Where we draw the line
We won't build anything that lies, pressures, or sells someone something they can't afford.
And you stay in every decision that matters. If it's about a person, a contract, a regulator or money, the software does the legwork and a human makes the call. That's how we keep AI useful andkeep you out of a conversation with a regulator you didn't want to have.
What we won't build
- Anything designed to create false urgency or pressure a decision
- Cancellation flows that are harder than the sign-up flow they mirror
- Anything that targets someone's distress, age, addiction or financial difficulty
- Systems that make a final call on hiring, credit, tenancy or pricing without a human who can explain and override it
- Anything that presents an automated decision as though a person made it
- Anything that puts your clients' data into a tool that trains on it, or that you couldn't explain to those clients if they asked
Where you stay in the decision
If it's about a person, a contract, a regulator or money, software does the legwork and a human makes the call. That is not a limitation we apologise for. It is how AI stays useful without putting you in a conversation you did not want.
In practice, that means we do not automate:
- Whether to report something to a regulator
- A client's risk rating
- Signing a compliance declaration
- Whether conduct is lawful
- Any final decision about a person
Why this is a commercial position, not just an ethical one
There is a neat irony in it. In Australia, from 10 December 2026, software that helps make decisions significantly affecting a person triggers transparency obligations under the Privacy Act.
Hand those decisions to a machine and you create a compliance problem while solving an efficiency one.Keeping a human on the gate is not a limitation we apologise for. It is the thing that keeps a client out of a regulatory conversation they did not want.
We said this before the law did
Much of what Australia's unfair trading law will prohibit from 1 July 2027 (manipulative interfaces, obscured cancellation, pressure tactics) describes things we already declined to build. The Act is passed. The detailed reminder rules are still being written. That is the only version of this position worth anything. A firm that discovers its ethics the month the legislation lands is not telling you something useful.