know a challenging and confronting situation to be with. But I do think that people just needed some time to metabolize the message, and I watched how over the next few days, people went from feeling the kind of overwhelm or kind of the

floored feeling to understanding more clearly what was driving the problem and kind of leaning more into the hope and wiesancy side of things rather than just the kind of disempowered side of things. Now, I think this, you know, why is the bad? and really important. Well, first, just to sort of lay out the very obvious facts, there's 1.4 billion Catholics on planet Earth, roughly one in six people. And the encyclicals have, you know, there's been almost 300 issued since 1740 with Leo the 13th alone writing 86 encyclicals over 25 years. And Pope Leo the 13th was the Pope during the Industrial Revolution, which, you know, the thing that AI

often gets referenced to. And he's most well known for Rehrom Novorum, which is this insiphym, from 1891, which was really advocating for the rights of workers, which of course we're going to desperately need as we move into AI. That's right. And that's really what the encyclicals are about. They're a format for addressing civilization scale moments. And in 200 years of using this tool of encyclicals, they have never dedicated one entirely to technology until now. People probably caught the headlines around Magnifica humanitas. But this was not something that happened overnight. There's been a decade of buildup. The Vatican's been engaged on a. AI, you know, going back to the Minerva dialogues in 2016, which were these informal conversations with Silicon Valley.

And then there was the Rome call for AI ethics in 2020 alongside Microsoft and IBM. And I believe, Aza, you were actually at the Vatican for one of these events, weren't you? Yeah. I believe the 2020 conversation. And actually, it's important that there's a historic way in which the Vatican and the previous popes have spoken about the dangers of an arms race. And specifically, Pope John the 23, in 1963, when the world was just weeks. past the Cuban Missile Crisis had personally backchannel between Kennedy and Khrushchev

about the dangers of the nuclear arms race. And his radio appeal, which he said publicly, was later credited by Khrushchev as one of the factors that pulled them back from the brink. Because if you think about it, that really was a civilizational moment. We almost went to nuclear war. And months later, another encyclical, Pacham and Therese, was published by Pope John the 23rd, which is the first encyclical ever addressed not just to Catholics, but to all people of goodwill. and it directly named the arms race dynamic for nuclear weapons as the problem, with its core demand that the arms race cannot be stopped by negotiation alone. It has to reach, quote, men's very souls.

This resonates so deeply with the way that we see this work at Center for Human Technology, which is that this isn't just telling people the information about the dangers of AI. It's actually about a more spiritual, almost soul-level confrontation. Are we really willing to annihilate? ourselves and the continuity of life. That's what we were dealing with in nuclear weapons. And the Vatican actually further, in the Second Vatican Council in 1965, condemned the nuclear arms race as, quote, one of the greatest curses on the human race. And so in my brief moment with Pope Leo, I kind of emphasized the dangers of the AI arms race, which I would argue is also a curse

on the human race. And that's really the main essence, the main takeaway of what my participation there was trying to communicate. Yeah, so I think it's very interesting. We were having this conversation with Yuval Harari recently, and he pointed out how strange it is that here we are deep into the modern world where you would think that we would have developed the governance structures to deal with, honestly, near-godlike technology or power. And yet the only place that we're here,

hearing a kind of moral poll being held is a 2,000-year-old religious institution. And it's just worth pausing and thinking about that, that why is it that a 2,000-year-old institution is the only one that's really standing up to start to say, you know, this race is unacceptable. And it's sort of an indictment, honestly, of modernity. Tristan, I want you, though, to drop us in as a listener. Because we're sort of speaking about going there. And my hunch is that listeners are like,

what does it actually like to go to the Vatican? Like put us inside the Vatican walls. Just what is it like? Yeah, I mean, it was pretty amazing. You know, you land in the Rome airport and you take a taxi to the Vatican walls, and there you are, and you have the Swiss guards who are wearing this colorful, famous blue, yellow, orange sort of uniform.

And they've got their, you know, it's this whole formal structure. And they had a stay, actually, in the Domus Sankte-Marthe, which is actually where Pope Francis stayed. It's basically the dormitories where all the visiting cardinals and priests around the world when they visit the Vatican where they stay. And so we had the privilege of staying in this incredible dormitory, which is a combination of very nice and kind of upscale, but also very basic and very kind of monk-like, the accommodations, which is where Pope Francis stayed because he cared about having the same living conditions as everyone else that is part of the Catholic Church. as speaking to our kind of common humanity. And it's really wild.

You know, you wake up in the morning and you have your coffee downstairs and everyone else there is, you know, a cardinal are visiting and they've got the whole garb on and everything. And, you know, then there's this weird pool of tech geeks, you know, who've been flown from around the world and academics and people who think about AI.

And it's just kind of a fascinating kind of culture moment. You go outside, you open the door and it's, you know, in the morning and the sun is shining and you open the door and immediately you see just the vast Basilica San Pietro or the St. Peter's Basilica, which is the biggest, I believe, church in the world. And you know, you go in and you can enter into the side door. And when you open the door, you're actually behind the kind of gated part where tourists kind of are normally seeing. So you're actually coming into as if you're coming out of the sort of special private parts of the church.

And it was just wild. It was really a privilege and honor to be there. I couldn't believe we got to stay inside the Vatican walls. And I just want to thank Paolo Bonanti, who was our host and person who really got us to the Vatican and who's been leading a lot of the AI-related engagement for the Vatican for many years. He's a dear friend. He actually couldn't be there because he was attending to a family member who was having some trouble.

But deep gratitude to Paulo and to everyone at the Vatican for hosting us. It was a wild experience. And tell me about, like, you told me a story of somebody that you spent time with who's like very well-versed in AI. and everything Vatican and his waking up moment I think it's really important. Yeah, well, so first of all,

I was surprised to hear how much our work had already been witnessed and integrated by the Vatican. The social dilemma was very popular than seen by many of the cardinals and priests that we spoke to. And specifically, there was a fascinating experience where there was someone from the DeCastrian Communications,

which is our host during the conference, who had spent three days, with us, you know, three days with us talking about this distinction between the ethical use of AI and kind of like, how do we preserve a human future from a kind of ethics point of view versus the kind of arms race for AGI. And it wasn't literally until there we were sitting, five minutes away from meeting Pope Leo on the final day. And there was this light bulb moment that I watched go off in his mind where he realized, oh my God, there's actually two different conversations here. One is about the ethical use of AI and the kind of preserving

humanity, which is a moral appeal. And then there's this other conversation about this arms race to AGI. And then he said, and he looked at me and he said, wait, and that's really dangerous. And he's like, and that's happening really fast. Like, we have to act right now. And I was like, yes, exactly. Because these are two distinct conversations and they happen at different timelines. And so I think this is really important because, you know, as we have said so many times

and what the social one was trying to do and what the AI doc film was trying to do was kind of name this cacophony of different conversations people have about AI that kind of don't converge to getting to this kind of converging conversation that underneath it all that's driving all these outcomes of whether we get a pro-worker AI or not

is actually this arms race to dominate and deploy this technology faster than the other guy. And if dominating deploying and market dominance means automating work versus creating a pro-worker future, then we're going to create an automating work future. And that outcome, if we want to address that outcome, we have to get underneath and deal with the competition. In some sense, it's just trivial to say,

like, obviously there's a race by all the major companies to get to AGI and to own the world economy, build a god, that whole thing. And yet it's so easy to send attention to the things that arise in the field, which are all of the symptoms. And I actually think there's probably something deeper going on here, just at the human level,

which is to focus on just like the ethics. Like, that's a slower conversation that you get to sort of philosophize about, And it doesn't have so many consequences it feels. And so it just feels safer to be in that conversation than to actually throw your mind against the grindstone of realizing that the race, which seems very hard to stop, is completely unsafe.

And actually, I think you were mentioning that at the end of your time at the Vatican, somebody asked, like, what are everyone in the room? What are they feeling? Like, how would you summarize the last couple of days? And you said that they gave two answers. one was sort of apocalyptic and the other was hopeful

and you know it sounds like well go ahead yeah I think you're going to say it sounds like apocalyptic from the AI doc but as some of our listeners may know the word apocalypse

comes from the meaning not just the end of the world it means a lifting of the veil a revealing of the truth underneath and I think that's exactly what this is as you and I have often said AI is humanity's ultimate test, but also our greatest

invitation, because it's forcing us to confront the shadows. And the shadows, of course, are humanity are the incentives and game theory that we let dictate how technology terraforms us. Yeah, what you just said is it's so important about this lifting of the veil. What do we actually mean by that? Well, AI forces us to confront the existing incentives of our system. So, for example, in Magnifica,

Humana Tos, which is the encyclical, Pope Leo said, quote, in the short term, it may seem advantageous to reduce labor costs or maximize financial efficiency, but in the long term, this undermines the very foundation of social existence. While technological successes are celebrated, the social fabric is progressively eroded, as if by a silent virus. And I think what Pope Leo is speaking to here is the mistake of valuing things entirely by productivity, valuing through the lens of financial efficiency. It's a reasonable thing to do.

You should include that instead of things that we want to value. We should get more efficient in some ways. But if you maximize that, and that's the essence of all value, then you're going to automate all your work away, you're not going to have a social fabric. Think of it the same way as when the China shock happened in the 1990s in the early 2000s when we did global trade. Well, if we're maximizing for just cheap goods,

then obviously let's just outsource all the manufacturing to China because they can do it more cheaply. But then suddenly you wake up 20 years later and you've got a national security issue because China can turn off the spigot and they control all the pharmaceuticals and the rare earth minerals and they've been doing all the manufacturing.

And so if you're just optimizing for financial efficiency, you might weaken national security or you might haul out your social fabric. And if you're just optimizing for engagement and attention, well, it seems like a good thing at the beginning because then people are getting more of what they want, quote, and it's good for a moment. But at the end of the day,

you just maximize for doom scrolling and loneliness. And so what I really think, and we've said this many times in this podcast, is that the AI problem is a confrontation with how we have been misvaluing things. And that is, I think, part of the great reveal of what this moment represents. The Pope directly did also speak to the arms race, and he said, quote, AI must be freed from an armed logic of competition driven by the pursuit of geopolitical

and commercial dominance. He said, artificial intelligence needs to be disarmed. I'm so happy that he said this because he's speaking directly to the arms race dynamic and again, you know, in a world where each actor in the game theory, each company, each country,

it's hard for them to speak to the dangers of the arms race and you need sometimes the outsiders, the moral voices that are sort of speaking to the civilizational moment as the ones that we rely on to get us out of that arms race. And again, the precedent of how the Vatican engage on nuclear weapons is very, very relevant

here. You know, we are obviously saying many similar things, but the Pope's megaphone is quite larger than ours. I think that brings us to, you know, one of the other surprising figures who is there with you at the Vatican, actually who stood next to the Pope while he announced the encyclical, was an AI researcher, and one of the, one of the co-founders of Anthropic, it was Christopher Ola. And I'm curious what you made of him being here. I think one of the things that he said, that I just wanted to quote as we get into this question, because it's exactly on this topic, as he said, quote,

every frontier AI lab, including Anthropic, operates inside a set of incentives and constraints that can sometimes conflict with doing the right thing. For instance, the pressure to stay commercially viable and to stay at the research frontier. No matter how sincerely NF is intent to do the right thing, I believe many of us do and will always be influenced by those incentives, and that is why, if we want this technology to go well,

it is the normless important that there be people outside those incentives. We need moral voices that the incentives cannot bend. We need moral voices that the incentives cannot bend. I think that just sums up the whole issue. It was interesting to have Chris Ola there. It's notable for people who don't know, so Anthropic is obviously known as the safety-oriented frontier AI lab. But Christopher Ola, for those who don't know,

is actually a technical engineer working at Anthropic. He was a co-founder. And specifically Chris Ola is known for something called mechanistic interpretability, which is like basically taking the digital brain that you've trained of like mythos or fable, this like AI brain, and then doing a brain scan and saying which neurons light up in that brain when it gives different answers. Because the way you get to kind of AI safety is you have the digital brain operating, but then you test and start locating, okay, these are the digital neurons that are associated with deception,

or these are the digital neurons that are associated with scheming, or these are the digital neurons that are associated with the AI, by thinking in a word called fear. And if you can theoretically do that and have a comprehensive enough net to catch those negative thoughts or negative emotions or negative thinking patterns

or sort of neuronal patterns, then theoretically you could use that to create a safer AI. But it's very interesting is that they had a technical person there from Anthropic. And I wonder what the Vatican's understanding of his role Anthropic really was.

Yeah, I mean, it's not like when they did the encyclical on the nuclear arms race, they had Oppenheimer. there. Or the head of Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman, the defense contractor is there. And when Post-Francis released, La Dautocie, which was an encyclical on the climate in 2015, no oil executives in the room. There was no one from Exxon in the room. And it's a little weird to have an AI company leader, even if they're from the quote, safer AI company, right there at the same place that Pope Leo is doing the encyclical. And I'm very glad that they

did, because I think it can be easy for Silicon Valley to not. Knape at, you know, the Vatican say, like, well, you don't really understand what's going on. You don't understand the technology. Leave it to us. But to have Christopher Ola there sort of meant that they couldn't make those kinds of claims. Here's someone who's, like, the deepest involved in the technology saying, actually, this is right. We need moral voices that cannot be bent by incentives. You know, when I think about this, there's, I'm very curious, you know, your experience, Christopher's experience.

Because when I went to the UN, the experience that I had was that the diplomats were terrified, that they didn't really know what was going on. And there's this very strange feeling that I had, which is I'm sitting across from these diplomats that are negotiating on behalf of their countries about how AI will roll out into their countries. And they just didn't know the basics of AI. and they didn't know some of the really terrifying most recent examples of AI uncontrollability, the ones we've talked about here, like the Alibaba AI, that during training secretly hacked out through the Alibaba firewall

to eventually mine crypto to get itself more resources. And I was talking to the head of one of the tops of the UN Foundation. It's like, well, what can we do? And the simple question I asked was, well, do you think that all of the diplomats doing the negotiation know these examples that you now know? It's like, no. Do you think that if they did know, they would be negotiating differently? Yes.

Then your job is to make sure that everyone knows, because that makes a different future. Well, and this is not to beat a dead horse, but this is our theory of change, right? Clarity creates agency. If you're actually living in a lack of understanding, this is not said with any disdain for those who are here. I mean, AI is an incredibly complicated topic. And to understand the frontier of the capabilities and the, different risk factors or, you know, evidence of doing AI doing rogue things.

Like, you have to be monitoring these weird corners of Twitter to be aware of those things. And you got a lot in your plate if you're a UN diplomat. Are you also going to pay attention to Twitter and these weird examples of what AI is doing? So, yeah. And Aza specifically just to let people in, you weren't just at the UN, you did screening of the AI doc for many diplomats from all the countries. Is that right? Yeah, that's right. It was hosted, I think, by Spain in their beautiful building they'd invited, I don't know,

something of the order of 100, 150 diplomats and sort of like heads of various UN departments to come watch the film. And I really want every listener to hear that when you imagine sort of like top diplomats or heads of state, you imagine them to be the most informed people on these topics because they're doing the most important negotiations

on these topics. And what we continually discover that when we get into these rooms, that that's just not the case. And that is both really scary, but also where, you know, I know Tristan, you and I find hope because that means there's a kind of like, we just don't really know overhang, meaning that there's a lot of headway to be made through just communication by having people understand like the path that we're on and making it crystal clear.

Yeah, exactly. It's like, it's as we've said in this podcast so many times, and part of the humane technology philosophy is the complexity gap, that the complexity of what needs to be known about technology is growing at an exponential pace, and the complexity of what is understood by society or even the leaders of society is not growing at a commensurate rate to the complexity.

And the dimensions of which you don't see amount to blind spots. So if the world is getting more complex in like 20 more dimensions, and you're only seeing in 10 dimensions, there's 10 dimensions of blind spot that are left over. And so the kind of no adult thing is not to put people down. I mean, sadly, social media has also been dropping the, complexity of what people are able to hold and what they're aware of. But this might also sound depressing to people, but actually what it does is, again,

clarity creates agency. It speaks to you either need to drop the curve of how much complexity you're creating in the world, or you need to up the curve of the total understanding. And a simple way to do that is to have the world's most powerful groups of people and the most powerful networks, whether it's the UN or all the social ministers, the digital ministers who banned social media for kids under 16, you know, getting everybody together in these groups, watching something like the AI doc, and then actually having a conversation. and then choosing differently once they see it. So clarity creates agency. Clarity is part of closing the complexity gap.

You know, the metaphor that jumps into my mind when you say that Tristan is that, like, the amount of complexity we have to hold, there's like a balloon, and it's just blowing up exponentially as like we have to hold more and more complexity. But the sides of our brains, the size of our skulls isn't increasing. So we're trying to blow up in bigger, bigger balloon inside of your head. And that just creates intense amounts of pressure, which I think we all fill. And the solution is we have to put all of our heads together

so the balloon can fit inside all of them. I think we have sort of two parts of this conversation left. The first part is like, I think it's a lot. it's worth getting a little bit more into the encyclical and just I'm curious just on if there are parts of the encyclical you want to particularly call out both for what was inspiring as well as where more work is needed and then we'll sort of end with okay let's tell the baker's story like why does this all matter um will this actually change things in the world so let's start with the first part yeah so just to speak about the encyclical and obviously there's been a lot of coverage of it

um but to say the basics as a pope leo framed the fundamental challenge as not technological, but anthropological, that it's a human question, not just a technological question. He also said the core question isn't what AI can do, it's who we are becoming as we interact with it. And he also spoke in the encyclical to power concentration, which we talked about a lot in this podcast, that he said AI tends to amplify the power

of those who already possess economic resources, expertise, and access to data, and that those who control AI will impose their own moral vision, which will become the invisible infrastructure of these systems. On war, he also said, quote, no algorithm can make war morally acceptable. AI does not remove the intrinsic inhumanity of conflict. Indeed, it can only bring about conflict more quickly and render it more impersonal. And again, this is just so related to the frame of AI takes the existing misalignment or competitive logic and then supercharges every fault line of where that competitive logic is operating. And so in war, where there's already a race to have,

arms build up, there's now a race for autonomous weapons and AI arms build up. And that creates a world that you really don't want. Like if you see these videos of, you know, the soldiers in Ukraine or in Russia who are, you know, on the front lines of that war, and they're just literally waiting there for a drone to see them and then kill them. And there's like nothing you can do. I mean, it's the most inhumane thing ever, right? We have to be careful about engaging in wars that will literally reproduce the Terminator scenario that we see in those films. Yeah, I think, Tristan, you're talking about, I mean, it's very hard to observe,

but these moments when people are getting hunted bound by drones, they just literally give up. And their eyes go to the ground, and they just stand there and wait for the end. And it reminds me all of this of something Martin Luther King Jr. said a long time ago, which was, it's pretty famous, but I think it's on point. The means by which we live have outdistance, the ends by which we live. our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power.

We have guided missiles and misguided men. Yeah, exactly. I mean, this is the whole, can you have an aligned AI inside of a misaligned system governed by bad incentives? And then you're back to Crisolo. We need people and moral voices who the incentives cannot bend. And so, you know, I think one of the reasons why the encyclical is so powerful is that it marks a point on the human. timeline of more leaders standing up to push back against technological encroachment or overreach into our humanity. And to me, this is evidence of a growing sort of human movement. It's the

growing human movement that just added an extra 1.4 billion people into the mix. That's a big chunk in the human movement. We now have 1.4 billion new members. Yeah. That's right. I think what we're going to see is, as the timeline continues more and more sort of moments that are Pope scale. At least that's my hope. Pope scale is my new favorite word. Yeah, this is not a hyper-scaling. This is Pope scaling. Where I personally get hope coming out of this encyclical, or at least I find really interesting, and this goes back to Pope John the 23rd. And you mentioned this briefly, but I think it's really important to dwell on it is that, you know, Pope John the 23rd didn't just write the encyclical

Patchman-Therese, Peace on Earth. He got involved. He acted as a crucial mediator between Kennedy and Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis. So he sort of like left the just the role of moral leader and became moral mediator. And I think there's, when we first started engaging with the Vatican, I did not realize that they had a secretariat of state inside the Vatican, inside the holy see, which is to say they have the equivalent of a department of state. And so I think there's going to be more that happens that we won't really be able to see where places that are neutral and moral that don't bend to incentives like the Vatican can behind the scenes play very interesting roles in negotiating what otherwise might be impossible negotiations.

100%. And that's the thing I'm excited about in what comes next is, you know, what could the Vatican do to actively mediate conversations between the countries, the various countries' AI labs? You know, we talked often about the need for something like a Bretton Woods that after the last destructive technology nuclear weapons, we had, you know, hundreds of delegates from hundreds of countries gather in a hotel, the Mount Washington Hotel in New Hampshire, to come up with this positive sum economic system to try to prevent society's from warring and coming up with an economic system and currencies and all that, that we create

more peace, given that we were living in a new age of nuclear weapons. And we have another destructive technology that totally changes the social fabric. We need a new kind of social contract. I know that's scary to people. It should not be engineered outside of the public participation of regular people and citizens, but we do need to have something that preserves not just what it means to be humans, but that humans have a future at all in an AI-dominated world. And maybe we don't want to have AI dominate that world.

And so, you know, this conversation is playing out right now in real time. And it's things like this encyclical and Pope Leo and the Vatican that are moving in the direction of, no, we can't do that. We have to preserve a human future. Thanks, Tristan, for this conversation. It's always fun to get to do the spotlights with you. And for everyone that's got here, thank you so much for listening to your undivided attention. And thank you again to all of our friends and allies. in the Vatican that were to make this possible.

All right at upward. Thank you so much. Your undivided attention is produced by the Center for Humane Technology, a non-profit working to catalyze a humane future. Our senior producer is Julia Scott. Josh Lash is our researcher and producer, mixing on this episode by Jeff Sudaken, original music by Ryan and Hayes Holiday, and a special thanks to the whole Center for Humane Technology team

for making this podcast possible. You can find show notes, transcripts, so much more at humanetech.com. And if you like the podcast, we would be grateful if you could rate it on Apple Podcasts. It helps others find the show. And if you made it all the way here, thank you for your undivided attention.