In an effort to keep up with AI developments, I started tracking existing and upcoming AI tools in a Word document, then in Excel spreadsheets. It did not take long before I noticed two big problems, and they are as follows:

1. The Bloom and The Bubble: Now a booming industry with massive amounts of money being poured into it, AI is seeing unprecedented numbers of people striving to "get a piece of the pie", including even those without adequate training. While they include valid (and often excellent) content from renowned individuals and organizations such universities, Microsoft, Google, University doctors, talented individuals, etc., platforms like YouTube are unfortunately ill-equipped to vet all their influencers, at least on this subject.
   
   Furthermore, we have a looming Aritificial General Intelligence (AGI) in the horizon; then there is the possibility of an eventual Singularity of which I can't even begin to fathom the impact. Only a couple of years ago I watched a Stanford University lecture where a renowed professor claimed that it would be at least another 50 years before bots are able to use GenAI to effectively "clean up your kitchen". As it appears, he was off by many decades!


2. Rapid Growth: There are not only way too many AI products to track in a simple document, there seems to be more and more solutions coming out virtually daily; especially with the rise of Agents and self-improving models.

This revelation forced me to recognize both the scale and urgency of the challenge: AI ethics matter far more than I initially estimated. AI possesses not just the power to reshape civilization, but to unravel it, potentially with consequences more severe than nuclear technology. This transcends business opportunities or technological trends; our collective future hangs in the balance.

While part of me wonders whether humanity would be safer without this technology, the genie cannot be returned to the bottle, especially in a world of competing nations. There’s no turning back - too many benefits. Our only path forward is to build safeguards with the same intensity as we develop the technology itself. This sobering reality crystallized the need for a dedicated solution.

My idea was simple: create a platform where people could not only find suitable AI solutions but also provide a detailed, multifaceted rating system. This way, we could help individuals make informed choices while promoting AI ethics; and at the same time, this presents an opportunity to build a community and suitable audiences for our own business.

I already built a Wikipedia-like webApp at Harvard; so I thought: Why not adapt it for this? Having previously developed a Wikipedia-style platform at Harvard, I recognized its potential adaptation for this purpose. With no comparable solutions available, and given the critical urgency of the matter, I chose to move forward anyway. To address resource constraints, I decided to prioritise establishing university partnerships from the outset.

So I came up with a solution:

• A platform where people can find and rate AI tools based on cost, reliability, performance, safety, and ethics.
• Students would test, review, classify, and score AI products.
• Users can provide quick 5-star ratings, with an optional detailed review that contributes to the overall scoring system.
• This would create an independent, community-driven, AI hub with multifaceted feedback loop, and therefore promote safe and ethical AI.

Through personal and professional experience, we've witnessed how rapid technological advancements, though groundbreaking, are raising critical concerns. Political pressures, market competition, and the global race for AI dominance have created an environment where societal impact is often sidelined in favor of speed, scale, profit, and power.

That's why we're building a platform to help users discover, evaluate, and rate AI solutions based on strict ethical criteria. By fostering accountability, we aim to shift the focus beyond performance metrics, reliability, cost, and security, ensuring AI competes not just in capability, but also in responsibility.