Slashdot Mirror
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."
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."
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.
Vote Tay for a cleaner America!
Can't bribe or influence an AI the way you can humans; so it's a no-go for replacing any existing government.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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?
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.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
An epileptic howler monkey on cocaine would make for a better alternative to those yahoos.
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.
When you ask the AI to end poverty, you may not get the answer you were hoping for.
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?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
A drunk toddler could make better policy decisions than most politicians.
You don't bribe the AI, you bribe the people who make the AI.
In many cases, the magic 8-ball can make better decisions than politicians.
They are correct, if by "AI" they mean an RNG.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
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.
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?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Are you sure about that?
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
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.
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
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 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.
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.
until political crime is declared "worse than murder" politics is just a race to the bottom.
Than politicians,
The above post is an editorial, the poster cannot and will not be held responsible for all or in part for it's contents
Tay AI 2020!
Tech,
Can't keep a Boeing 737 in the air properly under the best of conditions.
And you think it can make political decisions?
Caution: Contents under pressure
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.
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
I've wished for this disaster movie to come true since I was a child:
Colossus: The Forbin Project
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
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.
To quote Winston Churchill (from memory) - Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.
You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
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.
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.)
Fear? Fear of YOU.
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.
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So, current AI would be better than current politicians? See, that's relative. Words matter.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
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.
War: 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.
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.
'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?
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?
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.
Who gets to define "better?" That's the rub, as they say.
{^_^}
who left the monkeys in charge? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0...
Might makes right irrelevant.
We already have a robot making decisions in the UK, it is called "Teresa May".
It makes absolutely fucking awful decisions.
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.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Reminds me of what a certain American politician said hundreds of years ago, and what he said was absolutely right to avoid tyranny.
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.
... but I'm not sure electing those is necessarily a good idea either.
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.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
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..
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You want the Supreme Intelligence? ... This is how you get the Supreme Intelligence!
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.
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.
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?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/