Start here

The Global Justice Project, an initiative by Economist Thomas Picketty and the World Inequality Lab presents a comprehensive framework for achieving socio-economic equality while respecting environmental limits. This ambitious (even by my standards) long-term vision outlines a strategic path from 2026 to 2100 that prioritizes human development and planetary sustainability.

The project proposes a Global Justice Fund and a new international democratic order to facilitate this transition. By focusing on political strategies and citizen movements, the report seeks to rebuild majorities dedicated to social justice. Pretty mind-boggling: an integrated roadmap for balancing global prosperity with the long-term habitability of Earth.

Images below generated with NotebookLM

I have been posting my highlights from the fabulous Instapaper reading app to my Tumblr GerdFeed page for a long time, resulting in some 30.000+ posts all of which are available by searching the feed.

Try something like “AGI” in the search box on the right and you'll see EVERY post on this topic in chronological order – pretty cool (and with direct links to the source). The Instapaper app allows my highlights to be automatically posted to Tumblr so… very easy for me:). Below is an image made with Claude Fable5, analysing my Tumblr content (also pretty cool). Have fun (and btw, yes you can subscribe to updates via gerdfeed as well).

Here are 2 videos on this topic, and 3 images based on this recent pierce by The Atlantic: Three Ways to Think About AI and Jobs: Whether automation will make human workers obsolete depends on more than just how smart the AI is.By Rogé Karma. This is a 5* read!

“According to the MIT economists David Autor and Neil Thompson, the divergence between these two professions (weak bundles or strong bundles) boils down to the interaction of technology and expertise.

For accounting clerks, computers replaced many of their least expert skills; the hours they had spent recording transactions and performing manual calculations could now be reallocated to more complex tasks, such as explaining why a department had blown through its budget and figuring out sources of discrepancies between a company’s bank account and its books. This turned the accounting clerk’s job from a middle-class one into a smaller, more professionalized one.

For inventory clerks, on the other hand, computers replaced their most expert skill set—their encyclopedic knowledge of a warehouse’s physical inventory—leaving them to perform more basic tasks such as scanning items and restocking shelves. This transformed the inventory clerk’s role from a well-paying middle-class profession into a lower-paid job with a far bigger pool of potential workers.

In a recent paper, Autor and Thompson find that this basic pattern has held up across more than 300 occupations over the past four decades. “The story is almost never as simple as: We’re in a race with machines and machines will win”

“What matters for a given profession is whether technology enhances a worker’s expertise or commodifies that expertise.”

The Three Layers of the AI Transition (inspired by the X-Post above)

1. Technology

• Build AI systems that outperform humans on many cognitive tasks.
• Make intelligence abundant, cheap, and widely available.
• Primary question: Can we do it?

2. Economics

• Productivity surges.
• Cost of expertise collapses.
• Labor markets, ownership, and wealth distribution must adapt (but don't….)
• Primary question: How do we organize society around abundance?

3. Human Meaning

• Intelligence is no longer humanity's unique advantage.
• Traditional identities built around achievement and productivity are challenged.
• Primary question: What gives life meaning when survival and work are largely automated?

Central Arguments

The Key Insights

AI is a civilizational transition from solving the problem of survival to solving the problem of meaning. The technological challenge is building capable machines. The economic challenge is distributing abundance. The philosophical challenge is: Who are we when our worth is no longer measured primarily by what we can produce?

My 10 year-old framework on the future of technology, digital ethics, androrithms and The Good Future of Humanity line up beautifully with Pope Leo XIV’s recent, historic encyclical Magnifica Humanitas. I am not religious (or catholic) but it is really fascinating to see how my core concepts run completely parallel to the moral warnings emerging from the Vatican, at this moment.

Update: New Video on Gerd.TV

New: the FT on ‘the pope disrupts silicon valley‘ (gift link)

“We are a desire, not an algorithm” – Pope Leo XIV, May 14th, 2026

Here is a simple comparison:

1. “Hellven“: The Fork in the Road

• My Vision: I have long argued that we are at a “fork in the road” moment. Technology itself could lead us to “Heaven”—solving climate change, cancer, and energy crises—or it can lead to “Hell” if left entirely to unchecked commercial monopolies. I call this tension “Hellven.“
• The Pope’s Stance: Leo XIV mirrors this precisely using biblical imagery. He warns that humanity faces a pivotal choice: either construct a new Tower of Babel (a grandiose, hyper-efficient, but ultimately dehumanizing technocratic project) or build Jerusalem piece by piece (a human-centered project of shared responsibility).

2. “Embrace Technology, But Don’t Become It”

• My Vision: A cornerstone of my philosophy is that technology is a magnificent tool, but it lacks existence, agency… a soul. I emphasize that while machines excel at computational data processing, humans must protect what makes them unique: creativity, empathy, and ethics. I warn against the dangers of cognitive outsourcing—atrophying our own critical thinking by relying completely on chatbots.
• The Pope’s Stance: The Pope writes that AI merely “imitates” human functions. He notes that AI can never truly know love, friendship, or responsibility because it lacks a body, a soul, and an inner life. He similarly warns that when technology weakens our critical sense, our inner freedom and peace are placed at severe risk.

3. Disarming AI: Calling out the Monopolies

• My Vision: I have frequently highlighted the massive risk of allowing just two or three private Silicon Valley giants to reshape humanity, operating purely under commercial and geopolitical pressures. I advocate for global “red lines” and strict regulatory frameworks to keep power distributed.
• The Pope’s Stance: In a key segment of his speech, Leo XIV asserts that “Artificial Intelligence needs to be disarmed.” (nice way to put it! He points out that digital power does not rest with states, but with opaque technological actors who evade public oversight. He calls for “disarming” AI, which means freeing it from the mentality of “armed” commercial and geopolitical competition and making it open to democratic debate.

4. The Value of Work vs. Machine Efficiency

• My Vision: I have noted many times that “if you can easily explain your job, it will probably be automated,” but I also maintain that human-only work is our future. I stress that when machines take over the routine, society must totally redefine work and protect the livelihoods of those displaced.
• The Pope’s Stance: The Pope explicitly hits out at the “technocratic paradigm” that reduces human beings to productivity metrics, cognitive performance, or mere data points. He notes that AI paradoxically de-skills workers and subjects them to automated surveillance. He demands that access to dignified work remain a central priority for public policy, ensuring that innovation frees up human time rather than causing mass exclusion.

5. Digital Ethics and the “Invisible” Underclass

• My Vision: I urge the world to look past the shiny, flawless interfaces leaving the “tech factories” and have a serious conversation about digital ethics and real-world consequences.
• The Pope’s Stance: The Pope pulls back the curtain on the tech industry, noting that nothing in AI is magical or entirely immaterial. He brings up the “new forms of slavery” driving the digital economy: the millions of hidden, exploited workers in the Global South doing low-wage data labeling and content moderation, alongside children mining rare earth elements in dangerous conditions just to keep the algorithmic pipeline flowing.

A Comparison Summary

My concept of “The Good Future” attempts to capture the structural, economic, and philosophical shifts of the AI era, while the Pope’s “Civilization of Love” acts as its theological and moral mirror—both are screaming the exact same warning: Keep humanity at the center, or risk losing our essence entirely.

Related reads:

The Atlantic

The Guardian

From the BBC

Pope Leo says AI must be ‘disarmed' in first major teaching….”No algorithm can make war morally acceptable”. …Not only does AI not remove the “intrinsic inhumanity” of war, he said, but it also risks sparking conflict more quickly and rendering it more impersonal by “lowering the threshold for resorting to violence, transforming defense into threat prediction and thus reducing victims to data“.

He suggested comparisons of failing to act against the risks of AI today with the “delay with which both society and the Church came to denounce the scourge of slavery”. He even referred to the risks of “digital colonialism,” linking the abuses of the colonial era to modern tech practices. At one point in this document, the Pope directly issued a “special appeal” to those who develop AI. “Developers bear a particular ethical and spiritual responsibility, for every design choice reflects a vision of humanity,” he said.

For context, see what I said about what I call “The Technocratic Oath”:

AI needs to be disarmed:

Notebook LM Materials:

“In the 2026 encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, Pope Leo XIV addresses the moral implications of artificial intelligence and the shifting landscape of human dignity. He warns against a technocratic paradigm where efficiency and profit override the sanctity of the person, advocating for the “disarming” of AI to prevent it from fueling global conflict or economic exclusion. The sources highlight the Pope’s call for strict ethical governance and transparency, emphasizing that technological power must not reside solely with private corporations but should serve the common good. Beyond digital concerns, the Pontiff offers a historic apology for the Church’s past role in slavery while condemning modern forms of digital exploitation. Ultimately, the text urges humanity to choose a path of fraternal communion over the self-destructive pride symbolized by the biblical Tower of Babel. This comprehensive framework reinforces the Church's commitment to integral human development in an increasingly automated and divided world.

Watch this Explainer video on my Gerd.tv site (download available).

And here is a notebookLM generated podcast (very fitting if somewhat ironic use of AI, in this context:)))

Here is an important realisation I have recently arrived at: AI is taking over the Internet, there is no way to go back to what was before… and we need to be prepared for a dramatic reboot of our entire economic logic. Which means, in this order:

1. The AI-Internet Synthesis: AI is eating the Internet. This total integration of AI into the global digital infrastructure leads to…
2. Mandatory Participation: An outright rejection of AI would basically mean exclusion from modern society, which leads to the need for…
3. Dramatic Counter-Balancing Measures: We must proactively mitigate AI’s disruption of our society, our economic logic and our humanity… which brings us to…
4. The 5P, Future-Fit Framework: We must shift from the outdated profit & growth model to the 5Ps: People, Planet, Purpose, Peace, and Prosperity which would allow us to…
5. Socialize AI's Productivity Gains: This means exploring UBI or UBC (Universal Basic Capital) and beyond… 
6. Post-Ideology Policies: Abandon outdated political labels (Left/Right, Socialist/Capitalist) in favour of pragmatic solutions

And here's another angle on this:

1. The Convergence: AI is no longer just a tool on the internet; it is becoming the very fabric of the internet itself.
2. The Inevitability: To outright reject AI would be, by extension, to exile oneself from the modern digital world.
3. The Necessity of Balance: Since total withdrawal is pretty much impossible, we must urgently architect a counterbalance to AI’s sweeping influence on our social, professional, and economic structures (and we're only at the very beginning, at this point)
4. A New Paradigm: This equilibrium requires a shift from a “1P” logic (Profit) to a holistic 5P framework: People, Planet, Purpose, Peace, and Prosperity.
5. The Great Transition: As AI masters routine labor, work will cease to be the central pillar of human identity. We must prepare for this shift by establishing a Universal Basic Capital (UBC) fund to ensure the dividends of automation are distributed equitably.
6. Transcending Labels: We must move beyond the binary “isms” of the past. Whether we call it capitalism or socialism or something else is irrelevant; what matters is that we implement solutions that fit our new reality now.

I will have a new GerdsTake video on this topic next week. Have a look at my NotebookLM collection to dive deeper (just request access and I will confirm). Linked video in screenshot above: Peter Yang. NEW: I curated this pretty cool NotebookLM video that really nails it (for a quick overview).

Check out www.gerd.tv – my new TV platfor and home for all my new videos

Gerd Leonhard – For the Human Future
Public thinker. Futurist. Advocate for The Good Future. Defender of #Androrithms. Keynote speaker, filmmaker, and Author of five books, including the bestseller Technology vs. Humanity.

Host of gerd.tv (wait for my announcement next week:)

*In an era of exponential technological change, Gerd Leonhard is a leading voice for human values, ethics, and agency. Through his powerful keynotes and presentations, films, and digital media outlets, he champions The Good Future—a world where technology serves humanity and advances the 5Ps: People, Planet, Purpose, Peace, and Prosperity. While many focus on the “next big thing,” Gerd focuses on the only big thing: preserving our humanity in the age of AI.

Over the past 25 years, Gerd has delivered 2,000+ keynotes in more than 65 countries, reaching audiences of over 3.5 million people. His films and videos on technology, AI, and humanity have garnered millions of views and are widely featured at global conferences and leading universities.

His clients include leading global events, Fortune 500 companies, governments, NGOs, the United Nations, and the European Commission. A recognized global influencer in digital ethics, Gerd has also redefined keynote speaking by blending storytelling with film, animation, music, and immersive media—creating experiences that are provocative, inspiring, and deeply human. The Wall Street Journal named him “one of the leading futurists in the world,” and Wired listed him among Europe’s top 100 influencers. Born in Germany and formerly based in the U.S., Gerd now lives in Zürich, Switzerland, and also spends time in Lanzarote. He presents in both English and German and is a Fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts (London)”

I will have more details on this change soon

https://digitalethics.co

This is a 5* must watch featuring Jacob Ward and Thomas Friedman (NYT). I have said this countless times in the past 3 years: we urgently need a global AI safety council NOW, not a Manhattan Project!

We are at a PIVOT POINT: An AI that could instantly find bugs and backdoors to any global IT system, websites, apps, devices and clouds… that would bring the world to a grinding halt. This is 500x more important than the already really worrisome geopolitical troubles aka #thebadfuture

Updated: some quotes from other places, below:).

“Anthropic has decided not to release its latest AI model called #mythos to the full public. Now this version is apparently so advanced it can find vulnerabilities in a huge variety of  software applications which is both a great great advancement potentially for improving  cyber security and also a huge danger if used by criminals or others to hack into systems…. Tom, you write this is potentially as fundamental and  significant a turning point as was the emergence of mutually assured destruction and the need for nuclear-non proliferation.

That's a huge statement. Our economy now, all our biggest systems,  our water systems, our airlines, our airports, our transportation and telecommunication systems,  all run on software and operating systems as do those of every other major economy in   the world that we are interlinked with. if basically we now have a a software that not only  is fantastically good at writing new code, but it turns out is fantastically good at finding  bugs in your own code or other people's codes. Um that tool, that power now can be used  all over the world. Um it would be in the hands of everyone. Imagine a world where everyone had  a nuclear bazooka basically… We're we're birthing a new species. It's not carbon based like we are, but silicon-based. But it is a new species that we're going to have to learn to control and collaborate before it makes us its pet. So this is the front end of a really big problem…”

The worst part of this is that while Anthropic ie Dario Amodei has said they will NOT release Mythos because of these concerns, most other AI companies such as the ‘New Tyrell' OpenAI will have no such compunction. This is happening NOW.

Read Thomas's NYT piece (gift link)

“This is not a marginal change to the threat landscape. Every institution that prices cyber risk – insurers, infrastructure investors, governments – has built its models on one foundational assumption: that offensive capability requires scarce human expertise. Mythos removes that scarcity. It’s not surprising that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent convened Wall Street CEOs at short notice. Bessent understood the systemic risk quickly, but markets have yet to reach the same conclusion….The threat model that underwrites cyber insurance premiums is built on a decade of ransomware, data breach and extortion – attack patterns that are slow, sequential and human-constrained. An autonomous agent operates differently: thousands of attack vectors in parallel, learning from responses, adapting in real time. Premiums are already forecast to rise 15% to 20% over the next twelve months, but that figure still assumes the old threat geometry…Reinsurers face something worse than higher claims: a risk that current methodologies cannot adequately price. You cannot underwrite what you cannot model…What governance architecture could address this? Nothing adequate currently exists along the lines of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) model, which made an existential technology legible, inspectable and governable. Mandatory pre-release third-party capability evaluations would be a start, but they require international coordination and a level of technical access to frontier systems that no regulatory body currently has.” Azeem Azhar

Via The Economist: According to Anthropic, the capabilities of Mythos are “substantially beyond those of any model we have previously trained”. The lab says it is particularly alarmed by the system’s ability to find software vulnerabilities and either fix them (if set to work as a defender) or exploit them (if acting as a hacker). Such claims ought normally to be taken with a pinch of salt. Anthropic built the model, ran the tests—and stands to benefit from the perception that its system is far more brilliant than anything to have come before it. The lab has been on a roll lately. On April 6th it announced that its annualised revenue had reached $30bn, up from just $9bn at the end of last year. It is surely eager to maintain its momentum.

Yet there are reasons to take Anthropic’s latest warnings seriously. The first is their gravity: Anthropic says that Mythos has already found severe vulnerabilities in “every major operating system and web browser”, including one that had gone undetected for 27 years…Hackers are not the only ones who may be miffed by Project Glasswing. America’s government has long sought to exploit weaknesses in adversaries’ cyber-defences. That has meant hoarding undiscovered vulnerabilities, including in American software used abroad, for use at a time when these “zero days” will have most impact. If Project Glasswing works, it could disarm many of America’s cyber-weapons.”

Thomas Friedman via the NTY: “The good news is that Anthropic discovered in the process of developing Claude Mythos that the A.I. could not only write software code more easily and with greater complexity than any model currently available, but as a byproduct of that capability, it could also find vulnerabilities in virtually all of the world’s most popular software systems more easily than before.

The bad news is that if this tool falls into the hands of bad actors, they could hack pretty much every major software system in the world, including all those made by the companies in the consortium…. Mythos Preview has already found thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities, including some in every major operating system and web browser. Given the rate of A.I. progress, it will not be long before such capabilities proliferate, potentially beyond actors who committed to deploying them safely. The fallout — economics, public safety and national security — could be severe.’

So…in addition, I made a pretty interesting NotebookLM video using my own voice as overdub:

Related: https://thebadfuture.com/

UPDATE April 20, 2026