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

[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.

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.

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?

End poverty

[joe_frisch]

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

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?

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.

Silly rabbit...

[mschaffer]

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

Further

[sjames]

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

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.

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.

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.