Ethical Human and AI Community and News in your inbox 💗
Jun 05, 2026 12:18 pm
Your Ethical Human + AI: The Pulse
🚨 The Ethics Performance Is Over. Now What?
Let's be honest: AI ethics has become the shiniest participation trophy in tech.
This week alone, we've got priests advising Silicon Valley, new ethics indexes launching at universities, law firms scrambling to update their guidelines, and countries convening urgent dialogues. Everyone wants to talk about ethical AI.
But who's actually building it? If that’s you raise it in the community, what you’re doing, what you need? In the 💗 Community WhatsApp Group, join if you have not already!
Because here's the pattern I'm seeing: a whole lot of committees, credentials, and conferences. A whole lot of "guidance" and "frameworks." And underneath it all? The same power structures. The same exclusions. The same communities getting algorithmic harm while others get venture capital.
Let me show you what I mean.
The Institution Industrial Complex
UVA Darden just appointed Patrick Higgins to lead their LaCross Institute for Ethical AI in Business. Another prestigious appointment. Another well-resourced institute.
San Diego State is rolling out faculty micro-credentials in responsible AI literacy. MBA classrooms are wrestling with AI ethics in their curriculum. Boston University launched an AI Ethics Index to help schools evaluate real-world AI impact.
And look — I'm not mad at education. We need this literacy. We need leaders who can think critically about algorithmic power.
But let's ask the hard question: Who gets access to these programs? Whose voices are shaping these frameworks? Because if we're just credentialing the same demographics that built the biased systems in the first place, we're not disrupting anything.
We're rebranding it.
When Ethics Becomes Marketing
Anthropic just played a masterclass in ethics theatre. They positioned themselves as the "responsible AI company" — and it worked. They eclipsed OpenAI in public perception by using what one critic brilliantly calls "AI ethics slop."
Ethics as competitive advantage. Morality as market differentiation.
This is what happens when we let corporations define what "ethical" means. They'll wear it like a costume at an awards show and then write it off as a business expense.
Meanwhile, the real questions go unasked: Whose data are you extracting? Whose labor are you exploiting? Whose communities are your models harming?
Ethics without accountability is just good PR.
The Legal Scramble
Ohio just released a new AI ethics guide for lawyers and judges. Florida Bar says AI ethics are "just the beginning" for law firms. New guidance and proposed rule changes are dropping across the legal profession because — surprise — AI hallucinations and fabricated case law are causing real harm.
Here's what I appreciate: the legal field is taking this seriously because they have to. Malpractice is on the line. Careers are at risk. People are noticing when AI gets it catastrophically wrong.
But let's be clear: these ethics rules are reactive, not proactive. They're damage control, not systemic redesign.
And they're focused almost entirely on professional liability — not on the communities who face algorithmic discrimination in sentencing, bail decisions, and predictive policing.
Who's writing ethics guidelines for that?
Global Governance: Who Gets a Seat?
Uganda just convened a national stakeholders dialogue to strengthen ethical AI governance. Catholic leaders in Ghana are calling for ethical AI development following Pope Leo XIV's new encyclical.
This matters. Global South voices must shape AI governance — not as an afterthought, not as a token consultation, but as co-architects.
Because here's the truth: AI systems trained on Western data, funded by Western capital, and governed by Western frameworks will reproduce Western power structures. Period.
Uganda and Ghana stepping up? That's not just participation. That's resistance.
But we need to watch closely. Are these dialogues actually shifting power? Or are they checking a box so international bodies can say they "consulted stakeholders"?
Inclusion without redistribution is colonialism with a Zoom link.
The Religion Question (And It's Complicated)
A study just dropped showing that AI often omits religious perspectives when answering ethical questions. And now there's a Silicon Valley priest advising tech companies on AI ethics.
So here's where I sit with this: Religious traditions hold centuries of moral reasoning. They centre community care, dignity, and the sacred worth of human life. Those frameworks absolutely belong in AI ethics conversations.
But.
(You knew there was a but.)
We cannot let one religious tradition — especially one historically aligned with colonial and patriarchal power — dominate the ethical landscape. If we're inviting faith leaders to the table, it better be a big table. Muslim scholars. Indigenous spiritual leaders. Buddhist ethicists. Secular humanists.
Moral wisdom is not a monopoly.
And if AI is going to engage with religion in ethical reasoning, it needs to do so with the same rigour we demand around race, gender, and class. Otherwise, we're just automating religious bias.
Healthcare's Reckoning
China is rolling out AI in healthcare at massive scale — and it's spurring urgent calls for global guardrails. Meanwhile, scientists are asking: Can AI actually be safe, accurate, and beneficial in science?
Healthcare AI has life-or-death stakes. Diagnostic algorithms that underperform on darker skin tones. Predictive models that deny care to disabled patients. Chatbots giving dangerously wrong medical advice.
And now we're scaling it globally with no international standards, no accountability mechanisms, and no way to track harm across borders.
This isn't innovation. This is recklessness.
We need global guardrails now. Not recommendations. Not voluntary frameworks. Enforceable standards with teeth. Independent oversight. Community-led audits.
Because when AI fails in healthcare, it's not the tech companies who pay the price.
It's us.
The Real Work: Education Beyond Credentials
Here's what gives me hope: educators who aren't waiting for permission.
The National College Attainment Network held a Spring Institute connecting AI and advising for members. Adult educators are bridging minds and machines through ethical reflection.
This is the work. Not the credential. Not the certificate to hang on your wall. But the daily practice of asking: How do we centre humanity when AI walks into our classrooms, our advising sessions, our communities?
How do we teach with AI without surrendering to it?
Because if we don't answer that question ourselves, the ed-tech companies will answer it for us. And their answer will be whatever sells.
Supply Chains and Strategic Priorities
Fast Company says ethical AI is now a "strategic priority" for supply chain leaders.
And I want to believe that. I really do.
But strategy without investment is aspiration. Priority without policy is performance.
So here's my question for supply chain leaders reading this: What percentage of your AI budget goes to bias testing? To worker impact assessments? To community engagement in the regions your algorithms affect?
If it's less than 10%, your "strategic priority" is a press release.
✊ What Do You See? What Needs to Happen? What Are You Doing This Week?
Alright, community. Let's get real.
What do you see?
Look at this week's headlines. What's the pattern? Is it institutions building ethical infrastructure — or ethical theatre? Are we creating accountability or just credentials? Name what you're noticing.
What needs to happen?
If you could redesign one system this week — legal ethics rules, healthcare AI governance, educational AI frameworks — what would you change? Not improve. Not optimize. Transform. What would systematic equity actually look like in that space?
What are you doing this week?
I'm serious. What's one conversation you're going to have? One policy you're going to question? One room you're going to walk into and ask, "Who's not here?"
Because here's the thing about all these ethics initiatives, frameworks, and institutes: they only matter if they change practice. If they shift power. If they make someone who was excluded, included. Someone who was harmed, whole.
Otherwise, we're just rearranging deck chairs on a very algorithmic Titanic.
The work is ours. The moment is now.
Let's build something that doesn't just talk about equity.
Let's build the actual thing.
#EthicalAI #HumanAndAI #SystematicEquity #AIEthics #AIGovernance #CommunityFirst
Remember upcoming inclusive learning spaces:🎟️ Impact Hub Session June 19th Zurich, June 24th Joy and AI London almost sold out, and in our AI Academies and HR AI Academies