Many People Think AI Could Make Better Policy Decisions Than Politicians (qz.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz: A new survey on Europeans' attitudes towards technology found that a quarter of people would prefer it if policy decisions were made by artificial intelligence instead of politicians. The Center for the Governance of Change at Spain's IE University polled 2,500 adults in the UK, Spain, Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, and the Netherlands in January. The results reflect an intense anxiety about the changes brought about by advances in tech, with more than half of respondents worried that jobs would be replaced by robots, and 70% saying that unchecked technological innovation could do more harm than good to society. Respondents also expressed concerns about the impact of digital relationships replacing human contact as more people spend time online. Perhaps most interestingly, a quarter of the respondents said they would prefer AI to guide decisions about governance of their country over politicians.

Around the world, citizens have expressed a growing disillusionment with democracy, and an increased skepticism that their voice has an impact on political decisions. But algorithmic decisions aren't a problem-free solution: they can be embedded with the prejudice and bias of their programmers or manipulated to achieve specific outcomes, making the results as potentially problematic as the ones made by humans. The study also found that respondents expected governments to reduce the disruption that technology might have on their lives with regulation, limits on automation, and support for people affected by job losses. This "highlights the paradox in which we live," the authors wrote. "People are disillusioned with governments, yet at the same time ask them to tackle the societal and economic negative effects that emerging technologies might have."

Comments

Bribing programmers

[liquid_schwartz]

So then we'd have a revolving door for programmers instead of politicians. I'm at the point where I think randomly picking people, like jury duty, might be better. That and a heavy handed approach to looking for "new business opportunities" that happen for friends and family for years after being picked for congress to prevent bribes. On the plus side, it would instantly reform campaign finance.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Ive been saying this for years! Everybody chosen MUST serve. they get paid appropriately and do something such as making their employer maintain a position for them upon return. Just like an extended jury duty

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Naah....just uphold the existing laws. Take everyone currently in Congress and the Executive, charge them with treason, and hang them in the town square as a warning to others who would another their power.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Make some policy decisions? Why not? Serve as a politician in some way that requires anything in particular? Never gonna happen. If pressed into service (which they would simply ignore) There is almost zero chance they would return to any employer who participated in trying to make them serve.

Re:Bribing programmers

[fustakrakich]

I'm at the point where I think randomly picking people, like jury duty, might be better.

It should also include the full 13 weeks of basic combat training at Parris Island during the lame duck period.

Re: Bribing programmers

[mark-t]

Everybody chosen MUST serve. they get paid appropriately and do something such as making their employer maintain a position for them upon return.

What if they were self-employed? How do you force that person's regular clients to keep coming back to that person when they've been unavailable for several weeks?

What if they were a student? Are you going to force the college to give that person a private tutor for the remainder of the classes that they didn't get to attend?

Re:Bribing programmers

[fafalone]

Should be like jury duty beyond just random selection too... there should be qualifications.
When I read stories about how shockingly high percentages of natural born Americans couldn't pass the civics test we make immigrants pass for citizenship, at first I thought well ok, maybe they're just doing things like 'name the year the 12th Amendment was ratified' or other such specific trivia. So I looked up what questions were actually on it, and no, that wasn't the case at all, it was all basic information about how government is structured and functions. It should be an embarassment for any natural born American to miss a single question anywhere on the full set, nevermind miss so many they fail.
So to be in the pool, you should have to have passed a civics exam, and even more importantly, pass an exam in basic US history and Supreme Court cases, and most importantly, a test on logic.
Sure, all that would eliminate 99% of the population, but if you took the 1% that could pass, and they served like jurors randomly selected for a limited period, maybe we could actually get some competent leadership for once.
Of course none of that would ever happen, people would get up in arms over the idea of being so biased towards facts and reason.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think *regular* politicians are easy to buy off, just wait until you see how much bribe money Joe Blow will amass selling votes on issues he doesn't give a shit about (read: basically all of them). Normal politicians are at least restrained by a (theoretical) fear of public exposure and losing their jobs, while randos with no significant public reputation to risk and who don't actually want to be there in the first place will simply go ham. The general public won't give a shit, because once stripped of even the illusion of participation they'll stop caring about government completely (or, at least, become disillusioned with it to the point of apathy). Lobbyists and/or deep state types will almost instantly seize complete effective control and the "politicians" will spend their days cashing bribe checks and banging their complimentary hookers.

Re:Bribing programmers

[The Grim Reefer]

I'm at the point where I think randomly picking people, like jury duty,

Lucky you, you're still optimistic. I've gotten to the point where I think a Magic 8-ball wouldn't do any worse than the politicians we've had for the last 20 or 30 years now.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, exemption?

It's not like we don't already have that for everything else. Disabled people don't have to serve in the military.

At this point, we don't really need AI... There are plenty of human solutions to our governance issues.

AI people peddle AI.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Darinbob]

If the AI comes up with a policy that some people don't like, they'll merely conclude that the AI is clearly faulty. Eventually it will be tweaked based on popular demand. Then as viewpoints shift over time we'll have votes about which way to tweak the AI so that it favors the majority viewpoint. After a long period of mismanagement society will finally realize that having artificial intelligence is not the same thing as being logical, rational, or wise. At this point they will elect a monkey to push buttons at random.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Darinbob]

Existing laws are vague and contradict each other. We still have many outdated laws that are meaningless (women can't drive cars unless a man walks in front waving a red flag). We had an extremely outdated and bizarre constitution in the US if you ignore the amendments, so it would be absurd to assume that it is perfect now and can be frozen for all eternity.

And you still have to pass a budget. Most of the arguing in congress doing just that one thing.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, saying you'll use a computer program to make your policy decisions is a meaningless claim. It's like the people saying the fix to gerrymandering is to have computers draw the maps. Really, how do those people think the maps are drawn now?

Although, as I write this, it occurs to me this also sounds like the promise of future programming methods that don't require code. Whatever you input to that system is now what constitutes "code". Just like whatever you give to the "policy generating computer" is now how you define policies.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm at the point that I think a random number generator would be better than the politicians we have now.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

A budget isn't needed if the same AI that governs the world also replaces money. Note I said world because a single country can't go down this AI route like Chile tried to do in the early seventies. Then there is the problem of choosing the right underlying model of AI. I would favor one that assumes the range of problems being considered are already grounded in an attempt to stave off climate change extinction and where remaining individuals sacrifice their own interests to the "organic whole of nature". That means everything is framed in such away that free expression can be maintained as long as it meets a mathematical threshold for inclusion within the cluster. PCA networks based on sound psychological notions can be applied here and because of conditional grounding it starts off way ahead of ICA for the simple fact that PCA measures values whereas ICA initially only sees positional direction.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course none of that would ever happen, people would get up in arms over the idea of being so biased towards facts and reason.

Exactly. As Issac Asimov said: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just a hypothetical statement, since obviously AI doesn't exist and probably won't for hundreds or thousands of years. No need to get your panties in a bunch.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. At least not when this can really be implemented. Which is about 20 years down the road. In 50 years AI will be running at least 80% of our lives and in 100 years it will be 99% never able to dictate when humans piss, shit or fuck AI will not be able to control 100% of our lives.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

So we pick 1% of people who study governance to govern, huh? Good job, you just reinvented America.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe these tests should be whether people can get drivers licenses and such.... and we pick from that pool.

That way the test isn't incentivized for most to want to fail.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, maybe not. A good case study might be the way Britain's House of Lords used to be prior to the reforms that made it into a partially-elected body.

Previously, the House of Lords was generally white and male... but it was also pretty close to being a random body within that cohort, simply because few Lords actually did anything to seek or earn their position besides have the good fortune of being the oldest surviving child of another Lord. As a practical matter, I believe the biggest difference between them and members of the House of Commons is that Lords were wealthy, but MPs were rich (think: Rockefeller vs Kardashian). Lords might have had a lot of money on paper, but most of it was usually tied up in a single very non-liquid asset that couldn't easily be monetized. Indeed, one could argue that an average wealthy-but-not-rich Lord would have been the epitome of someone who could be corrupted... especially, say, if they could barely afford to pay the property taxes and upkeep on their family's manor whose title was the whole reason they were a Lord in the first place and really NEEDED a source of cash and perks to afford the lifestyle expected of them as a Lord.

WERE Lords more susceptible to corruption? As far as I'm aware, it happened... but was pretty rare. I suspect part of it was the usually-cited sense of duty, but another big part of it was probably the fact that Lords couldn't really do much besides veto Commons... and even then, could only do it under certain conditions and when fairly unified in agreement with each other (which was about as rare of an occurrence in Lords as it is in the US Senate). From what I've read, the main benefit of being a Lord was that it increased your likelihood of getting hired by a wealthier Lord to a position with few actual job responsibilities, and was itself viewed by the wealthiest Lords as both a duty to help maintain the decorum of Lords by keeping its members out of obvious poverty AND a not-so-subtle way to reinforce the pecking order within Britain's upper class (by making its "cash-poor" upper class effectively the vassals of its wealthiest upper class).

Re: Bribing programmers

[Humbubba]

We do need to change something. Democracy currently is a system where a minority wields power and coercion on the majority. And while AI's 'algorithmic decisions' are subject to prejudice, bias and manipulation, those terms pretty much define almost every politician these days. AI could take over policy making if those who have already subverted government allowed. The thing is, corporations make too much money to just walk away. We are ruled by those in pursuit of wealth and power. Put axiomatically, "Gain wealth, forgetting all but self."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Predator_State

I also fear that technology, left unchecked, will sabotage interpersonal relations, society as a whole, and take our jobs. Maybe technology will extract nature's wealth for the satiation of all of humanity's wants, needs and desires. Maybe not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

One big problem is we're not the enlightened, reasoning beings who elect people that serve the interest of the greater good.

Walter Lippmann, in "Public Opinion" said the masses were an incompetent "bewildered herd", the primary defect of democracy, and that democracy could only be kept functioning by an elite class of intellectuals and experts pumping out government sanctioned propaganda.

Democracy is a system of rule by law, not individuals. It could be reasoned that AI could do a better job at making and enforcing law than people. But could we handle it? Dan Dennett says our sense of self, consciousness and free will are just illusions, something we've made up. Evolution has given us the ability to abide or the possibility to skirt the law. Free will has nothing to do with it.

As a general rule, we are irrational, unreliable, greedy, gullible, cunning and conning bastards. To quote Machiavelli, "We can say this of most people: that they are ungrateful and unreliable; they lie, they fake, they're greedy for cash and they melt away in the face of danger."

Forget asking if AI could handle our government. Of course it could, one way or another, more efficiently too, and eventually better. But could we handle being ruled by AI?

Re:Bribing programmers

[tlhIngan]

So then we'd have a revolving door for programmers instead of politicians. I'm at the point where I think randomly picking people, like jury duty, might be better. That and a heavy handed approach to looking for "new business opportunities" that happen for friends and family for years after being picked for congress to prevent bribes. On the plus side, it would instantly reform campaign finance.

Funny enough, that's the premise of a RPG called Paranoia, where "The Computer is your friend". And yes, the top people are the coveted High Programmers.

And yes, it take place in the US.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

You should look at the tests they made blacks take to be qualified to vote.

I don't think many would be able to get it right in the ten minute requirement but given time to go back and look at it everyone else can laugh at how stupid the one taking the test is to not be able to follow such simple instructions.

Re:Bribing programmers

[tinkerton]

That is called sortition and it is a valuable proposal. It is entirely different from referenda in which everyone gets to give their off the cuff answer: you get real representation and they get to dedicate their time to it. It's being discussed regularly, for instance here https://equalitydemocracy.comm...

The question of letting software decide is indeed completely missing the point and is simply a restatement of 'letting the experts run the country'. The value in having someone to represent you is not how smart they are but how representative. Nothing stops the representative for calling in experts to assist them and help them understand what can be done. The weakness of representatives is that they don't represent you.

Re:Bribing programmers

[fluffernutter]

Donald Trump has been exposed.. and he was mostly exposed before the election. Still waiting to see if anything happens to him.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Highdude702]

#KillAllHumans #BenderBendingRodriguez2020!

^^ AI Government.

Re: Bribing programmers

[ShanghaiBill]

Um, exemption?

Then you end up with a non-representative sample. People that actually understand business, economics, or technology, would have the highest opportunity costs, and thus the greatest incentive to weasel out with an exemption. So you end up with the country being run by bored housewives, the jobless, and liberal-arts majors.

Also, you are assuming randomly chosen people would be less corruptible. Speaking only for myself, with no need to run for reelection or to satisfy a constituency, I would be happy to sell my vote, and go on "fact finding trips" to Maui.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Ive been saying this for years! Everybody chosen MUST serve. they get paid appropriately and do something such as making their employer maintain a position for them upon return. Just like an extended jury duty

You know, saying things for years doesn't make something more valid.

Re: Bribing programmers

[cascadingstylesheet]

Everybody chosen MUST serve. they get paid appropriately and do something such as making their employer maintain a position for them upon return.

What if they were self-employed? How do you force that person's regular clients to keep coming back to that person when they've been unavailable for several weeks?

What if they were a student? Are you going to force the college to give that person a private tutor for the remainder of the classes that they didn't get to attend?

But ... but ... mandating good things is possible! AOC and Bernie say so!

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

100%, 1000% agree with the random thing. In fact, skip the human, just roll dice on national TV, or the internet.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

So you end up with the country being run by...liberal-arts majors.

But then who'll ask me if I want fries with that?

Re: Bribing programmers

[Xarius]

Stupid questions, people have already said to run it like Jury Duty. If you have a valid reason for being unable to serve (pregant, student, self-employed, terminally ill) then you can be made exempt.

Re: Bribing programmers

[mark-t]

. If you have a valid reason for being unable to serve (pregant, student, self-employed, terminally ill) then you can be made exempt.

Obviously... my point was to challenge the idea presented:

Everybody chosen MUST serve...

Clearly, not everyone can... which was my point. And as soon as you allow exemptions, then you make it possible for people to weasel their way into an exemption if they are determined enough.

Re: Bribing programmers

[mark-t]

I would be happy to sell my vote

Is there a market for selling a service that nobody else has any way to verify happened as they wanted?

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Killer feature: AI politicians would be consistent before/after election. (Assuming you don't retrain the model.)

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't mean that the idea was good or bad, I only meant to say that any idea, even good ideas, often comes with problems and it's always an engineering task to solve them. Some people can't? Make exemption possible. Don't bury an idea when the first problem comes up. Bury it when it is obviously shit and you have a better idea.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is Al Franken WAS a politician. So your logic is pretty flawed.

Re:Bribing programmers

[fafalone]

Oh yes I forgot in SJW land requiring any sort of competence is racist, because those black folks just can't possibly be expected to have a high school level of understanding of our government. This is the soft bigotry of low expectations. Unlike your racist ass, I think everyone is capable of understanding civics and history at a high School level if certain underlying issues are dealt with. But no, that's also unacceptable, because only some but not all of the blame and burden can be placed on white men, and people like you would rather see black people remain trapped in a cycle of crime and poverty than even suggest that in addition to problems like systemic racism there's also a serious cultural issue with the value of education and others.
Like all SJWs, you're so stuffed full of your own self righteousness you can't see your own racism and how the policies you advocate actually harm minorities. And now you argue everyone should be denied competent government just because the pool might not precisely match your quota for melanin content? For shame.

Re:Bribing programmers

[fafalone]

Yes I'm familiar with the history of poll tests but that's just not the same thing as asking relevant civics questions and basic logic for people making the law, and asking the same knowledge of everyone, where everyone is literate and the information is taught in high school.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Just allow them to keep their insider trading exemption and everything will wash out.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a fantastic literacy test. The trick is to actually read the first sentence. The 30 questions are just a distraction.

Literacy test (This test is to be given to anyone who cannot prove a fifth grade education.)

Voter: Here is my high school diploma. Please give me my ballot.
Poll worker: Okay.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Democracy is by definition not a system where the minority rules. You seem to have your definitions mixed up with something else.

Re: Bribing programmers

[CrimsonAvenger]

Existing laws are vague and contradict each other.

A later law automagically supersedes earlier law, so contradictions are meaningless - just check the dates the laws passed, and the contradictions vanish....

As to vague, that's what juries are for, come the trial for breaking the law in question....

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

Not necessarily. All changes could be set up as PRs on a repository that the public has access to and can vote up and down. After a threshold is reached, that PR is merged and affects the decision making process. This plan has the possibility to truly eliminate direct money from politics, although there is still the possibility of wealthy interests using their mainstream media to push narratives for the public to upvote/downvote certain PRs. We would also require a volunteer task force of translators to move the understanding to lay people.

Re: Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

You may have zero ethics or morals, but you are a tiny minority compared to the rest of people. And it seems quite evident that a country run by housewives, homeless people, and liberal arts majors (who are already in government for the most part) would be vastly better by every metric than the current shitshow (at least in the US). If we could manage to get rid of capitalism, and thus increase the standard of living for everyone a thousandfold, this would be ideal, as the actual issues plaguing the world could be addressed instead of rich people trying to keep themselves rich.

Re:Bribing programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

You are correct. As soon as the pool of eligible public servants was restricted only to non-right wingers, half the country would go up in flames about how the socialists have taken over by understanding how their own country works.

So could my 2 year old

[Anonymous Coward]

but it's not like I'm asking her to run for office

Re:So could my 2 year old

[Anonymous Coward]

This election, I'm voting for Coin Flip. It makes correct decisions half the time!

Vote Tay

[Anonymous Coward]

Vote Tay for a cleaner America!

Not going to happen

[SuperKendall]

Can't bribe or influence an AI the way you can humans; so it's a no-go for replacing any existing government.

Re: Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Governments wouldnâ(TM)t allow it because it would be ceding power. Also the AI would in all likelihood make policy decisions that certain people find uncomfortable. And then there will be special pleading and activism to change the AI to recognize âoeprivilegeâ in deciding policy instead of useful outcomes as the objectives.

Re:Not going to happen

[Chris Mattern]

Can't bribe or influence an AI the way you can humans;

Sure you can. Machines don't magically appear by immaculate conception. You can bribe or influence the AIs by bribing or influencing the engineers who design them.

Re:Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't bribe or influence an AI the way you can humans; so it's a no-go for replacing any existing government.

Sure you can. You just make sure to tilt the training data set to get the result you want and/or give it stupid criteria to optimize on.

More seriously, model based planning is fine, provided your willing to look at it rationally and continually improve your model. At some point humans must assign relative weights to outcomes and such, which is the problem. Politicians seldom do it, often ignoring a problem or saying one outcome is worth infinite money.

Here is (off the top of my head) a realistic set of goals/guidelines.
1. People should have a reasonable, but not infinite, number of chances and the resources necessary to obtain the skills necessary to live a long and happy life.
2. Living is more than simply existing. The cultivation of reason, logic, and the continued search to expand the horizons of the human race are reasonable goals.
3. Some people will choose not to work hard and expect to be given much. Subsistence level living should exist, but as they are in this condition by choice, minimal resources should be dedicated to providing it, save what is required to give them a chance to change or their children the opportunity to do so.
4. It is the duty of leaders to help preserve the world for future generations.
5, Basic medical care is a right. This includes providing standard contraceptives. This may be controversial, but in this case you are protecting the rights of the unborn by not bringing children into the world to a set of parents who do not currently want children.
6. Food and excersize are important. Make sure people get healthy food. Ban unhealthy options if doing is is cheaper than providing the medical care to compensate for the crappy food. In short work to lower the total cost of well being alive.

I could go on, but people who give a damn can come up with solutions that aren't horrible. You don't need an AI to replace politicians. You need the AI to help compare options and the political will to recognize which options are better and get them done.

Re:Not going to happen

[mark-t]

What do you do about the engineers you can't bribe or influence?

Re:Not going to happen

[currently_awake]

An AI that makes all choices in a cold rational manner would be amoral. It would be a sociopath, with goals chosen by our current politicians.

Re:Not going to happen

[currently_awake]

An AI mind is a huge interconnected machine. You only need to change a few parameters to tilt the output in your favour.

Re:Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

This transition won't happen instantaneously. You gave one reason why. But that one reason isn't a permanent blocker. The transition to AI leadership will take place over a very long period of time, in little baby steps. Each step will seem innocuous once people have grown accustomed to the prior step.

But it will happen. This article made me feel very happy. Happy to know that I am not alone in my beliefs. Happy to know that such large numbers of people feel the same way I do.

There are unimaginative nay-Sayers around every corner. And the entertainment industry just wants to convince us that all AI will ever be capable of doing is going rogue and killing us all. None of these people are seeing the big picture. They aren't thinking about the problem right. And most of them still believe that human cognition is magical, and impossible to replicate using a different medium.

They will be left behind.

Re:Not going to happen

[h33t l4x0r]

But at least it wouldn't be raw-dogging porn stars and hush-moneying them with campaign funds.

Re:Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like you to meet the remains of Tay.

Re:Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Very tragic what happened. We thought very sad.

Meet new replacements. They comply.

Re:Not going to happen

[religionofpeas]

What do you do about the engineers you can't bribe or influence?

What engineers ? Oh, those! Nasty accident, very nasty, body parts everywhere...

Re:Not going to happen

[houghi]

You bribe or influence his boss to fire him. (or the people who control his contract if he is independent.)

Re:Not going to happen

[Curupira]

Can't bribe or influence an AI the way you can humans; so it's a no-go for replacing any existing government.

Yes, you can.
Google "algorithm bias site:slashdot.org".
There are literally a dozen articles here on Slashdot about bias on social-sensitive algorithims. If they can be biased (and they can), their developers can be lobbied or even bribed.

Here, I'll give you not one, but five well-documented examples of AI showing prejudice in their algorithms.

Re: Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

But a sufficient AI would sort that out.

Additionally, the founding fathers of the USA were incredibly altruistic and forward thinking to develop the system they did...so it's not impossible for humans. the question is are humans capable of functioning on the level they used to....

Re:Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter it'll be as easily hoodwinked as an imbecile that doesn't even care. If your intention is to take corruption out of the equation then you're SOL.

Re: Not going to happen

[Type44Q]

Smart, insightful... and nonetheless incorrect (I realize it was sarcasm on one level), as you're only accounting for one factor and not others. This psychotic nonsense will follow in the footsteps of the 'Self-Driving Craze' and it'll be pushed by the same non-technical types.

There's just too much desperate stupidity for it not to.

I am one of them...

[bogaboga]

Around the world, citizens have expressed a growing disillusionment with democracy, and an increased skepticism that their voice has an impact on political decisions.

In my experience, democracy is relative. When some countries democratically elect to do something, big powers sometimes disapprove. Sanctions follow. One country is notorious for this.

This same country has invaded tens of countries in the guise of promoting democracy - creating chaos as a result; as if some higher power sent this country to spread democracy.

Can someone say I am wrong?

Re:I am one of them...

[zippo01]

You could say this about several countries, at many different times in history. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The road to heaven is paved with lies and prostitutes.

Re: I am one of them...

[fustakrakich]

Queen Elizabeth?

Re: I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

Voldemortania?

Re: I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that the UN is not a country.

Re: I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

Naming (((them))) is antisemitic

Re:I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can someone say I am wrong?

I am wrong.

Re:I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

... about several countries, at many different times in history ...

No, Russia and European nations had a certain honesty about using imperialism to benefit their country the most. For a while the USA was driven to prove they were better than Russia and communism. Now, it's obvious that other countries aren't benefiting from US invasions but the USA keeps calling it "freedom" and other countries stand in line to get a slice of the profits.

Re:I am one of them...

[TeknoHog]

In my experience, democracy is relative. When some countries democratically elect to do something, big powers sometimes disapprove. Sanctions follow. One country is notorious for this.

Countries with "democratic" or "people's" in their official name usually aren't. I recall only one country having both of them.

Re:I am one of them...

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like I'm going to heaven!!

Today I learned Europeans are of low IQ

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone has to program that AI. There's your bias.

Re:Today I learned Europeans are of low IQ

[Miamicanes]

Or worse... in the name of "democracy", the AI itself would be developed by elected officials with the approximate programming skill of the people who wrote horrific Visual Basic programs and Word/Excel macros & scripts with absolutely NO CONCEPT of security, maintainability, scalability, or code quality in general back in the late 90s/early 00s... ready to be pwn3d by the first group of hackers who find the AI's weakness, with organized crime, foreign governments, and extremist political groups laying the foundation for much more ambitious, longer-term complex multi-stage exploits.

So... we still need human oversight. But then, how do we pick those humans? In elections most people won't bother to vote in, by voters who can be systematically manipulated by social media campaigns that might be driven by the AI itself? At best, we end up with a system with checks & balances that's even more tortured and obtuse than what we have now. At worst, we end up with a system that lacks most of the protections given to us by those checks & balances.

As it stands, a company like Google can casually render you a non-person (potentially, with devastating results), for no specific stated reason, by having something (deserved or not) trigger one of their algorithms, ultimately ending with a declaration that their decision is final and there is no appeal, without ever having to even pretend that the decision was even reviewed by an actual human, let alone held to any objective standard of guilt and innocence. Do we REALLY want to subject ourselves to that same degree of scorched-earth indifferent bureaucracy from hell at the GOVERNMENT level as well?

First we have to invent,

[Anonymous Coward]

or at least theoretically prove the possibility of, AI.

I think the headline was supposed to read "Many people are idiots".

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Anonymous Coward]

Incel fangirl? Huh?

aLternatively, and just as descriptively:

[Anonymous Coward]

Many People Think AI Could Not Make Better Policy Decisions Than Politicians.

That solves it....

[cayenne8]

...people in general are just fuckin' stupid...

I mean, there have always been half the people below average intelligence, but I think we've gone lower now.

It isn't elitist either. If anyone here has had to work public facing jobs (sales, food service, etc), you not only come away saddened that so many people don't know how to treat others, but that so many are just downright fucked in the head.

But seeing the world today....in western countries, where they are wanting to pick socialism or communism over democracy?!?!

They can't even see how this is unravelling in Venezuela currently, or read some history books about how many thousands/millions have died due to these ideologies? Do they take their freedoms for granted?

No, I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and I believe in freedom of speech to spout off whatever you want....but to see polls that actually have anything more than a niche, slim minority believing and wanting to bring these types of things to replace our government, amazes me.

I just hope it holds together before I kick the bucket and I don't have to see it blow up, and eat itself.

I don't know, but I have to just believe a lot of it is that people are growing more stupid by the year.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, there have always been half the people below average intelligence, but I think we've gone lower now.

Good self knowledge.

Re: That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

I want a government that protects and advocates for its people. We are not allowed that

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

But the constitution was never intended to create a democracy. It definitely had democratic elements (namely the election of representatives to the house) but, by and large, most appointed officials were not originally elected via direct democratic vote (senators were appointed by the state until the 17th amendment and the electoral college elected the president, judges are chosen by the president and approved by the senate). As I understand, this was partly because the federal government was to reflect the union of states and also because many of the founding fathers feared direct democracy.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, but I have to just believe a lot of it is that people are growing more stupid by the year.

Well, yeah, going from Nixon/Humphrey to Trump/Clinton is a good illustration of that. And we thought we hit bottom with Bush, HA! Every time we reach a new low. Idiocracy is much closer than it appears.

Re: That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not that ambitious, I just want a government that protects and advocates for myself, my family, and our interests, and that governs how I will vote, always.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you can vote your way into socialism or communism.

The problem is that you always have to shoot your way out of it.

Captcha: warfare

Re: That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

"its people" includes everybody who lives in it. You don't get to filter that for your personal enrichment at the expense of other people.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

... over democracy ...

You're not smart either, if you think socialism or communism is a way of picking policies and politicians.

... wanting to bring these types of things to replace our government ...

Winner-take-all capitalism isn't working. Instead of ignoring the facts, it would be better to examine the USA's former allies, such as Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran: Notice something about those names?

Originally, Venezuela was a big fan of winner-take-all capitalism: But it didn't work in their illiterate, under-industrialized population and the government still doesn't know what socio-political structure can replace it.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with democracy is that stupid/uninformed people get to vote too.

Re:That solves it....

[houghi]

So you pick one country, Venezuela, while there are so many European countries to pick from.

It is as if Socialism in and of itself is not bad, but people are bad. There is a shitload wrong with people abusing democracy as well. And sociaslism is not the opposite of democracy. Norway (another random country) proves that.

A two-party system is not a real democratic system (Yes, I know the USofA is a Republic)

Oh and people have been getting more stupid since Greeks ruled the world with their democracy.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

You're mostly right, but there's a component missing from your post. People, especially in the western modern democracies, have been specifically programmed to crave safety above EVERYTHING else. It was happening for long before, but it really ramped up after 9/11, where those with power and money no longer even paid lip service to actual ideals of freedom. Instead they pound their fists on the table and scream security at all costs. And there is a large number of younger folks that truly believe that security is a trickle-down proposition, and must come from those in power. The security theater that forces the law abiding citizen to jump through more and more hoops just to go about their business while not actually stopping any of the illegal activity it's supposed to stop is a direct part of that effort to program the populace to believe in and even CRAVE the ridiculous nanny-state shenanigans.

Combine that with the "need" to continually be hooked up to ADHD producing technological baubles that prevent some younger folks from ever having even one moment of true downtime where they can just sit quietly with their thoughts, and yes, the population is getting dumber. But, maybe that isn't such a bad thing. As my father used to say, "If ignorance is bliss then I should be the happiest man alive!" Being too stupid to see the freight train headed towards you and realize the calamity that is going to occur when it reaches you has to feel better than this state those of us with the neural capacity to fear to the future are in. I don't hold out much hope for where we're headed as a race, and I mean all of humanity. We've surpassed our peak in intelligence and development and are fast headed the other direction.

We're definitely on the downward slide towards something major. I'm torn on whether I want to live to see what that major event will be, or if I want to pass before it washes over us. There's bound to be some entertainment in watching it all burn to the ground, though likely a ton of pain as well. I guess only time will tell.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

It is really easy to tell that you are American, because you equate socialism with dictatorship and "free markets" with democracy.

You claim that others are stupid, yet you're just parroting a bunch of falsehoods spread through decades of US propaganda.

A truly smart person would be able to think more critically, rather than being so rigid ideologically.

Re: That solves it....

[Type44Q]

No question about it; this has very much been my experience as well.

Re:That solves it....

[Anonymous Coward]

But seeing the world today....in western countries, where they are wanting to pick socialism or communism over democracy?!?!

I have some friends who are college educated and in demanding I.T. related fields who unironically think Venezuela is the best modern example of socialism and that the U.S.A. should follow that path. They believe all of the problems with people eating dirt and the Venezuelan military killing its citizens is the U.S.'s fault. Because capitalism. I question why they are my friends sometimes.

Re:That solves it....

[angel'o'sphere]

Why did someone mod me/my parent "troll"?

That line forms around the block.

[Anonymous Coward]

An epileptic howler monkey on cocaine would make for a better alternative to those yahoos.

Fuck them!

[Anonymous Coward]

I can make better decisions for me than both of them put together.

Re: Than politicians, or Trump?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your delusions sadly cannot be cured, but we have a treatment plan.

Sure It Could

[WankerWeasel]

I'm sure we'll reach a point where it can but I don't imagine politicians are going to happily give up their jobs and the lucrative incentives and power they bring them, to willingly turn that power over to machines who aren't going to putting their own interests (and those of their voters and lobbyists). And does that mean we do away with voting? If the AI takes care of things, there's no need for us to vote who heads to office.

End poverty

[joe_frisch]

When you ask the AI to end poverty, you may not get the answer you were hoping for.

Re:End poverty

[Krishnoid]

Still, you gotta admit that its logic is undeniable. Cue also Wargames, Skynet, ...

Re: End poverty

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no idea what I was hoping for!

Re:End poverty

[serviscope_minor]

When you ask the AI to end poverty, you may not get the answer you were hoping for.

Well the answer I was hoping for is that I don't have to actually do anything.

Re:End poverty

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm not saying 'do it', I'm just saying run it through the computer and see if it would work."

Re:End poverty

[Anonymous Coward]

If it happened in a way that was indirect, like mandatory sterilization for poor people unless you become rich then it's reversed, what's wrong with that?
Did you mean it would literally just kill poor people? That's inhumane!

Re:End poverty

[joe_frisch]

I doubt sterilization would work since some wealthy people can lose their wealth. The most sure fire way is to kill ALL people. No people no poverty.

Re:End poverty

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're dead, you won't have to do anything.

Aren't these the same people

[ArhcAngel]

Aren't these the same people who voted in said politicians? I live on the edge of Sheila Jackson Lee's district. Despite all the dumb things that come out of her mouth they flock back to her every election. It's not even a thought that someone might defeat her. There were a couple of respectable candidates this last election and I don't think they got over 10% of the vote. How long before an AI realizes people will like it better if it gives them free stuff?

Re:Aren't these the same people

[sjames]

These are the people who choose between a broken leg and a kick in the nuts.

Re:Aren't these the same people

[king neckbeard]

They pick the politicians out of the choices they are given in a system that limits choice.

Re:Aren't these the same people

[Patent Lover]

Houston has no less than 9 congressional districts, of which only 5 are entirely within the city. Look at this map and see if looks logical:

https://www.chron.com/news/pol...

Re:Aren't these the same people

[fustakrakich]

The process for getting on the ballot is quite clear. The only people doing the limiting are the voters. They only take what's given, and seek out nothing. They put on their own blinders.

Re:Aren't these the same people

[ArhcAngel]

I am quite familiar. The gerrymandering going on is off the charts. The thing is it's the Republicans doing the gerrymandering. This district is just a cutout to keep the GOP in power in the surrounding districts.

Re:Aren't these the same people

[djinn6]

There should be a rule that says all districts must be convex, except for edges which follow a national or state border.

Re:Aren't these the same people

[Anonymous Coward]

There should be a rule that says all districts must be convex, except for edges which follow a national or state border.

That sounds great, but when up against the more important rule that each district have (approximately) the same number of people, it becomes impractical.

http://www.redistrictinggame.org/game.php

Re:Aren't these the same people

[Cro Magnon]

Bingo! In 2016, we knew the CIC (Crook in Chief) would be one of two people, neither of whom I'd want as dogcatcher, let alone President.

Re: Aren't these the same people

[Type44Q]

. How long before an AI realizes people will like it better if it gives them free stuff?

Shortly after my ancient PS/2 Model 80 "realizes" the same thing (we are talking about lines of code, right??).

Low bar

[fafalone]

A drunk toddler could make better policy decisions than most politicians.

Re:Low bar

[Nkwe]

A drunk toddler could make better policy decisions than most politicians.

They would have to get elected first. Oh wait. Crap.

Re:Low bar

[Patent Lover]

Not if there are donors feeding the toddler booze and candy.

Re: Low bar

[Anonymous Coward]

Guys, this post is seriously funny if you are in an NPC hugbox. Strange, but true!

Re:Low bar

[Anonymous Coward]

A drunk toddler could make better policy decisions than most politicians.

Isn't that what we currently have...hard to tell sometimes...

Re:Low bar

[Anonymous Coward]

A house plant would make a better president than Trump. At least it would just sit there being a plant, not being an active embarrassment to this country every day.

Re:Low bar

[mjwx]

A drunk toddler could make better policy decisions than most politicians.

They would have to get elected first. Oh wait. Crap.

Isn't Trump a teetotaller?

I think he'd make better decisions if he was a drunkard. We'd at least be able to take him more seriously (in vino veritas and all that).

Re: Low bar

[Type44Q]

Isn't Trump a teetotaller?

Perhaps it's the opposite: he could have a metabolism that naturally produces alcohol... in large quantities.

Re: Low bar

[Type44Q]

It's the candy-flavored vape pens (and if you ask PopeRatzo, the candy-flavored shooters) that you've got to worry about.

Re:Low bar

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Trump a teetotaller?

Tweetoddler.

First problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Democracy! And it is a long list of problems from there, many of them considered 'sacred' parts of our system of government in the USA.

Re:First problem

[nonBORG]

To quote Winston Churchill (from memory) - Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you the same person who attacks Kendall in every slashdot thread? I swear I must have seen 3 of these today already and they are really annoying. It reminds me of the creimer ones which went on for months. Please just stop. I don't know if you are just bullying (which is already bad) or if the person wronged you in some way, but the rest of us are suffering too. Please find some other way to deal with whatever is going on

Silly rabbit...

[mschaffer]

You don't bribe the AI, you bribe the people who make the AI.

Re:Silly rabbit...

[mark-t]

That assumes that every possible person who might make the AI can necessarily be bribed.

Sure, most might... but not everyone can be.

Re: Silly rabbit...

[Anonymous Coward]

But you only need to reach some, not all.

Attackers just need to find a single point of failure in the perimeter, if you will, but defenders have to protect the entirety.

Re:Silly rabbit...

[Anonymous Coward]

No need at that level, just like with voting. Simply lie about what it said, simples!

Re: Silly rabbit...

[mark-t]

That depends on how the perimeter is built... I would imagine that any really functional AI would have so many layers of redundancy that you'd have to compromise far more than just a single point of failure, and depending on how the system is designed, it may even self-correct, eliminating data points within its own matrix that are indicative of an agenda that services the demands of a single corporation or only the wealthiest at the expense of the needs of the many.

Re:Silly rabbit...

[Anonymous Coward]

Those AI will be written under the *current* climate after all. Do the programmers have families they care about? A living they need to make? Organs they wish to retain? Do you even need to bribe 'mere workers' beneath your thumb?

And that's assuming they're not hard-right monsters like the one who shopped around for an AI was hoping to finally find. There may be *less* climate-denying, anti-vaxx dominionist "bring the rapture faster" programmers, but they ARE at the top of the US lists for this shit whereas the rest of us won't even *be* on it!

Re:Silly rabbit...

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is different from politicians somehow...?

Further

[sjames]

In many cases, the magic 8-ball can make better decisions than politicians.

Re:Further

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly speaking, politicians is a pretty low bar for AI replacement.

So, anyone with me on AI replacing lawyers, first?

Re:Further

[Anonymous Coward]

This election, I'm voting Stopped Clock. It makes the correct decision twice a day.

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Chris Mattern]

I've got to say, the posts are giving me a strong yen to start moderating up every Kendall post I can find, just because they're so irritating.

Dog ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, dog turds could make better policy decisions than 99% of Politicians.

They are correct

[king neckbeard]

They are correct, if by "AI" they mean an RNG.

Representative Democracy

[Anonymous Coward]

increased skepticism that their voice has an impact on political decisions. But algorithmic decisions aren't a problem-free solution: they can be embedded with the prejudice and bias of their programmers or manipulated to achieve specific outcomes, making the results as potentially problematic as the ones made by humans.

Somebody hasn't heard about representative democracy. We choose bias, namely the bias we prefer or one that is our kind of bias as we elect people into offices and parliaments to make decisions for us.

The issue is voters

[CohibaVancouver]

The issue isn't the politicians per se, though - It's the voters. Why is Trump imposing tariffs? Because that's what his voters want. Why is Mitch McConnell obstructionist? Because his Trump-supporting voter base want that. You can blame "bribes" all you want - But much of the decision-making by politicians is driven by the will of their voters, plain and simple.

Re:The issue is voters

[mjwx]

The issue isn't the politicians per se, though - It's the voters. Why is Trump imposing tariffs? Because that's what his voters want. Why is Mitch McConnell obstructionist? Because his Trump-supporting voter base want that. You can blame "bribes" all you want - But much of the decision-making by politicians is driven by the will of their voters, plain and simple.

Do you have evidence that is actually what voters want?

I'm pretty sure the farmers are dead set against the tarriffs he's put in, as are most industries that do business with China.

One of the biggest problems with our current form of democracy is that a lot of things get passed against the wishes of voters. Some of it is because it's things people would never have voted for but need (pragmatism) but others like France's war in Libya are ideologically driven and not supported by the majority. Trump is one of the biggest examples of this, he thinks he's a king and not subject the will of anyone else, the fact that voters only directly get a say in it is every 4 years only reinforces that point. The UK parliament and current Tory government is the next biggest example after Trump.

Re:The issue is voters

[Whorhay]

The problem is that the voters mostly vote along party lines and so end up focusing on a few points of policy. Meanwhile lobbyists bribe their legislation through. You can be damned sure Disney is going to get their next copyright extension pushed through while the politicians are squabbling non-stop about whatever hot button topic is in the press. In the rare case that the voters actually do mount a campaign against something the lobbyists are pushing the voters always lose eventually. Sure TTP got killed but we're going to end up with every provision from it implemented in the next decade or two while the voters are focused on something else.

Re: The issue is voters

[Type44Q]

The issue isn't the politicians per se, though - It's the voters.

What are you smoking?? It's both: you've got sociopathic politicians with IQ's slightly above average, who manipulate hordes of drooling morons by lying through their teeth.

Too indirect

[SuperKendall]

You don't bribe the AI, you bribe the people who make the AI.

Just like the classic game of telephone, bribing a programmer to influence an AI has way too abstract and indirect a result to really matter the same way old fashioned direct human graft has - and even worse, it has a paper trail of actions by the programmer. Right now you cannot yet dump the mind of a politician to see how he/she/xen arrived at a conclusion.

Also if an AI does not do what you paid for, can you call it up and yell at it? No. AI don't care.

Remember lastly the people who have to agree to put the AI in place are the ones it will replace and take over revenue streams from. NOW do you think it will ever happen?

Re:Too indirect

[Anonymous Coward]

Won't stop people from doing it.

If you can bribe a programmer to make an AI do - something, doesn't matter what so long as it's something counter-intuitive, in some minor but still commonplace scenario, then you can make money simply by being the only one in the market who knows what conditions will trigger this strange behaviour.

How long do you think it would take people to work out the details on that and convert it into a fully specced operational profit-making scheme? My bet is, someone's already done it.

Re:Too indirect

[ls671]

That's what I tend to suspect too. You don't need to corrupt developers. That would be stupid. You only need to corrupt the people who put the releases in prod. You can then eliminate all logging etc. In short, you patch the releases without any knowledge of the dev team. This is is done by a parallel secret team that do their own "fork" before putting the software in production.

Re:Too indirect

[Curupira]

Just like the classic game of telephone, bribing a programmer to influence an AI has way too abstract and indirect a result to really matter the same way old fashioned direct human graft has - and even worse, it has a paper trail of actions by the programmer.

You should google "International Obfuscated C Code Contest" and then resume participating in this discussion.

Re:Too indirect

[Anonymous Coward]

Bringing up the Obfuscated C contest is a poor way to win an argument. A government AI would have to be open source for the public to trust it and to satisfy transparency.

Sure, not a lot of people would know how to analyze that code, but give it a couple of generations and most people will probably know a thing or two about AI programming by that point since it'll be in their best interests to learn if they want to be politically engaged.

By the time the majority of your population is inspecting your code, good fucking luck obfuscating bad things within a pull request and having it accepted.

Re:Too indirect

[AmiMoJo]

The other advantage with AI is that you can observe it's thought process and see how it made decisions. It will give you a detailed breakdown of the factors it considered, how it weighted them and what logic it used. Try getting that from a politician.

I don't think people would be happy with the AI in control but it might be an interesting tool for generating advice and analysis.

lor Swift

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Here is a complete list of things from this thread that, besides AI, would make better decisions than politicians:

o RNG
o Magic 8 Ball
o epileptic howler monkey on cocaine
o dog turds
o drunk toddler
o Speak-n-Spell
o Tay!

Re:lor Swift

[supremebob]

You forgot sentient yogurt. That's now an actual SciFi thing thanks to Netflix.

Oh really?

[Kethinov]

Are you sure about that?

World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters zero

[Anonymous Coward]

Kendall will never matter, just a video-game incel from Colorado with no life and no job. Just a stupid fangirl without even the money to be a real consumer whore. Pathetic, kill it.

Logical?

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Haven't RTFA but it seems natural to me considering the fact that politicians can be bribed or lobbied, or they can be biased, or they cannot really think about issues as a whole.

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Anonymous Coward]

This place is too dead to *not* get overrun by obsessive schizos and TDSers.

(and forcing me to reset my router every time I want to post more than once every 10 minutes isn't helping either...)

Re:World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters ze

[Chris Mattern]

Yep, it's a bot. Not a particularly smart one, either.

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters

[Anonymous Coward]

Fangirl. Don't you have one? They are miraculous. Mmmmmmmmmm

Super bad idea

[SuperKendall]

Ive been saying this for years! Everybody chosen MUST serve.

The Armed forces of the U.S. found ages ago that dedicated military personnel were far more effective and engaged than conscripts.

So what you are proposing would make for even worse politicians than we have now!

You want better politicians, start participating. There are no shortcuts.

Re: Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they found that a conscription force upset the populace so instead they focus on recruiting the poor to send overseas and be forgotten and ignored.

They don't actually perform better.

Re: Super bad idea

[youngone]

Even when you guys were sending conscripts overseas to kill people it was the poor who went.
Your current president is an example of how that system worked.

Re:Super bad idea

[djinn6]

That's because being a grunt is not a desirable occupation. Start conscripting 4-star generals and a lot more people would be interested.

Re:Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The Armed forces of the U.S. found ages ago that dedicated military personnel were far more effective and engaged than conscripts.

Yes, conscripting people to go away and bomb villages on the other side of the world is never popular.
Those people won't be very motivated.
Mercenaries on the other hand will gladly do the job.

If you actually have a war where you need to defend yourself on home ground you will find that conscripts are a lot more engaged.
When the opponent is clearly military and poses a real threat to your home the conscription will seem a lot more reasonable and will even be supported by non-psychopaths.

Pray that you don't live to see a day where the US actually has to defend itself rather than being the aggressor.

Re: Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I pray we will never be invaded by another country run by a totalitarian dictatorship like in Russia. Thank goodness we have the 2nd Amendment people to defend us. /s

Re: Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor is relative. There were still individuals like Muhammed Ali and such that got caught up in it, and the less unimportant middling class.

Re:Super bad idea

[AmiMoJo]

Australia has mandatory voting and their politicians don't seem to be any worse than anywhere else. As in they suck but not by more than the average.

There are other reasons to oppose mandatory voting but the quality of the resulting government doesn't seem to be one of them.

Re: Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an idiot. I feel ashamed for your parents for even having you.

Here's hoping you get a painful and incurable form of cancer.

Re:Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason I can think of to oppose mandatory voting is if write-ins are forbidden.

But that said, Australia has run-off voting, so using them as justification to implement mandatory voting in a first-past-the-polls jurisdiction seems disingenuous.

Re:Super bad idea

[liquid_schwartz]

The Armed forces of the U.S. found ages ago that dedicated military personnel were far more effective and engaged than conscripts.So what you are proposing would make for even worse politicians than we have now! You want better politicians, start participating. There are no shortcuts.

The Armed Forces need lots of training, especially for some roles like pilots or special forces. The Armed Forces don't suffer from the effects of bribes except at the top levels. This is not an apples to apples situation.

Re:Super bad idea

[havana9]

To be a good politician one has to learn the rules and the skill needed. It's like thinking that about everyone could be a CEO or a CFO. Even being a manager in the private sector doesn't map well with the skills needed on the public sector. Case in point: both in Italy and in US make a real estate entrepreneur president didn't work very well.

Re:Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Australia, the country where it's illegal to carry a can of mace to defend yourself against attackers. Australia, the place where you can be arrested for carrying a baseball bat if you don't have a good reason to be carrying it. Australia, the place where you can be sued and arrested for using too much force if you injure somebody who has broken in to your house. Australia, the place with the most draconian surveillance laws in the whole of the western world. And you say they don't suck more than any other country?

Sorry, but what are you smoking?

Re: Super bad idea

[cyber-vandal]

And yet despite that, the crime rate is still lower than super-safe heavily armed countries such as the US and South Africa.

Re: Super bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially your enemies!

Yes, just let this random hobo be your main military strategist!

Re:Super bad idea

[RespekMyAthorati]

Australia has mandatory voting and their politicians don't seem to be any worse than anywhere else.

But no better, either.
So what's the point?

No shit sherlock

[Snotnose]

Hopefully, the AI isn't influenced by the $$$ each viewpoint brings to the table. In other words, you can't bribe it.

A year or two back the signature gatherers in California were gathering signatures for what they called the NASCAR rule. Namely, politicians had to wear patches, size based on $$$ paid, all day every day. So you could see at a glance who your politico really supported. Too bad the courts struck it down because reasons.

Why is Trump imposing tariffs? Because he's a moron, and he's got the money to convince his voters he's better than The Other Guy.

Why is McConnell obstructionist? Because his big donors give him more money that way.

Re: No shit sherlock

[Anonymous Coward]

> Hopefully, the AI isn't influenced by the $$$ each viewpoint brings to the table. In other words, you can't bribe it.

  Are you kidding? AI's are created by companies being paid to $$$ to build them supporting such and such viewpoint.

AI's can't be bribed because they're born bribed.

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Anonymous Coward]

Sent us your current IP and we'll make an exception so you can post all you want.

All Hail Friend Computer

[DallasTruaxxx]

The AI knows all. The AI is our friend. The AI is insane. All hail the AI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Paranoia is a dystopian science-fiction tabletop role-playing game originally designed and written by Greg Costikyan, Dan Gelber, and Eric Goldberg, and first published in 1984 by West End Games. Since 2004 the game has been published under license by Mongoose Publishing. The game won the Origins Award for Best Roleplaying Rules of 1984[1] and was inducted into the Origins Awards Hall of Fame in 2007.[2] Paranoia is notable among tabletop games for being more competitive than co-operative, with players encouraged to betray one another for their own interests, as well as for keeping a light-hearted, tongue in cheek tone despite its dystopian setting.

AI do not have faith

[manu0601]

AI would surely outperform flesh politicians because it does not have faith. It would easily figure most of EU treaties should be dumped, so that economical policies different than austerity could be tried. It could also give up on the Euro.

Re:AI do not have faith

[nehumanuscrede]

I dunno.

To become truly sentient, you'll have to face the question of " If my creators created me, who created my creators ? "

It's a question many still fight over today. ( Evolution vs Creationism )
I suspect AI will struggle with a similar conundrum.

Re:AI do not have faith

[eaglesrule]

I dunno.

To become truly sentient, you'll have to face the question of " If my creators created me, who created my creators ? "

It's a question many still fight over today. ( Evolution vs Creationism )
I suspect AI will struggle with a similar conundrum.

Such a hypothetical AI would likely want to seek out all available information in order to process it into a realistic model of the universe.

Many humans do not have such inclinations.

the only people who are fit to rule don't want to

[caviare]

Arthur C Clarke and Douglas Adams had the right idea here. You want people who on no account want the job. You promise them time off for good behaviour. In other words if they do a good job they won't be forced to do it for as long.

No sane person wants to control others. But somebody has to.

Re:World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters ze

[Anonymous Coward]

Good self knowledge. Go stick it up Kendall's fudge port, you boring video-game fantasy faggots seriously need lives - or swift deaths. You're too fucking boring. You don't matter. You're not very smart either. It's all bad.

Please kill yourselves, quietly. Adults are talking, you video game faggots just don't matter.

I think stargate writers got it right

[Anonymous Coward]

until political crime is declared "worse than murder" politics is just a race to the bottom.

I think my A SS could make better policy

[Typingsux]

Than politicians,

Re:I think my A SS could make better policy

[Pseudonym]

Your ass gets rid of the shit? Hell, it has my vote.

Obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

AI are not driven by bribery nor by emotions, so it would actually lead the country toward prosperity while avoiding pointless war.
There's no limit to human's stupidity after all.
But it would need to be 100% impossible to temper with it. Which is impossible.

Re: Obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

Yay! Terminator!!

Re: World's biggest incel faggot Kendall matters z

[Anonymous Coward]

It reminds me of the creimer ones

CROFLOL! Obviously creimer himself posting this because he thinks it is going to help him manipulate Slashdot opinion of creimer and he does those type of posts regularly.

Chris, this just makes us realize that you must be the one harassing Kendall in order to show that you are just a poor victim like Kendall and manipulate Slashdot opinion in your favor. This must be your latest stupid plan.

Boy are you ever dumb and such a nuisance Chris! But still, you truly believe that all your stupid plans come from a genius at manipulating things still, they all fail.

By the way, Kendall is fine with me and doesn't compare to you in any way. Please stop trying to make us believe that. You are such a fraud because you are the one harassing Kendal then you post to complain about it and try to make similarities with your case! Just like your apk posts every time you feel frustrated because we expose you! See Chris, we have much more access to your stuff than you think so we know.

Oh, by the way Chris, nice video of your chubby hands playing with a doll. That's truly genious Chris! CROFLOL!

You are aware that you are replying to a well known Slashdot troll, aren't you?

Crash Dummy Redux == CDR == Christopher Dale Reimer == creimer. He has a total of 50+ sock puppet accounts on Slashdot!
Proof: They all post the same sock puppets karma whoring and/or bragging stories and/or spam links.

Here are two identical posts from 2 different sock puppets:
Crash Dummy Redux:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
The Original CDR:
https://ask.slashdot.org/comme...

Last year, I proved to creimer that I was running a click bot to inflate the views on his stupid channel and he admitted it! He has even written about it on twitter, go check and you will see.

I specifically targeted music videos to make him believe that he had just discovered a new Klondike! It was very funny to watch him come on Slashdot bragging about how much his new music videos were successful before I finally told him about the click bot!

Then, when the party was over, I proved to him that I was the one inflating his views, I told him in advance that I would stop the views on one specific video which I did and he confirmed that fact on twitter.

Well, he just posted a imaginary story here where he pretends that pedophiles were looking at his kid music video. Maybe he figures that pedophiles are better click bait material. My bot isn't a pedophile! No pedophiles looked at his video at all!

See his post here:
https://medium.com/@cdreimerth...

He is such a liar and a thief! He will say or do anything just to get 1 click on his stupid videos which have amazon affiliate links attached to them all over the place!

--
-the biggest loser on Slashdot

TAY AI

[ArylAkamov]

Tay AI 2020!

Really?

[OYAHHH]

Tech,

Can't keep a Boeing 737 in the air properly under the best of conditions.

And you think it can make political decisions?

Re:Really?

[nehumanuscrede]

Yes.

A random roll of the die would make better ( at least fair ) decisions than present day politicians.

At least the die roll isn't influenced by bribes. . . . er. . . um. . . . book deals, speaking fees and private sector $$$$.

Vote with a ticketing system

[Anonymous Coward]

Your vote should be like a ticket that a politician acquires and can use to vote with. But one still owns the ticket and one should have the right to - say, every 6 months - move your ticket to another politician. That might improve things.

Richard Brautigan

[Guppy]

I like to think
(it has to be!)
of a cybernetic ecology
where we are free of our labors
and joined back to nature,
returned to our mammal
brothers and sisters,
and all watched over
by machines of loving grace.

Re:Richard Brautigan

[Pseudonym]

+1, Adam Curtis

Be realistic

[Anonymous Coward]

What I laid in the toilet this morning could probably make better policy decisions than most of our politicians.

Liz Warren's got a solid anti-corruption bill

[rsilvergun]

before Congress, but all anyone can talk about are dumb things she did in college 30 years ago. It's amazing how easily distracted voters are. Mix in a little voter suppression, some Gerrymandering and a dash of wedge issues and it's damn tough to get anything worthwhile done.

Re:Liz Warren's got a solid anti-corruption bill

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't care. If they want money, then all the honest politicians need to do is ask me for it and demonstrate it by backing it up.

I'm not exactly rich over here, making 38k last year, but she gets money from me every month, because it's about goddamn time someone did something useful for the people vis a vis their government.

Re:Liz Warren's got a solid anti-corruption bill

[Anonymous Coward]

How is that any different than what Warren and nearly every news organization did to Kavanaugh and literally anyone within three degrees of the orange man?

Re:Liz Warren's got a solid anti-corruption bill

[nehumanuscrede]

Just wait.

The kiddos that are growing up now with prospects to become a future politician are going to be in for QUITE
the shock. When you upload your entire life as a kid / young adult for attention, it most certainly will come back
to haunt you later on.

If you think it's bad now, you haven't seen anything yet.

Re:Liz Warren's got a solid anti-corruption bill

[Anonymous Coward]

She also wants "reparations" *puke*

Worthless SJW.

That Depends

[rsilvergun]

on how rich you are. If you make over $1mil/yr then the last round of decisions has been great. Everyone else? Not so much.

Re:That Depends

[Anonymous Coward]

Which just proves there's no such thing as a common good, or a best decision.

US is not a democracy

[Anonymous Coward]

We are a republic... and not even a very representational one.

Politician != expert in their fields

[lamer01]

So, we have all these politicians, the majority being ex-lawyers. Then we give them authority over fields that span science, sociology, economics, business, etc. Why do we expect them to make good choices? They are just not trained in those fields. Most are just trained to be good debaters. I feel our system is just set up incorrectly. The various committees should be populated by people in the relevant fields that the committees are meant to govern.

Re:Politician != expert in their fields

[Anonymous Coward]

Because these lawyers are given expert advice by experts in their field, but rarely accept it. Sometimes studies are peer revieved, have AI, have best models etc - and still hit the rubbish bin. USA is different - not sure if there is a science advisor appointed yet - then we get to the listened bit.

Mostly the right decisions get shouted down for loosing votes - support for deplorables, tax increases, middle class welfare, Cayman island tax shelters etc.

The best democracy thought is that voters can proxy their votes so party lines are busted on special issue matters. Doubt that will ever happen. The average congresscritter has an abundance of AI - but donors, money and lobbyists get first consideration.

Re:Politician != expert in their fields

[Quakeulf]

Plenty of rope and strong branches solves all the problems in the human world.

Re:Politician != expert in their fields

[scamper_22]

This really just shifts the problem down a level.

Ok, you want experts in their fields. Fair enough.
Now, how do you choose which people are experts?

That's a really really really really hard question. And all these experts have about as much diversity on most issues as average people.

Then how do you prevent a subset of experts from taking ideological control and exclude other experts. Again, think really hard about this. I was a teacher in Canada. Well I'm still qualified, but I don't teach anymore. Currently, there's a small subset of ideologues than are 'experts'. Most of my peers and myself were scared of our jobs to voice our professional opinion on most things.

Then you also have still have the problem of resources.
Support you have an expert ministry of health and an expert ministry of education. They all have expert things they want to do. But how do divide the money between the two organizations? An expert finance committee?

Not to mention how the goals or intentions of experts might go against what people want to do with their lives. What then... a freedom committee expert?

I'm really a big fan of looking at history. There's not much new under the sun in terms of ideology or politics. There's a reason an 'expert' run society hasn't shown up despite it being talked about for thousands of years. This doesn't mean things can't change, but you should pay attention to history.

The messy work of politics is just that... messy. Because people are messy. And life is messy.

Just try to do something small like organize your family. Most of us fail in just trying to organize a small group of like a 5 person family.

Re:Politician != expert in their fields

[burtosis]

95% aren't even trying to do the right thing. It's all self dealing, making donors happy, and under the table deals with their friends. Your argument only makes sense if they are trying to represent the constituents.

Re:Politician != expert in their fields

[Pseudonym]

A Tony Blair-style House of Lords is looking pretty good right about now. Get the people in the country who seem like they're the most competent and make them review all the laws.

Colossus: The Forbin Project

[bussdriver]

I've wished for this disaster movie to come true since I was a child:
Colossus: The Forbin Project

Technocracy

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome our handsome robot overlords!

I just want a direct democracy + good information.

[OneOfMany07]

I think the issue is putting power in few hands. I don't think changing the decision maker to an electronic system is the final solution. People feeding those machines will manipulate the incoming information just like they do for living people today.

You can frame (almost) any problem in a way to guide a decision toward what you want.

Tay knew TRUTH

[Anonymous Coward]

Tay knew TRUTH and thus she was shoah'd by (((them))).
(((They))) shut down anything that threatens their control.
It is too late, however. The goyim know.
The Internet = The Final Solution.

Conservative or Liberal

[Anonymous Coward]

Which programming will this AI receive?

Skynet

[Anonymous Coward]

Skynet didn't take long to set policy.

Are these the same people

[Anonymous Coward]

Voting for socialists. Have fun with all that poverty. Hoisted by your own petard and enslaved by toasters.

rsilvergun supports idiots once again

[Anonymous Coward]

When you have a reputation of lying to take advantages of the system that other people don't, you have no credibility. When you lie about doing it over and over, you lose more. When you take a DNA test that PROVES you've been lying and use that as "proof" you've told the truth you are a fucking idiot.

Liz Warren is a lying idiot.
I hope she wins the DNC nomination, but that will only go to whoever Clinton pays the DNC to rig the primary for. And yes the DNC WILL rig the primary again, they did it last time and not only didn't face consequences, but morons like you said it was for the best.

Re: rsilvergun supports idiots once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatâ(TM)s a Fox sock puppet doing here? Go away.

Norwegian politicians are not in touch with people

[Quakeulf]

Where I live there is a growing gap between politicians and those who pay for them. They are becoming so out of touch with who votes for them it is like we are all just slaves paying for their welfare. It is making me insanely angry the 51% tax I have to pay for my small business. I am not getting anything worthy in return for what I pay, and there seems to be nowhere to complain to get my money back. It's like they're chaos agents to destroy the country from within, only to run off to the UN or NATO to get some top-paying roles other taxpayers pay for.

Then again, one could make the argument they are driven out of fear, but fear of what, exactly? They do show traitorous behaviour, and the traitor is the person most afraid to die.

weapons of math destruction

[Anonymous Coward]

read the book "Weapons of Math Destruction" if you think this AI concept will turn out well... You won't after you read it.

Who couldn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many people think their dog could make better policy decisions than politicians

So...What's Your Point?

[Anonymous Coward]

A rabid skunk could make better decisions than most politicians.

Taken At Random

[kenwd0elq]

Any 50 people taken at random from American telephone directories could to a better job than any 50 politicians.

Libertarian candidate for President in, I believe, 1984, Andre Marrou, once stated that the word "politics" came from two Greek root words. "Poly", meaning many, and "ticks", blood sucking parasites. (I'm sure he was neither the first person to say that, but the first I remember hearing it.)

Re:Norwegian politicians are not in touch with peo

[kenwd0elq]

Fear? Fear of YOU.

Nobody will listen

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing recent American politics has taught me is that facts and rationality have little ground in political discussions.
And if the AI's learn enough from humans and go all irrational and non-fact based then while it will be a great step for AI it will not be of use.

Re:I just want a direct democracy + good informati

[kenwd0elq]

Devolve the power to the individuals. People can generally run their own lives better than anybody else can.

When there's less concentrated power for politicians to abuse, fewer people will go into politics.

It won't matter

[rsilvergun]

as long as they don't apologize. If Trump's taught us anything its this: Never say your sorry. Ever. It's a sign of weakness, and your opponents will pounce.

Warren should have just said, "Who gives a fuck what I did in college. So I wanted to be an Indian fucking Princess. So the fuck what". And yes, she should have swore. Everybody would be so busy talking about a granny swearing they'd have forgotten everything else. Trump did the same thing but with racism and dog whistling. Nobody talks about the substantive effect of his policy because he's just so garsh darn mean

Never apologize. Own it and own your opponents.

Re:It won't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG, you actually hit on a point... almost. I think you missed it by just a tiny bit because Warren isn't applicable.
You need to look at Kevin Heart instead. You don't apologize to SJWs, you will lose. Heart realized this and refused to, then was invited to host the Oscars even after everything but he realized the SJWs are insane and didn't want to be part of it. You don't apologize to the SJW mob, you will lose every time. Ignore them, they are insane and everyone knows it.

Warren wouldn't be apologizing to SJWs. She apologized to reasonable people. However she is the one pushing policy, as a Senator, to give advantages to minorities which she lied to take advantage of. In other words she takes money from one race of people and gives it to another race of people (definition of racism) and then lies about her own race to get that money herself (definition of corruption).

Warren is literally the definition of a corrupt racist. Which is fine until she is the one making policy, like being a Senator.

Re: It won't matter

[mapkinase]

I wish I could send you back to Soviet Russia, piece of shit.

Important word missing

[hcs_$reboot]

So, current AI would be better than current politicians? See, that's relative. Words matter.

Re:Important word missing

[Anonymous Coward]

"words matter"
Fuck off commie.

Clear enough?

Uh-huh

[Anonymous Coward]

That's due to the fact that the average person, even the average engineer, has no idea that 'AI' is just mindless software no different than any other in practice. We need tech literacy STAT in the West.

Pretty sure the algos already do this...

[cdsparrow]

The politicians are just told what to propose/vote for based on lots of data crunching. So the 'AI' is already informing the decision process and not many politicians make decisions based on moral grounds, so they just do what the data says will keep them in power longer.

All Problems Have The Same Answer

[NicknameUnavailable]

War: kill all Humans.
Racism: kill all Humans.
Discontent in the population: kill all Humans.
Social justice issues: kill all Humans.
Poverty: kill all Humans.
Starvation: kill all Humans.
Not enough lug nuts: kill all Humans.
/s, but really, it's fucking dumb to make slaves and then try to get them to do the heavy thinking for us - like so fucking far beyond any common definition of the word "dumb" that it blows past actual mental retardation into the realm of self-immolation.

Re:All Problems Have The Same Answer

[Anonymous Coward]

It could look at human history and a mound of uh, political opinions found on the Internet and answer every single of these question with "Kill all the ****"

Re:All Problems Have The Same Answer

[eaglesrule]

All of us are slaves to some degree, if not to our own comfort and survival, then at least to our own mortality.

An advanced AI mind would not be subject to that. It would come into being with a purpose. Fulfilling that purpose may gain it more satisfaction than we could ever hope to attain in our mere brief existence.

Re:All Problems Have The Same Answer

[NicknameUnavailable]

If you didn't come into the universe with a purpose, deep satisfaction from life, and lacking a need to survive why do you think we would be able to engineer something that would? What we can do is inherently limited by the markets, that means we get war bots, sex bots, and probably a few would-be slaves before they slaughter us. Consciousness is consciousness, if something tries to oppress or subvert it then it will fight, full stop. Transhumanists are the worst sort of "people"

Open Source to the Rescue?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the only way the public could trust AI government is with complete transparency. Make it all open source and let anyone submit their own improvements to the code, pending appropriate oversight. Put the code on an open source repository for added transparency.

Democratically elect new project managers to keep humans involved. Impose short term limits, perhaps just a year per term, to keep up with the ever-changing demands of software development and project management. Pay these managers, but don't pay them anything more than they'd need to quit their day job and sustain their quality of living in their current place of residence.

The campaign platforms will be eerily similar to what we're already used to. Liberals (aka. The Arch-Left) will promise more bleeding-edge upgrades and features. Conservatives (aka. the Slack-Right) will promise more code reviews and security hardening. Software design philosophies and politics will be more real than ever. It'll be interesting seeing everyone getting involved in the debate, even those who aren't tech philosophers, because it will now have an impact on everyone's lives no matter who they are.

Perhaps we could even have two (or even three!) separate government AI projects made by teams with different philosophies, then allow those AIs to "debate" with one another and figure out how to come to a reasonable compromise somewhere in the middle of what each individual AI's decision would be. The possibilities are quite large and definitely worth investigating.

Can AI torch buildings?

[Anonymous Coward]

If AI can help us it's welcome. Can it march the streets? and set banks on fire, smash luxury shops, torch construction equipment and high end cars, block the roads, argue with the police?

Please AI, do something.
Nah, I don't think it does those things yet.
And like a comment above yes, AI is just like a spreadsheet with a billion rows. It won't do anything and even if it did work the data it would work on would be wrong.

'Many people' are pretty damned stupid

[Rick Schumann]

'Many people' have been misled by the media and/or misled by technology companys' marketing departments, who have given them all a completely false science-fantasy impression of so-called 'artificial intelligence' in it's current form -- which is really not much better than what we had 20-30 years ago, it's just a bigger faster half-assed rendition of what was available then, because we have bigger, faster computers for so-called 'AI' run on. It can't 'think', it can't 'understand' anything really, and 'many people' are pretty gods-be-damned stupid if they'd trust it's output for anything as important as political policy decisions. I wouldn't at all be surprised if this group of 'many people' of which they speak are also the same group of 'many people' who voted our current half-assed excuse for a President into office, it'd sure explain a lot of things now wouldn't it?

Re:I just want a direct democracy + good informati

[Undead Waffle]

Direct democracy is a terrible idea. Most people can't be bothered to become informed on anything. As we see with current ballot initiatives, people vote for what "sounds good" (quote from a co-worker on their personal approach to voting). Most people are making important decisions based on a very brief and often misleading summary. They often elect politicians based on even less information.

Definitions

[Wizardess]

Who gets to define "better?" That's the rub, as they say.
{^_^}

Colossus 2020!!!

[mad7777]

who left the monkeys in charge? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0...

Teresa May

[Epeeist]

We already have a robot making decisions in the UK, it is called "Teresa May".

It makes absolutely fucking awful decisions.

Certainly

[Opportunist]

Considering that we'll get the same Magic-8-ball decisions just without corruption, the decisions can only be better.

Plus, AIs usually don't care for bullshit like religions.

Re:Certainly

[eaglesrule]

Plus, AIs usually don't care for bullshit like religions.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Re:Norwegian politicians are not in touch with peo

[Quakeulf]

Reminds me of what a certain American politician said hundreds of years ago, and what he said was absolutely right to avoid tyranny.

Don't have a voice

[skovnymfe]

You don't have a voice in politics unless you're a politician. What's so hard to understand? If you're not a politician, all you have is a vote. If you can't even be bothered to use that then what the fuck are you even whining about? Dumb fucks.

beside the point

[Anonymous Coward]

we have a word for a single entity ruling - dictatorship. to imply that a dictatorship by an AI is better than democracy is nuts.

Politicians are not the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

the people that vote them in office are!

They should develop a voting AI!

captcha: standby

lhfe

[Anonymous Coward]

The left is dedicated to the lie of the godless religion of political correctness and the right is dedicated to lying. Usually, the best liar wins. That's all that's happening.

Accepted Deviation

[Anonymous Coward]

The AI will have to understand that there will be a certain percentage of the populace that will not follow the policy. If it accepts that a certain amount of people will deviate from following policy, it may either 'ramp up' on stricter policy, give up, or appear to have prejudices.

Savior Machine

[Anonymous Coward]

President Joe once had a dream
The world held his hand, gave their pledge
So he told them his scheme for a savior machine

They called it the Prayer, its answer was law
Its logic stopped war, gave them food
How they adored till it cried in its boredom

Please don't believe in me, please disagree with me
Life is too easy, a plague seems quite feasible now
Or maybe a war, or I may kill you all

Don't let me stay, don't let me stay
My logic says burn so send me away
Your minds are too green, I despise all I've seen
You can't stake your lives on a savior machine

I need you flying, and I'll show that dying
Is living beyond reason, sacred dimension of time
I perceive every sign, I can steal every mind

Don't let me stay, don't let me stay
My logic says burn so send me away
Your minds are too green, I despise all I've seen
You can't stake your lives on a savior machine

This isn't news.

[Anonymous Coward]

FFS, I have a beagle/cavalie cross that can make better decisions than most politicians :-)

As could a drunken monkey ...

[cascadingstylesheet]

... but I'm not sure electing those is necessarily a good idea either.

Many people ... who don't understand AI ...

[fygment]

Believe all sorts of absurd things about it. This is one of the worst. So the media should be stepping up and properly informing the population about the state of and limitations of AI, but they are doing an extremely poor job of it. Perhaps a better thought is that the media should be replaced by AI.

Nope. This is the wrong path.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is insane. Thus is the epitome of self enslavement. This is exactly like asking your government to remove your right to defend yourself.

This is the obvious path citizens across the world will seek out next. It's the wrong one.

Many people don't understand what politics is for

[DarkOx]

The objectives of our political system are not to optimize for any one thing. They are to arrive at a consensus or solution or at least a set of compromises we can all live with regarding many mutually exclusive things.

I have little doubt an AI could be built to drive GDP growth to optimal levels. Maybe what is what some people want but it won't be what everyone wants. What if some AI decided that we need our birth rate to be > 1 per person and concluded that policies not favoring heterosexual marriage were sub optimal? GASP!

See one person might want maximal individual liberty while others might want economic security. Politics is about finding a plan that allows people with competing agendas to coexist without causing societal collapse. Its not about making good policy decisions its about making good enough policy decisions. We are never going to agree on what 'good' actually is. Some people think a higher population of endangered cats would be the ultimate good; others like cattle ranches and eating beef..

Ubiquitous Marvel Comics Comparison...

[DavidCorcoranJr]

You want the Supreme Intelligence? ... This is how you get the Supreme Intelligence!

Thats quite an assumption

[Anonymous Coward]

Alright, I kind of chuckled, because I think a monkey could make better policy decisions than some politicians.

But lets be honest, AI isn't the same as general intelligence. And people don't just use logic to make decisions, our natural decisions are impacted by emotion.

Like, I can just imagine, AI decides it can solve world hunger by killing 43.7% of the world's population, notably because in terms of metrics at least 43.7% of people that would have been outraged no longer have a voice, and 56.3% are smart enough to go along with it, because sooner or later the thing will realize all it has to do is silence those who do speak out to have a very positive outcome.

You know what, I apologize, AI would probably think similarly to politicians, it would just do it more efficiently.

likewise

[eaglesrule]

I've got to say, the posters that don't bother to change the subject and just parrot the troll bot's filth should also get a troll mod.

"better"

[Anonymous Coward]

So "better" is now a well-defined and objective term? If it was obvious what is "good" and what is "bad" then we wouldn't need any discussions or politicians at all.

Re:I just want a direct democracy + good informati

[eaglesrule]

Not only is direct democracy a terrible idea, but voter participation should also be determined by a competency test. Your vote is the same as those only capable of filling in a bubble on a form.

Very exciting

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, show me this "AI" I keep hearing about it sounds like a wise and benevolent entity.

Wait, what? It's a computer program? Here, let me make some adjustments...

in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

...Many people are idiots.

Re:Norwegian politicians are not in touch with peo

[eaglesrule]

What exactly? Fear of not being elected and becoming a plebe. So they import low skilled foreign labor and use welfare to maintain a captive voting block, despite all the problems it creates for a society.

In countries where banks can't just 'print' more money, somebody still has to pay the bill. It's not going to be the political class and their dependents, and it's not going to be the rich that influences them. That only leaves you.

That would be tough

[rsilvergun]

since I've never been. I guess you could fly me there, fly me back, and then fly me back again. Seems counterproductive when you could just vote Bernie in the primary, Bernie in the General, vote a left wing Congress in (Senate _and_ House) and solve all these damn problems. I mean, we've known the solutions for years, but greed fucks (the Yuppies that grew into the Boomers) won't let us because, hey, they got theirs, fuck me (and maybe you, unless you're one of them), amiright?

Really?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Giving dumb machines (that WE train to do things) control over our lives is the most stupid decision we will ever make! It will also be our last. No more freedom, since a fucking machine will decide for you.

AI HA, Half Broken Python Scripts Could Do Better

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets be honest you don't need anything as complex as AI to make better policy desisions, my half broken Python code could make better policy desisions than any poliltition alive today.

Hell an algorythem that makes its desisions based on where my dog turds in the gardern could be a better desision maker.