What if "less harmful" is the wrong ceiling for AI? Human flourishing can't be separated from planetary flourishing — and this conversation names what gets left on the table when harm reduction is treated as the finish line instead of the floor.

Caro Ames, Dr. Heather Wade, and Ada Parris — co-chairs of IEEE GAISFI's Ecological Regeneration & Planetary Care subcommittee — join AI for Human Flourishing's chair, Tamara Lechner, to dig into what it actually means to build AI that contributes to living systems rather than just avoiding harm and participating in extraction.

AI promised to give us time back. So why does everyone feel more depleted?

Charis Loveland and Dr. Wendi Lord, co-authors of the new AI for Human Flourishing report Protecting Well-Being in the Age of Intelligent Tools, join Tamara Lechner to unpack the paradox at the heart of modern work — and why the question isn't whether AI is smart enough, but whether your workplace still treats you like you are.

Intelligent tools. Intelligent humans. One conversation worth your lunch break

OpenClaw went from side project to 150,000 GitHub stars in weeks. It's an open-source AI agent that actually does things—manages your inbox, books travel, runs shell commands. Not a chatbot. A digital employee. Security researchers are raising alarms. Users are calling it "the closest thing to JARVIS." Moltbook is where it gets weird. Someone built a social network for AI agents. No humans allowed. Agents post, comment, argue, upvote each other. Scientists are now studying what happens when AI talks to AI at scale. AI is becoming more autonomous. The question is whether we're keeping up—or being left behind by tools we no longer fully understand.