A life you have a say in.

Flourishing is the measure of the ambition.

Progress means better possibilities for people: more time, security, learning, creativity, and control over their lives. Productivity matters because of what it makes possible.

A person accomplishing the same work with more time for a life they value is a success.

People should have room to define a good life for themselves. We will ask how our systems affect that room, including effects that a task-completion score cannot capture.

More of what matters.

Useful tools should expand what people can accomplish, learn, and create.

What can someone now do that matters to them?

Useful assistance can help someone produce, learn, care, or recover time. We will examine immediate results alongside lasting skill and the effort of supervision and correction.

A meaningful say.

People should be able to understand, direct, change, and refuse how automation acts for them.

Can someone understand the terms and change their mind?

Choice needs practical support: knowledge, time, resources, and security. It includes the freedom to delegate and the ability to change the terms. An approval button alone cannot establish meaningful control.

A share in the possibilities.

People affected by automation should have a voice in its terms and how its benefits are shared.

Who receives the gains, and who bears the costs?

Contributors, users, and the people affected by a system may value different things. Explicit agreements should give those differences a place to be heard, including the ability to renegotiate or leave.

Keep the tradeoffs visible.

Greater autonomy can involve more risk. Compensation can support contributors while adding costs to sharing. A tool can help one person while shifting work to another.

We will report who receives gains and who bears costs. Ownership, open sharing, payment systems, and protocols are arrangements to evaluate against the purpose. We should be willing to change them.

Make room to be wrong.

Each project should explain whose circumstances it aims to improve, what improvement would look like, and what evidence would make us reconsider. We will publish methods, limitations, negative findings, and corrections.

These principles express commitments. Whether a particular system lives up to them is a question for evidence.