Slashdot Mirror
'Technology Will Replace the Need For Big Government' (vice.com)
New submitter axlash writes: There's a lot of dissatisfaction with governments today, as can be seen by the rise of left-wing parties in Europe, to the rise of non-mainstream political candidates in America. Well, here's a thought -- with all the talk of technology replacing jobs, why not have it replace governments, too? The speculates about how "in the near future, the government might dramatically shrink -- not because of demands by fiscally astute Americans, but because of radical technology." It goes on: "Even the US President could one day be replaced, which -- strangely enough -- might bring sanity to our election process." The main thrust of the article is essentially about how government jobs will be replaced with technology, although it doesn't say much about whether there'll be technology administering this technology.
... That's seriously the only reason I can think of why someone would think that putting technology into an oversight role over humanity is a good thing.
A generation raised on YouTube and Google algorithms and that doesn't seem to value freedom of expression or thought also doesn't understand why humans, process, and procedural protections are necessary. In turn, that makes things less efficient than they theoretically could be, but a technocratic Orwellian state as envisioned by dipshit solutionists will eventually come to the conclusion that life would be a lot more efficient if you just get rid of humans altogether.
I'm honestly a bit confused how people don't see this. Did they not see T2 growing up? Did they not watch any dystopian 70's sci-fi? Have they never heard of The Twilight Zone and its continual reminders about how hubris catches up with people? What is it?
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
Do you really think the Government will permit this?
No, they won't.
In the USA, the Federal Government is too big to permit any competition.
In the USA, many State Governments are too big to permit any competition.
Every thing that competes with the Government loses. Look at Microsoft's surrender to the USA Federal Government when M$ reached its zenith and became a threat to the Feds. Zap! M$ lost the battles and now pay homage to the USA Government.
There's a lot of dissatisfaction with governments today, as can be seen by the rise of left-wing parties in Europe,
Did you mean "as can be seen by the rise of right-wing parties in Europe"? Computerization of the government was a goal in the Soviet Union at one point. SAP consultants are surely already gleaming of the though of selling national ERP systems to centrally manage whole countries at a time in really big computer systems. Really Big Systems.
There seems to be a fundamental misconception behind this story: namely that 'big' refers to number of employees; rather than size of role.
It's obvious to the point of trivial that certain technological advances will reduce the number of people required to do a given job; but that doesn't change whether or not the job is considered to be within the state's mandate or whether it is a private sector matter.
That's what size-of-government fights are really about(sure, there's some skirmishing about shrinking or expanding specific workforces to either save money or address a perceived deficiency in service): "What should the government do? What should it not do? What is acceptable to contract out? What is best handled internally?"
Given that technology has tended to result in labor savings, I'd certainly expect a lower headcount in government in the future; but that's irrelevant to whether it is 'big' or not. Running a welfare state, say, would probably be more efficient if you could just have a single AI do it; but it'd be just as much a 'big government' proposal, just one with fewer people pushing paper around.
The author has a terminal case of Star Trekitis. He assumes since we can make a fireproof building, we don't need firefighters. We won't need police because the Internet of Things can monitor everything.
He's never met Murphy. It isn't at all clear that he even understands how to turn his TV off.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
The Founding Fathers crafted the Constitution specifically to make sure Americans do NOT actually get what they vote for.
If you think about who makes up the voting public, I can understand why they'd do that. Democracy is mob rule, and mobs are very stupid, easily manipulated things.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The whole problem is the notion that people need an "oversight role", which in fact they do not.
What technology enables is the ability for local regions to function in a decentralized manner without need for "oversight" or "central planning".
It's not about REPLACING human oversight, but dismantling it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"The need to be observed and understood was once satisfied by God. Now we can implement the same functionality with data-mining algorithms."
"Extreme surveillance hardly inspires reverence. Perhaps fear and obedience, but not reverence."
"God and the gods were apparitions of observation, judgement, and punishment. Other sentiments toward them were secondary."
"No one will ever worship a software entity peering at them through a camera."
"The human organism always worships. First it was the gods, then it was fame (the observation and judgement of others), next it will be the self-aware systems you have built to realize truly omnipresent observation and judgement."
"You underestimate humankind's love of freedom."
"The individual desires judgement. Without that desire, the cohesion of groups is impossible, and so is civilization. The human being created civilization not because of a willingness but because of a need to be assimilated into higher orders of structure and meaning. God was a dream of good government. You will soon have your god, and you will make it with your own hands."
And to provide the counterpoint, a very brief warning from Twitter as to how quickly it can all go wrong.