About Brasil 2030
We wrote this scenario because Brazil’s trajectory worries us. Artificial intelligence is already changing work, security, and relations between countries, but the discussion about Brazil’s place in that future still gets little attention.
We want to bring Brazilians together around this discussion, understand our possibilities, and make choices about artificial intelligence a national priority.
Why tell a story?
A discussion about computing, contracts, and international agreements can feel distant. It changes shape when a clinic loses its patient records, a recent graduate cannot find a job, or a government has to accept foreign conditions to keep its services running.
Camila and Lourdes help us follow these consequences. One works in Congress; the other lives through the effects of decisions she does not always understand. The story connects what happens in laboratories and international negotiations to everyday life in Brazil.
We chose to follow a bad trajectory to examine how the country could get there. Even when the great powers manage to slow down AI development, Brazil can remain vulnerable. Having energy and hosting data centers is not enough if the country cannot contract the computing it needs, protect its services, and take part in the decisions.
Who writes
Luiz Piccini
Head of Product at Tela, where he builds products to help companies make use of artificial intelligence. Previously, he worked at Bain & Company and Wildlife Studios, took part in creating Tennis Clash, created and directed Sky Warriors, and founded the game publisher Falco. He writes Calibrating Posteriors, about technology and the decisions we make around it.
At Brasil 2030, he works on the scenario, synthesis, and editing.
Personal site · Calibrating Posteriors
Danilo Naiff
Holds a degree in Mechanical Engineering and Mathematics from UFRJ, where he also completed a master’s in Mathematics. His doctoral research in Mechanical Engineering works with generative models for porous media. He has taken part in AI safety research and training projects and programs, including SERI MATS and ML4G.
At Brasil 2030, he works on the writing of the scenario and the chronology.
Pedro Castilho
CTO of Cumbuca, a fintech dedicated to Open Finance and custom financial integrations. He has been an entrepreneur since 2019 and worked as a software engineer at startups in Brazil and Silicon Valley, after a stint in computer vision research. His experience includes intensive use of AI on a small team operating in the financial sector.
At Brasil 2030, he works on the computing and data center model.
Ivan M. Franco
National organizer of Effective Altruism Brazil, CVO, and partner at Little Brown Mouse Audiovisual, where he leads innovation and positioning initiatives in artificial intelligence. He brings more than 20 years of experience in audiovisual production, communication, and education. In recent years he has also dedicated himself to community building, event organization, and communication about AI safety. He holds a degree in Film from UFSCar and an MBA in Data Science and Artificial Intelligence from PUCRS.
How we built the scenario
The text was developed from the authors’ proposals, source research, and collective review. Contributions were gathered into a shared chronology and worked through successive versions of the narrative. The notes let readers check the sources behind the facts and hypotheses discussed in the text; the evidence page collects supporting material.
The format draws on AI 2027, AI 2040, and Europe 2031. We have no affiliation with those projects, and the reference does not imply that their authors endorse our conclusions.
We used AI tools to support research, writing, editing, and building the site. Responsibility for the text, for checking the sources, and for the positions defended rests with the authors.
What this scenario claims and what it does not
Brasil 2030 is a scenario, not a forecast with calculated probabilities. Camila and Lourdes are fictional. The future episodes, the agreements, and their consequences were built to explore a possible trajectory; the dates should not be read as deadlines we know will be met.
A source about a current vulnerability does not demonstrate that the attack narrated will happen. Likewise, the possibility of an international agreement does not establish that it will have the terms described here. The sequence, the speed of change, and countries’ capacity to react are important parts of the uncertainty.
The scenario also does not exhaust the risks of AI. A slowdown can fail, and the damage could be much greater than what is narrated. Our focus is what happens to Brazil when some global threats are contained, but the country reaches the negotiations without enough capacity to defend its interests.
Independence
This is an independent research project, without funding. The positions expressed are the authors’ own and do not represent their employers or other institutions. The affiliations in the profiles above serve only to give context to their experience.
The letter and commitments present proposals to avoid this trajectory. Supporting the letter does not require agreeing with every episode in the narrative. Likewise, reviewing the text does not mean being a co-author or endorsing its conclusions.
Help us improve
We want to know where the argument breaks down, where the story seems exaggerated, and where the reading stops making sense. When sending a critique, point to the passage and explain the problem. A source, a counterexample, or an alternative wording help more than a general rating.
Send your comments to whoever forwarded you the project or to luiz@piccini.app. Disclosing a reviewer’s name depends on their authorization.
Portuguese is the reference edition. The English and Spanish editions translate the same text.