On Pope Leo XIV's encyclical: AI, power, and (the loss of) human agency
Interesting Engineering
sales@interestingengineering.com for advertising inquiries.
To read the full extended edition of the Blueprint weekly, subscribe to IE+ and get more exclusive content and long reads, as well as an ad-free experience on Interesting Engineering. Click here to upgrade now.
FROM THE EDITOR
This week, we talk about the Pope's encyclical on AI—more specifically, the moment in time it was released, and what it signifies for the AI landscape at large. Following this flagship report, below are the week's essential signals across science and tech.
Of God and algorithms
On Monday, Pope Leo XIV issued his first encyclical, a 42,000-word warning about concentrated power and the quiet transfer of human agency into the hands of a few companies. Standing beside him was a co-founder of Anthropic, the AI company that has built its reputation around caution and restraint. The image was striking. It was also a little unsettling.
Anthropic is currently paying SpaceX roughly $1.25 billion a month for compute access, helping fund the infrastructure behind what may become the largest IPO in history. The two companies aren't separate forces orbiting the same moment. They are financially and structurally tied to each other.
The Pope's timing felt either accidental or prophetic.
The encyclical arrived the same week Meta cut 8,000 jobs, not because the company is in trouble, but because it is spending up to $145 billion on new AI infrastructure this year and needed room in the balance sheet. The same week, Google showed off agents that can browse, shop, decide, and act on a user's behalf. The same week, an older clip resurfaced of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman telling a room full of infrastructure investors: "We see a future where intelligence is a utility, like electricity or water, and people buy it from us on a meter."
Leo's core argument is that technology is never neutral. The encyclical doesn't ask the world to slow down or retreat from AI. It asks a more uncomfortable question: who gets to decide where all of this goes?
Are the people shaping these systems at this scale, with this much power and this much at stake, really the right ones to be doing it alone?
THE SIGNALS
Three stories we think matter this week, with our take on each.
A few years ago, a search engine behaving like a conversational assistant would have felt bizarre. Today, it barely registers as unusual. Google no longer simply points people toward information, but interprets, summarizes, and speaks on behalf of the internet itself. For millions of users, the AI-generated paragraph at the top of the page has quietly become the answer.
People are slowly getting used to consuming information in a pre-digested form. Instead of exploring the web, they increasingly rely on one AI-generated interpretation of it. The issue is not that people are suddenly incapable of thinking critically. The issue is that technology quietly reshapes behavior over time, especially when it removes friction from everyday tasks.
In a candid assessment, one Russian military journal has reported on the underwhelming performance of domestic air-to-air missiles in Ukraine. The piece even openly admits several major weaknesses in Russia's operations in the region, given the reality of modern air warfare.
The main thrust of the piece explains that air combat is no longer "Top Gun" style dogfighting. It is more about engagements at long range, where aircraft never visually see one another.
Immense flexibility is required when it comes to building the technologies for an ever-changing moon program. Case in point: Colorado-based space firm Lunar Outpost recently announced it is building a smaller, "sporty" lunar terrain vehicle (LTV) called Pegasus to align with NASA's goal of accelerating the cadence of Artemis missions.
In a conversation with Interesting Engineering, Dr. Forrest Meyen, co-founder and Chief Strategy Officer (CSO) of Lunar Outpost, reflected on the lessons learned from MAPP, as well as the company’s role in the future of lunar habitation.
ADDITIONAL READS
The Blueprint: IE's daily engineering, science & tech bulletin.
Mechanical: Explore the wonders of mechanical engineering.
Aerospace: The latest on propulsion, satellites, aeronautics, and more.
AI Logs: Insights into the intricacies and developments within the realm of AI.
IE Originals: Weekly round-up of our best science, tech & engineering videos.
Sustainability: Uncover green innovations and the latest trends shaping a sustainable future for the tech industry.
Electrical: From AI to smart grids, our newsletter energizes you on emerging tech.
IE Academy: Master your field and take your career to the next level with IE Academy
Want to share your feedback? contact@interestingengineering.com
We use technology to improve the human condition. Humanity has been very successful because we cooperate. Cooperation has shown us that collaboration is far better than war. Today, in many parts of the world, more people die from overheating than from starvation. This reminds us that the challenges facing humanity are changing. The tools we create are powerful, and with that power comes responsibility. We must not allow the technology we created to become the instrument of our own destruction. Technology should remain a servant of humanity, not its master. Progress without wisdom can lead to danger, but progress guided by cooperation, ethics, and compassion can elevate civilization to heights never before imagined.
Having watched our economic systems evolve recently, I’m convinced we’re heading toward a crisis. AI is displacing workers at a pace that is destroying purchasing power. The economy is currently being held up by the few jobs that remain. But we have to ask ourselves: is this actually sustainable in the long run?
I wonder what the full fallout of the AI Age will be? We have witnessed several eras in the past: first the Machine Age, then Electricity, then Automation and Robotics, then Computers and Digital. Each one was disruptive in some way and reshaped society. Based on history, what do you think?
What struck me most is that this is ultimately not an AI discussion but a leadership discussion. Every powerful technology raises the question of who decides, who benefits, and who remains accountable. The challenge is not simply building more capable systems, but ensuring we do not quietly surrender the responsibility and judgment that make us human.
Pope Leo is a wise man. If you read the whole encyclical, the twists and turns of the AI worls have all been taken into account. Sometimes it appears that something has been let loose with no "caretakers". Sometimes it appears that it appears like a park where all the dogs are left to play and a "let's see attitue is adopted - till something tragic happens. Then all the leashes are out! That's all in summary (I do not speak for him - this is my interpretation of a 50pg encyclical with my brain trying to squeeze the monumental document into my sphere of comprehension). The message "DONT LET THE DOGS OUT!" OR WE WILL BE FOREVER SINGING "WHO LET THE DOGS OUT"!