Google CEO Sundar Pichai bygone appear his company’s new rules administering the development of AI. Over the course of seven attempt he lays out a broad (and useless) policy abrogation more wiggle room than a pair of clown pants.

If you tell the story of Google’s captivation in architecture AI for the US aggressive backwards it makes absolute sense. In such a case, the tale would begin with the Mountain View aggregation creating a policy for developing AI, and then it would use those attempt to guide its actions.

Unfortunately the absoluteness is the aggregation has been developing AI for as long as it’s been around. It’s hard to gloss over the fact that only now, after the company’s ethics are being called into catechism over a aggressive contract, is the CEO anxious about having these guidelines.

Of course, this isn’t to advance that it’s a aggregation that’s been developing AI technology with no oversight. In fact it’s clear that Google engineers, researchers, and scientists are among the world’s finest and many of those advisers are of the accomplished ethical character. But at the aggregation level, it feels like the attorneys are active the show.

No, my point is to advance that Pichai’s blog post is annihilation more than thinly-veiled trifle aimed at technology journalists and other pundits in hopes we’ll fawn over the allegorical statements like “Google won’t make weapons.” Unfortunately there’s no actuality to any of it.

It starts with the first assumption of Google’s new AI policy: be socially beneficial. This part lays out lip account saying it will strive to advance AI that allowances society, but doesn’t altercate what that means or how it’ll achieve such an abstruse principle.

Oddly, the final book under assumption one is “And we will abide to carefully appraise when to make our technologies accessible on a non-commercial basis.” That’s just a word salad with no more depth than saying “Google is a business that will keep doing business stuff.”

Instead of “be socially beneficial,” I would have much adopted to see article more like “refuse to advance AI for any entity that doesn’t have a clear set of ethical guidelines for its use.”

Unfortunately, as leaked emails show, Google’s higher-ups were more anxious with government certifications than ethical considerations when they entered into a arrangement with the US government – an entity with no formal ethical guidelines on the use of AI.

In appearance, each of the seven attempt laid out by Pichai are accepted bullet points that read like cover-your-own-ass statements. And, each corresponds with a very accepted affair that the aggregation seems to be alienated discussing. After the above first principle, it just gets more vapid:

  1. “Avoid creating or reinforcing unfair bias.” This, instead of a charge to developing methods to fight bias.
  2. “Be built and tested for safety.” Pichai says “We will abide to advance and apply strong safety and aegis practices to avoid adventitious after-effects that create risks of harm.” It’s absorbing that Pichai’s people don’t seem to think there’s any risk of adventitious after-effects for teaching the aggressive how to advance image processing AI for drones.
  3. “Be answerable to people.” Rather than “develop AI with transparency,” which would be great, this just says Google will ultimately hold a human amenable for creating its AI.
  4. “Incorporate aloofness design principles.” Apple just apparent technology advised to keep big data companies from acquisition your data. Google just it cares about privacy. Accomplishments speak louder than words.
  5. “Uphold high standards of accurate excellence.” Google’s analysis happens inside of an centralized accurate echo chamber. Numbers 4, 5, and 6 should be replaced with “be transparent.”
  6. “Be made accessible for uses that accord with these principles.” In this same certificate Pichai points out that Google makes a large amount of its work in AI accessible as open-source code. It’s easy to say you’ll only advance AI with the best of intentions and use it for only good, as long as you take no albatross for how it’s used once your company’s geniuses finish inventing it.

Pichai’s post on Google’s AI attempt serve little more purpose than to, perhaps, eventually end up as a hyperlinked advertence in a future apology.

Read next: Snapchat's new sports ticket market could draw a more mature crowd