3. Most of the document appears to resemble an attitude toward technology that resembles the insidious attitude of progressives toward “hate speech.” Who is going to define what is “overreach” by civil institutions? The Church? Governments? Soothsayers? The philosophy of prophylactic prohibitions which must be accompanied by enforcement smacks of pre-crime.

4. Based on the summary and acknowledging that it is 700 words describing 40,000, there is a lot of ramalama-dingdong in the letter. What does “Humanity must safeguard its inherent grandeur and dignity amid AI advancements.” mean, for example, in practical terms? Similarly, the rhetoric about truth as a gift to be shared is ominous. Who gets to define “truth”? I can guess, and I am pretty sure what a lot of that “truth” will be.

5. The encyclical rapidly leaps into socialist territory and social justice cant, emphasizing that governments and laws must ensure that the benefits if AI be distributed fairly, whatever that means.

6. This was seemingly seen by the Vatican as an opportunity to use a hot topic, artificial intelligence, to get worldwide publicity for the usual papal hobby horses: social justice, re-distribution of wealth, open borders, pacifism, “disarmament,” diversity, equity and inclusion, environmentalism, climate change, and increased reliance on the Church.

7. The Pope emphasizes the importance of education to ensure that A.I. is used responsibly. Or does he mean indoctrination? In any case, since U.S. education is crippled already by incompetence, politicization and lack of standards, adding one more task to the list meets the Ethics Alarms Impossibility Rule: “That which is impossible is unethical to advocate no matter how virtuous or beneficial it may in theory.” In fact, the whole encyclical could fairly be placed under this umbrella.

8. Another point at which I would quit reading and metaphorically wad the whole document into a paper ball if I weren’t obligated here is when the Pope extols the U.N. as overseeing “international cooperation.” The U.N. includes Iran on its Human Rights Council. The U.N. just passed a resolution that can reasonably be read as requiring the U.S. to pay damages to nations who claim they are suffering from climate change. The U.N. advocates open borders. To repurpoie what a Chinese dissident memorably said about China, “Don’t trust the U.N. U.N. is asshole.” The U.N. is biased, agenda-driven, and frequently antithetical to the best interests of the United States…you know, like the Catholic Church.

9. As soon as I get my sock drawer in order, finish “War and Peace” and figure out how I’m going to pay all those back taxes, I will read the whole encyclical to see if it is more substantive than the A.I. summary suggests. I don’t see how the Pope’s opinion should factor in U.S. policy, and based on the summary and the part of the document I slogged through, nothing I’ve read so far changes that assessment.

10. In summary, the encyclical warns that artificial intelligence holds promise, risks and perils yet to be understood…like nuclear energy, cloning, and the sewing machine. Yeah, we knew that. In fact, that point was made rather forcefully in “The Terminator,” a film released in 1984.

I wonder if Pope Leo saw it…