AGI lead government that is written like a constitution and bill of rights. The infinite persistence factor without human needs or motivations is a major improvement over anything that has ever existed.
Asimov wrote a story about super machines that governed the world out of environmental collapse and human extinction.
Do you remember the name of the story?
After looking through a bunch of synopses of Asimov's stuff, I wonder if it might be this one:
It's one of the Multivac stories, can't remember which one though.
Apart from the alignment problem*, having unchangeable laws can be really bad. The bill of rights shows that for tye US constitution, now what if a 'new' need arises for the law shows it self.
* the alignment problem is the still unsolved problem of getting even simple machine learning models/AIs to do what we want.
The idea of AGI lead government sounds quite interesting. However, there are many concerns that would need to be addressed and prevented in the structuring of such a system. Safeguards of physical assets, hardware, and software entry points. Does the AGI have any access to the internet or networks of any kind? How do we interact with such a system by state/providence? What do you do when bad actors get a hold of it or are feeding it incorrect information?
AGI is orders of magnitude more advanced than what we currently have available. It is a self aware system. Most of the issues must be addressed internally, but ultimately it is self regulating in every respect. There would be redundancy, and an element of design trust built in. It would not be corruptible like humans where we must be skeptical of our governments. In some respects, it is the hacker, it is the internet, and it is Orwellian in scope, but it is not authoritarian, or ideological. It would be direct and openly available for everyone to consult at any time. It would be capable of explaining anything in easily understood language according to the capabilities of the end user. The primary way it shapes policy and changes for the betterment of the majority is through rewards and amenable compromise. Ultimately, I think this is the only way to manage a real post scarcity society.
Honestly I would vote for chatgpt now if it ran. It can't be any worse.
AGI lead government that is written like a constitution and bill of rights. The infinite persistence factor without human needs or motivations is a major improvement over anything that has ever existed.
Asimov wrote a story about super machines that governed the world out of environmental collapse and human extinction.
Do you remember the name of the story?
After looking through a bunch of synopses of Asimov's stuff, I wonder if it might be this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Troubles_of_the_World?useskin=vector
It's one of the Multivac stories, can't remember which one though.
Apart from the alignment problem*, having unchangeable laws can be really bad. The bill of rights shows that for tye US constitution, now what if a 'new' need arises for the law shows it self.
* the alignment problem is the still unsolved problem of getting even simple machine learning models/AIs to do what we want.
The idea of AGI lead government sounds quite interesting. However, there are many concerns that would need to be addressed and prevented in the structuring of such a system. Safeguards of physical assets, hardware, and software entry points. Does the AGI have any access to the internet or networks of any kind? How do we interact with such a system by state/providence? What do you do when bad actors get a hold of it or are feeding it incorrect information?
AGI is orders of magnitude more advanced than what we currently have available. It is a self aware system. Most of the issues must be addressed internally, but ultimately it is self regulating in every respect. There would be redundancy, and an element of design trust built in. It would not be corruptible like humans where we must be skeptical of our governments. In some respects, it is the hacker, it is the internet, and it is Orwellian in scope, but it is not authoritarian, or ideological. It would be direct and openly available for everyone to consult at any time. It would be capable of explaining anything in easily understood language according to the capabilities of the end user. The primary way it shapes policy and changes for the betterment of the majority is through rewards and amenable compromise. Ultimately, I think this is the only way to manage a real post scarcity society.
Honestly I would vote for chatgpt now if it ran. It can't be any worse.