Ethical Human + AI the Pulse
The Week UNESCO Launched Tools While Engineers Were Being Silenced, as someone who does the architecting and building as you know I have lenses on both sides. Leading an AI academy so you just don't build, but you architect is a differentiator.
This week gave us a perfect split screen.
On one side: global summits, keynote speeches, new governance frameworks, and a Pope calling for ethical guardrails.
On the other: engineers saying they know the risks but can't speak up. AI models making life-or-death decisions differently than humans. Workplace cultures built on silence.
𝗪𝗲'𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗱𝗿𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸𝘀.
Let me be clear: I'm not here to dismiss the summits or the speeches. We need both the architecture and the alarm bells. But when the people closest to the code are being hushed while the people furthest from it are making proclamations, we've got a dangerous gap.
And that gap? It's where harm lives. So we have word to do, see you in the Whatsapp Group or at the events at the end of this newsletter 📆 .
The Global Stage: Frameworks and Faith
UNESCO launched new AI governance tools at their 4th Global Forum on the Ethics of AI in Riyadh. The promise? Enabling policymakers to strengthen actions toward inclusive AI. Read the full story
Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro stood at the AI Horizons 2026 Summit calling for federal guardrails. His message was clear: we need safe, ethical AI growth with regulatory boundaries.
Read the full story and Read the full story
Pope Leo XIV met with officials, reinforcing calls for ethical AI boundaries rooted in moral frameworks. Catholic tech leaders gathered for "Beyond Fear: A Catholic Vision for Artificial Intelligence." Read the full story and Read the full story
Even Venezuela backed ethical AI governance at UNESCO's Digital Learning Week. Read the full story
Here's what I see: 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗰𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗰𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝘃𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲.
Summits are necessary. Declarations matter. But frameworks without enforcement are just expensive wishes. And when those frameworks are built in rooms where engineers, community members, and impacted populations aren't centred, they're incomplete before they're even published.
The Silence Inside the Machine
While leaders were on stages, HR Dive published something that should make every one of us pause:
AI engineers say they know AI's ethical risks. They see the problems. They understand the harms.
But workplace culture silences them. AI Governance has always been less abut compliance and more about culture, hence our Book Club next week 22nd Sept with the Shoshana Rosenberg Author of Practical AI Governance. Read the full story Read that again.
The people building the tools know what could go wrong. And they can't say it out loud without risking their jobs, their reputations, their futures.
This came out the same week a former Anthropic engineer warned that his peers "earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade."
Not could cause harm. Could kill us all.
And still - silence.
Stuart Russell, president of the International Association for Safe and Ethical AI, called international cooperation "absolutely essential." OpenAI disclosed six more incidents of unexpected AI behavior.
But if the people inside these organizations can't speak, how do we even map the risks we're supposed to be cooperating on?
𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘄𝗼𝗻'𝘁 𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗲. 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘄𝗼𝗻'𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿.
When AI Makes Moral Choices We Don't Recognize
Here's where it gets concrete.
Researchers at Penn State asked: who gets the kidney?
They tested AI models against human moral reasoning in high-stakes scenarios. The result? AI models approach ethical decisions differently than humans do. They show little of the uncertainty people express when faced with difficult choices. Read the full story
Let me translate that: AI doesn't hesitate. It doesn't second-guess. It doesn't wrestle with competing values or sit with the weight of a decision that will end or save a life.
It just decides.
And we're letting it.
The AMA released guidance on health AI ethics, offering case studies and CME to ensure physicians have sound ethical frameworks. Read the full story
That's important work. But guidance for doctors doesn't address the models themselves - the datasets, the training, the encoded biases about who deserves care, who gets prioritized, whose pain gets believed.
If the AI was trained on a healthcare system that already underserves Black mothers, undocuments chronic pain in women, and deprioritizes disabled patients, your guidance won't override the foundation.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗜𝘁'𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲.
The Ones Trying to Build Something Better 💗
Not every story this week was a warning or a failure. There are people doing the work. Like me 💪🏾 ;). And:
A Shelburne professor published an AI ethics handbook for professionals and everyday people navigating this landscape. Read the full story
Riverside, California, created an AI working group with three City Council members to study safe and ethical use of the technology. Read the full story
A University of Delaware piece highlighted philosophy's moment - the growing recognition that as AI becomes more powerful, critical thinking and ethical oversight become more essential. Read the full story
A former U.S. lawmaker spoke in Duncan, Oklahoma, acknowledging that AI will never be completely safe but challenging us to design a society that makes it as safe as possible. Read the full story
Salesforce published a piece reframing trust not as a limit on AI, but as the accelerant - turning human rights and governance into competitive advantage. Read the full story
Local cyber experts are speaking at community events about AI safety and ethical concerns. Read the full story and Read the full story
Even tax practitioners are examining ethics and AI in their field, asking what happens when algorithms handle decisions about debt, audits, and financial justice. Read the full story
And faith communities are stepping in. An Athens Summit speech explored faith, moral compass, and the gift of possibility in an age of AI. Read the full story
A St. Thomas AI ethics expert called for an independent body to regulate the technology - not industry self-regulation, not voluntary frameworks, but real oversight with teeth. Read the full story
𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗱𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻.
What Do You See?
Here's the pattern:
We have summits and speeches. We have guidance and handbooks. We have engineers who know the risks and can't speak. We have AI making moral choices without moral frameworks. We have local governments trying to catch up while global forums set aspirations no one is enforcing.
And in the middle of all of it, we have communities and patients and workers and citizens who are the testing ground for every unexamined model, every unchallenged dataset, every "move fast" decision that breaks people instead of things.
The question isn't whether we need frameworks. We do.
The question is: 𝘄𝗵𝗼'𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗺 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗻, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱?
Because right now, the people with proximity to harm aren't the ones with proximity to power.
What Needs to Happen?
We need engineers protected when they speak up - legally, financially, culturally. Whistleblower protections that actually work. Channels that don't end careers. We need people that can craft culture with the Board.
We need frameworks that include impacted communities from the start, not as an afterthought or a focus group once the tool is already deployed.
We need independent regulatory bodies with enforcement power. Not advisory boards. Not voluntary commitments. Actual consequences for harm.
We need datasets audited for bias before deployment, not after lawsuit. We need transparency about what AI is deciding, how it's deciding, and who profits when it gets it wrong.
And we need to stop pretending that innovation and ethics are opposites.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗱𝗼 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆.
What Are You Doing This Week?
Here's your call.
If you're building AI: create a channel where your team can flag ethical concerns without fear. Make it anonymous if you have to. But make it real.
If you're using AI in your work: ask what it was trained on. Ask who tested it. Ask what happens when it's wrong.
If you're leading an organization: don't wait for regulation. Build your own ethical review process. Hire for ethics, not just engineering.
If you're a community member: show up to those local government meetings. Ask questions. Demand transparency.
If you're teaching, preaching, parenting, mentoring: talk about AI like you talk about any other tool that shapes life and death. Because that's what it is.
Let's Talk
I want to hear from you.
𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸'𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝘄𝘀? What pattern are you noticing that I didn't name?
𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱, 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 to move from aspiration to accountability?
𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸 - one action, one conversation, one decision - to make sure AI serves humanity instead of replacing it?
Drop your thoughts. Challenge me. Share what's working where you are.
Because summits and speeches matter.
But we build the future in the in-between spaces - the slack channels and the classrooms and the city councils and the quiet conversations where someone finally says:
This isn't right. And we're going to do something about it. Let's be those people.
✊🏾
#EthicalAI #HumanAndAI #SystematicEquity #AIEthics #AIGovernance #TechAccountability
Together. We're building the future of Human + AI - and it's going to take all of us. See you in the Whatsapp Group or 📆 :
This Sunday 20th September 20:00 or get the replay: sign up / share our SEO - AEO - GEO session "Why You Rank on Google or LinkedIn - But You're Invisible to AI" sign up
In person Zurich HR + AI Lab is 21st September
and perhaps virtually for Book Club 22nd September.
#EthicalAI #HumanAndAI #SystematicEquity #AIEthics #JusticeInTech
0 comments