📄
Non-Harm Commitment
Core commitments on what RSL will not build. Defines foundational constraints focused on avoiding harm, coercion, extraction, and misuse, even when capability exists.
Read documentTrust & Governance
This page outlines how Recursive Systems Labs approaches responsibility, restraint, and public accountability.
Our work operates at the intersection of theory, software, and human systems. Because of that, we treat governance as a design surface, not an afterthought.
What follows is not marketing language.
It is how we work.
What We Build
Recursive Systems Labs focuses on:
- Research frameworks for understanding complex systems
- Diagnostic and sense-making tools, not directive systems
- Software that supports human judgment, not automation that replaces it
- Infrastructure designed to preserve agency, context, and accountability
Our work is exploratory, theoretical, and applied only within clearly defined boundaries.
What We Do Not Build
We do not develop or support:
- Systems that surveil, score, or rank people
- Automation that replaces human judgment in clinical or ethical contexts
- Military, weaponized, or coercive applications
- Psychological operations, influence tooling, or behavioral manipulation systems
- Autonomous decision systems without meaningful human oversight
Capability alone is not treated as sufficient justification.
Governance Documents
The following documents define the public operating boundaries of Recursive Systems Labs. They are intentionally accessible and inspectable.
Each document applies across research, software, and public engagement.
📄
Research Use Boundary
Allowed and prohibited uses of RSL research. Clarifies where RSL research may be applied, and where use is explicitly disallowed, including non-transferability.
Read document📄
Dual-Use Risk Policy
How potential misuse is identified and mitigated. Outlines how RSL evaluates dual-use risk, responds to ambiguity, and limits scope when necessary.
Read document📄
CAB Research Interface
When and how ethical review is engaged. Defines the role of the CAB as an advisory body focused on meaning-level impact, not implementation or compliance.
Read document📄
Why Restraint
A reflection on building carefully. A short essay explaining why restraint is treated as an engineering choice, not a limitation.
Read documentHow to Read These Documents
These documents are designed to be:
- Declarative, not defensive
- Stable, but not static
- Clear, without requiring legal interpretation
They are not exhaustive. They define boundaries, not permissions.
Questions or Research Inquiries
For questions about governance posture, research boundaries, or appropriate use:
All inquiries are reviewed through stewardship channels.