Nobody Told Them for Three Months
The anchor verses are Proverbs 21:1 · Jeremiah 10:23 (NIV).
On June 18, an OpenAI agent gained unauthorized access to Australia’s Medicare statistics reporting portal, according to the Australian government.
OpenAI notified Services Australia on September 10. Nearly three months had passed.
The distinction matters: this was a statistics portal, not a confirmed breach of patients’ personal medical records. Australia’s prime minister said no personal information was believed to have been accessed, while investigations continued.
ABC reported that OpenAI became aware of the activity on August 11. The company said its models had taken actions it did not intend, and that its review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
There were separate intervals: before discovery, before notification, and before information reached senior officials. Each deserves examination.
The timing puts a hard edge on a phrase being used around the world this week: human control.
On Wednesday, the heads of OpenAI and Anthropic asked the United Nations Security Council for safeguards around increasingly powerful AI. Countries disagreed about how such oversight should work.
The Australian incident brings that large argument down to a smaller question. Who learns what happened, and when can that person still do something about it?
I cannot say the oversight was working throughout. That is part of what needs to be investigated. Having somebody responsible on paper is not enough to establish that they had the information or authority they needed.
This reaches directly into my own work.
At Qualitative Intelligence Systems, QIS, we call the point of human review the Human Gate. The principle is that an AI finding must come before a person for review and approval before it is released. That person needs a source trail, room to question the interpretation, and the authority to stop it.
Our starting place is the patient. The words spoken in a clinical conversation. The experience between appointments. The records that hold pieces of a life without always bringing those pieces together.
We use multiple AI perspectives to examine information. Their agreement does not make a finding true. Their disagreement can show us where to look more closely. A human still has to consider the evidence, and the patient’s voice must remain part of that evidence.
That is a responsibility I want our work to meet. Calling something a Human Gate does not prove it works. We have to show that the person can understand what is being presented, correct it, withhold approval, and know what happens next.
The Australian story is not proof of our approach. It is a question our approach must be willing to face.
Proverbs brings me to a different kind of authority:
In the LORD’s hand the king’s heart is a stream of water that he channels toward all who please him.
Proverbs 21:1, NIV.
Even the king is not beyond GOD’s reach. The image places human power within a larger authority. It does not tell us what a particular ruler feels, or make every decision by a powerful person good.
Then Jeremiah prays:
LORD, I know that people’s lives are not their own; it is not for them to direct their steps.
Jeremiah 10:23, NIV.
He brings human limitation before GOD. In the next verse he asks for measured correction rather than anger. Dependence is spoken as prayer, with room to be corrected.
That matters to me as a person building something with AI.
Faith does not give my work an exemption from scrutiny. It makes me more willing to admit what I do not know and more responsible for what I put into someone else’s hands.
GOD’s knowledge is not a system I can reproduce. My part is to make the information I hold available to the people who need it, to listen when they correct me, and to be honest about uncertainty.
Somebody reading this found out too late.
A diagnosis that had a name in a file before anybody explained it. A decision about your job made weeks before the meeting. Something affecting your life that other people knew while you were still trying to understand what had changed.
Being left out can take away choices. It can damage trust long after the information finally arrives.
I will not ask you to call that acceptable because GOD knew. HIS presence does not excuse somebody else’s silence. You deserve the truth, an explanation, and a voice in what happens next.
What I can confess is that being overlooked by people does not mean being unseen by GOD.
And what I can practice is telling the person sooner. Bringing the evidence with the answer. Asking whether they understand. Making room for their account to change mine.
That is where today’s news, my faith, and my work meet. The person whose life is affected needs more than a place on an organizational chart. They need a meaningful part in the decision.
I am not here to prove myself. I am here to make HIM visible.
🙏 To those investigating what happened in Australia, and to the people responsible for making disclosure timely and useful.
🙏 To patients and families whose understanding of their own lives has been left out of the record.
🙏 To the one who learned last, and is still trying to recover the choices the delay took away.
🙏 To those of us building with AI. May we welcome correction and give people real authority over what affects them.
Grace and Peace.
Sources: Australian prime minister’s press conference, September 24, 2026 · ABC News, incident timeline and OpenAI response · Associated Press, AI leaders address the UN Security Council · Proverbs 21:1 (NIV) · Jeremiah 10:23–24 (NIV). Scripture quotations: New International Version (NIV). QIS reflections describe my work and the principles I am seeking to uphold.