CDZ Artificial Intelligence-assisted meritocracy

[there4eyeM]

The fears of "a.i;" remind one of the fears of cloning; a poorly understood subject that elicited unfounded paranoia.

 

[BookShaka]

To be perfectly honest AI terrifies me.

This is a good article about how AI can be used deceitfully. AI Is Killing the Uncanny Valley and Our Grasp on Reality | Backchannel

It may eventually be able to make it look like a person said something they didn’t actually say or do something they didn’t actually do. Can you imagine what that would mean for the world? We would no longer be able to trust what our eyes and ears are telling us.

 

[fncceo]

To be perfectly honest AI terrifies me.

Many people have felt that way about high tech at first...

 

[there4eyeM]

To be perfectly honest AI terrifies me.

This is a good article about how AI can be used deceitfully. AI Is Killing the Uncanny Valley and Our Grasp on Reality | Backchannel

It may eventually be able to make it look like a person said something they didn’t actually say or do something they didn’t actually do. Can you imagine what that would mean for the world? We would no longer be able to trust what our eyes and ears are telling us.

What our eyes and ears tell us is only a partial tale at best. Physics shows us that our perceptions are of illusions. Psychology, psychiatry and physiology show us that our perceptions are subjective.

We are a species in need of advancing to the next level. That level may well be the marriage of the human intelligence with the 'intelligent' inventions we can make. We merely need to find the constructive fashion to accomplish this.

 

[there4eyeM]

Either we will use "a.i." well, or we will use it poorly. Like any technology, once learned, it will not be unlearned. Using it to help us perfect systems that have a potential to function well would be a good use. Using it otherwise, or allowing it to develop itself, would be yet another folly of man.

 

[Leo123]

America has become so complex and at the same time so confused that the present government is not up to managing our position in the world.

America has always been complex and has had to deal with complex issues.

The question isn't whether or not our government can deal with our position in the world. The question is, what should our position in the world be? Is being a 'super power' in today's world to our national advantage?

The 'super power' makes the rules so........

 

[there4eyeM]

On "Bloomberg", an economics and investment expert said that the Chinese have a great potential advantage in the us of "a.i." because of the centralized nature of their decision making.
This re-enforces the idea that a U.S. government modified and streamlined would protect republican principles while advancing security, both economic and geopolitical.

 

[fncceo]

The weaknesses of democracy are abundantly clear. The alternatives to democracy are abundantly unattractive. Meritocracy sounds like a good idea, yet we understandably fear what will pass for "merit". With a proven standard applied objectively, we could envision a just and efficient system with democratic/republican (note lowercase consonants!) supervision, perhaps a senate-like body.
America has become so complex and at the same time so confused that the present government is not up to managing our position in the world. What about examining a combination of the maximum that artificial intelligence can contribute to a maximum of what our best and brightest can? More or less, it could resemble something like replacing the House while keeping a modified Senate and a stable Judicial branch.
Please notice that this is not a left-right issue in the mind of this poster.

Mark Adlard wrote a book about just such a society in 1971.

The book is called 'Interface'.

There are two sequels, 'Volteface' and 'Multiface', that are equally as good.

 

[there4eyeM]

Now that previous levels of gridlock are about to be exceeded, perhaps people will be more interested in a style of government that uses intelligence. This old way has outlived its effectiveness (if ever it was).

 

[fncceo]

When Congress is working effectively, they produce copious amounts of legislation ... Gridlock is the optimal form of government. Huge drama, minimal impact.

 

[there4eyeM]

We would, perhaps, need to define "effectively".

 

[sparky]

Perhaps the concept is already being utilized 4eyeM....?

My morning epiphany>>>

How artificial intelligence is transforming the world

i never get the memo.....
~S~

 

[there4eyeM]

Perhaps the concept is already being utilized 4eyeM....?

My morning epiphany>>>

How artificial intelligence is transforming the world

i never get the memo.....
~S~

I have a friend who is very involved at a high level in robotics and the algorithms that go with that science. He has a very realistic appreciation for "a.i.". In fact, he isn't convinced it is an appropriate term. I tend to agree, but it is the term we have to work with for the present.
The point in this thread is to consider that we (humans) have realizations and means not previously available to our race and we need to integrate what would serve us best into systems that are serving us less and less well. Government is a primary area. The forms of the past all have serious problems, as history has revealed, and they resolve to greed and shortsightedness. Governance with trained experts aided by advanced technologies involved, overseen by carefully selected, wise individuals, would seem to be an interesting approach to pursue.

 

[ding]

Perhaps the concept is already being utilized 4eyeM....?

My morning epiphany>>>

How artificial intelligence is transforming the world

i never get the memo.....
~S~

I have a friend who is very involved at a high level in robotics and the algorithms that go with that science. He has a very realistic appreciation for "a.i.". In fact, he isn't convinced it is an appropriate term. I tend to agree, but it is the term we have to work with for the present.
The point in this thread is to consider that we (humans) have realizations and means not previously available to our race and we need to integrate what would serve us best into systems that are serving us less and less well. Government is a primary area. The forms of the past all have serious problems, as history has revealed, and they resolve to greed and shortsightedness. Governance with trained experts aided by advanced technologies involved, overseen by carefully selected, wise individuals, would seem to be an interesting approach to pursue.

Are you telling me that you would accept conclusions you didn't agree with if AI concluded it was the "right" thing to do?

Because that's the problem. There isn't an easy solution that everyone will agree with.

 

[sparky]

Are you telling me that you would accept conclusions you didn't agree with if AI concluded it was the "right" thing to do?

I'm trying my best to imagine some sort of AI that forwards conclusions w/o all the political theater we endure ding

Think about it , we're no where near rational , nor do we come to rational conclusions

We're always off on some knee jerk deal

Would AI offer avenues w/o the fear, the hate, the ansgt , or greed w/o partronizing special interests ? Would it do so upholding constitutional considerations ?, or would the scotus be given an agenda?

Because that's the problem. There isn't an easy solution that everyone will agree with.

That's the thing

Imagine every individual country installing some sort of AI into their central governance . 130 odd individual AI brains w/custom programming....

~S~

 

[Picaro]

Alexis de Tocqueville, a 19th century fan French fan of America and chronically of the American experiment once wrote:

'America will be finished when the electorate discovers they can vote themselves the national treasury.'

He figured it out.

Trite phrase, too bad that was discovered, by Hamilton, and we have been doing that since 1792, and we're still here, and with a booming Wall street.

 

[Picaro]

The weaknesses of democracy are abundantly clear. The alternatives to democracy are abundantly unattractive. Meritocracy sounds like a good idea, yet we understandably fear what will pass for "merit". With a proven standard applied objectively, we could envision a just and efficient system with democratic/republican (note lowercase consonants!) supervision, perhaps a senate-like body.
America has become so complex and at the same time so confused that the present government is not up to managing our position in the world. What about examining a combination of the maximum that artificial intelligence can contribute to a maximum of what our best and brightest can? More or less, it could resemble something like replacing the House while keeping a modified Senate and a stable Judicial branch.
Please notice that this is not a left-right issue in the mind of this poster.

F.A. Hayek's The Fatal Conceit addresses the fantasies of 'constructive rationalism' and the superiority of traditions,particularly religious traditions, over such fantasies pretty well. 'Artificial intelligence' is a myth, and will prove even more defective than human 'rationalism', since they just lead to communist style dictatorships and a particularly destructive form of insanity.

And you're right, it's not just a left wing thing; sociopaths on the Right also reduce ans simplify human beings down to economic 'numbers and variables' exactly the same as Marxists do, so they're as worthless as commies are; both resort to mass murder to 'solve' problems. This essay covers some of the issues; there are several others. 'Libertarians', of course will always just make up answers, having never been a real life thing, so they're free to pull anything out of their asses, due to an argument from historical silence.

Marxism of the Right

This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society.

 

[ding]

Are you telling me that you would accept conclusions you didn't agree with if AI concluded it was the "right" thing to do?

I'm trying my best to imagine some sort of AI that forwards conclusions w/o all the political theater we endure ding

Think about it , we're no where near rational , nor do we come to rational conclusions

We're always off on some knee jerk deal

Would AI offer avenues w/o the fear, the hate, the ansgt , or greed w/o partronizing special interests ? Would it do so upholding constitutional considerations ?, or would the scotus be given an agenda?

Because that's the problem. There isn't an easy solution that everyone will agree with.

That's the thing

Imagine every individual country installing some sort of AI into their central governance . 130 odd individual AI brains w/custom programming....

~S~

That’s kind of my point. If we are nowhere near rational, why would we rationally accept something that we didn’t want no matter how rational it is?

 

[there4eyeM]

The "a.i;" conceived of initially (the o.p.) was in the mode of an objective, fact and science based advisory element. Working with experts in all fields, such a system would synthesize and relate to past experience the ideas and proposals that emerged. Laws and precedents, for example, would be rapidly and coherently evaluated and applied, and even be shown to need modification. Briefly put, there would be no danger involved at all. "A.i." would not be in an executive capacity.

 

[ding]

The "a.i;" conceived of initially (the o.p.) was in the mode of an objective, fact and science based advisory element. Working with experts in all fields, such a system would synthesize and relate to past experience the ideas and proposals that emerged. Laws and precedents, for example, would be rapidly and coherently evaluated and applied, and even be shown to need modification. Briefly put, there would be no danger involved at all. "A.i." would not be in an executive capacity.

I think you are missing my point. Unless this AI were autonomous and needed no human decision maker and could have complete control, it would still rely on subjective humans.