Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Hi Captain,

Well said and I understand a lot better now. I understand the fear though. But it is not all as bad as it seems I think.

We often hear people say that we lose jobs because of automating production, but that is not true. It is the populist kind of talk you would typically hear from the likes of Wilders, Trump and Farage. There is no backing for that what so ever. The argument has been used since the start of industrialization though. When the first factories in the UK started to use steam engines to drive the machines in the factory there were protests to stop this because people feared the same thing. History has shown by now that this fear is not justified.

However, there are other fears that are justified. And lets face it, we would be moving into unknown territory. So we should be cautious, but that should not stop us.

Fear runs deeper than just the fear of unemployment, that's clear. I am concerned, but not scared. And even though I am concerned I still think this is the only way forward in the long run. Surely these movies you referenced are great examples of what could potentially happen. But then again, Hollywood is not exactly known to make a movie in which nothing goes wrong. That wouldn't sell very well. My biggest fear is that people will try to delay/stop it because it is not in their personal interest. And when I say this I am referring to people who make decisions. Not us the average Joe.

Regarding the comment I made in my earlier post.

So after all these years of making machines that perform better quicker and cheaper than humans, you are telling me that we should not go in this direction because we can do it better ourselves?

Click to expand...

I agree I pushed it a bit, but it was in reference to your trust in flesh and blood, so not entirely my own construction, but I did get carried away a little with my interpretation. lol.

I think the same thing happened the other way around though.

Is it your idea we create something that is "better, quicker, and cheaper than humans" to take over?

Click to expand...

Better quicker and cheaper, yes! But to take over, NO!!!!!

I am looking at it as a tool that can aid us like we are using a million tools every day around us all the time. It can and should work autonomously, but we can and should monitor it at all times. And we always have the possibility to interfere, bypass and go in a different direction if we have good reasons to believe that we should.

Joey

JoeyJoystick said:

Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Technology moves fast and soon it will be possible to allow AI to overtake many tasks we now do ourselves. Should we allow AI to aid us in decision making? Should we allow to use AI to aid us with policy making? Should we allow AI to rule as a judge in a court of law?

I think that when we introduce AI into our governing bodies that decision making will be more fair, more cheap and more quick without having to deal with different personalities and interests of different people and groups of people. In case of AI used as a judge I can see some clear advantages because rulings will be less biased. Things like colour, social background, religion and all that kind of stuff play a much lesser role which could result in fairer judgements.

Joey

Click to expand...

I got a dumb guy question from a dumb guy: couldn't you sandbox the AI to see what it'll do before you unleash it on the planet?

Cardinal said:

I got a dumb guy question from a dumb guy: couldn't you sandbox the AI to see what it'll do before you unleash it on the planet?

Click to expand...

Smart question. I am 100% sure that this is exactly what they would do. And they probably would do this for a long time before they would start using it.

I also think that the learning process (AI is/should be self learning) will take a considerable amount of time.

Joey

the one thing robots can never do is make independent decisions. To be a politician, you must be able to make independent decisions.

JoeyJoystick said:

Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Technology moves fast and soon it will be possible to allow AI to overtake many tasks we now do ourselves. Should we allow AI to aid us in decision making? Should we allow to use AI to aid us with policy making? Should we allow AI to rule as a judge in a court of law?

I think that when we introduce AI into our governing bodies that decision making will be more fair, more cheap and more quick without having to deal with different personalities and interests of different people and groups of people. In case of AI used as a judge I can see some clear advantages because rulings will be less biased. Things like colour, social background, religion and all that kind of stuff play a much lesser role which could result in fairer judgements.

Joey

Click to expand...

Ah, Technocracy. There's no such thing as AI currently and I am doubtful we will ever be able to create real AI on any comparable scale. Computers are a LONG way from achieving sentience or becoming self aware so what your'e advocating would be to turn over Governing to a complicated set of coded algorithms that could be written and re-written to provide biased results based on ideology.

There would still be a potential for human influence in their calculated decisions, the computer or AI wouldn't have the ability to make conscious decisions. Scientist still have no idea where human consciousness comes from although there are several theories being bandied around. It's called " the hard problem " for a good reason because it has yet to be traced back to a neuro- physiological source inside the brain. If consciousness is not just a set of complicated bio-chemical algorithms then how are we to reproduce it artificially ?

I'm not sure people realize to what extent this already occurs. AI is a broad description, and it's already used widely on Wall Street to make fortunes and in most industries in one way or another. And this is the tip of the iceberg. It will be a big revolution/age without a doubt.

Just like all advancement you cannot stop it.

The only thing more dangerous than a US revolution in AI development is a world where other major powers develop it and the US sticks its head in the sand.

Mach said:

I'm not sure people realize to what extent this already occurs. AI is a broad description, and it's already used widely on Wall Street to make fortunes and in most industries in one way or another. And this is the tip of the iceberg. It will be a big revolution/age without a doubt.

Just like all advancement you cannot stop it.

The only thing more dangerous than a US revolution in AI development is a world where other major powers develop it and the US sticks its head in the sand.

Click to expand...

Black box trading is not AI, its just a set of complicated pre-programmed algorithms or intructions that account for variables like price and time and it was developed to automate a very time intensive process of sending out small trades ( child orders ) out to the markets.

Its wasn't deveoloped for profit, instead its was developed to minimize cost and risk in order executions

If another Nation claimed to develop true AI I would be highly suspect in their claims

Fenton said:

Ah, Technocracy. There's no such thing as AI currently and I am doubtful we will ever be able to create real AI on any comparable scale. Computers are a LONG way from achieving sentience or becoming self aware so what your'e advocating would be to turn over Governing to a complicated set of coded algorithms that could be written and re-written to provide biased results based on ideology.

There would still be a potential for human influence in their calculated decisions, the computer or AI wouldn't have the ability to make conscious decisions. Scientist still have no idea where human consciousness comes from although there are several theories being bandied around. It's called " the hard problem " for a good reason because it has yet to be traced back to a neuro- physiological source inside the brain. If consciousness is not just a set of complicated bio-chemical algorithms then how are we to reproduce it artificially ?

Click to expand...

I agree we're not quite there yet, but I also think we'll get there a lot quicker then people may think. But that's just a matter of opinion.

I understand what you're saying regarding consciousness. Now I am looking at my screen and I do not know how to write what I want to say so bare with me here for a sec. (Sorry, English is not my first language after all.) In essence, consciousness is merely awareness of your surroundings. This can be done fairly simply by using sensory. This is the kind of technology that is already available and still improving. Algorithms to process this information is also available, but needs to go to a much higher level in order to be useful in combination with AI. I will make an analogy here that I think helps me a bit to explain myself. It is easy to make a robot that looks like a human. It is, as of yet, not possible to make a robot which we can not distinguish from a human. I think it is the same with consciousness. It is easy to make all the sensory, but it is not yet possible to create a set of data as detailed as humans can themselves. Yes we can feel a surface. But it is not possible yet (or maybe in early development stage) to feel a surface and feel all the same things that we can feel with our fingers. Because we do not just feel with our fingers. We feel with our fingers, but at the same time we look at it and we listen when we move our fingers over the surface and all this is additional information. The complicated combination and interaction of a high number of sensors (eyes, ears, nose, skin, tongue etc. etc..) with its correct interpretations is what will allow consciousness as we know it today. Yes, this will be one of the hardest things to do with AI. Anyway, this is only an example I am using to explain that consciousness is possible but we're not quite there yet to say the least. But ultimately, it will be the self learning capabilities of AI that will overcome such burdens.

So I guess what I am saying is that consciousness itself (feeling what the temperature is and drawing the conclusion that the temperature is 57 degrees) is not the problem right now. But the complete and total interaction of all sensory in a useful manner is not the kind of technology that is about to be mastered tomorrow. I still believe at the same time that all this is moving forward a lot faster then most people realize.

Now my example was obviously a bad example, because in the context of AI and its purpose to aid us with governing we do not need fingers and eyes, but all we need is a brain. In our brain we also have a level of consciousness in our thought patterns. So if I may be so free to translate your comment regarding consciousness to the difficulties we will face to make this work inside the brain, yes, problematic right now. But if we talk semantics, we are pretty much there right now. We do have awareness and we have managed to recreate most sensors in our human body in a fairly reliable manner, some even way better. But like in the animal kingdom where many animals outperform humans on 1 or a few points, there is no other animal that outperforms us overall, and hence the reason we are on top of the food chain. So to get it all right and functioning at the same or a higher level as we humans can, that is the challenge.

Sorry for this vague story. I'm looking at it now for an hour and it just doesn't feel right but right now I have no idea how to put my thoughts in words better than this. Anyway, let me know what you think, if you wish.

Joey

Mach said:

I'm not sure people realize to what extent this already occurs. AI is a broad description, and it's already used widely on Wall Street to make fortunes and in most industries in one way or another. And this is the tip of the iceberg. It will be a big revolution/age without a doubt.

Just like all advancement you cannot stop it.

The only thing more dangerous than a US revolution in AI development is a world where other major powers develop it and the US sticks its head in the sand.

Click to expand...

Agreed with every word you said. Regarding AI the problems is of course the total interaction. That still lacks behind today. And the combination with self learning abilities and consequent creativity that should come out of that.

And I most definitely agree with your last statement and would like to add that I think it is of such importance that all major advancements, achievements and patents should be labelled 'Top Secret'. We surely do not want the Chinese nor the Russians to get an edge over this. And since we are surely not the only one who comes up with this idea, we may even wonder what there already is that we do not know about...


Joey

If it would balance the friggin' budget, end the Fed, lower taxes for all, end all direct government meddling in the economy and cut defense spending in 1/2...go ahead.

Let the computer run the whole damn government.

JoeyJoystick said:

Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Technology moves fast and soon it will be possible to allow AI to overtake many tasks we now do ourselves. Should we allow AI to aid us in decision making? Should we allow to use AI to aid us with policy making? Should we allow AI to rule as a judge in a court of law?

I think that when we introduce AI into our governing bodies that decision making will be more fair, more cheap and more quick without having to deal with different personalities and interests of different people and groups of people. In case of AI used as a judge I can see some clear advantages because rulings will be less biased. Things like colour, social background, religion and all that kind of stuff play a much lesser role which could result in fairer judgements.

Joey

Click to expand...

I would be surprised, if there were no AI being used right now. It's used in business and research.

JoeyJoystick said:

I agree we're not quite there yet, but I also think we'll get there a lot quicker then people may think. But that's just a matter of opinion.

I understand what you're saying regarding consciousness. Now I am looking at my screen and I do not know how to write what I want to say so bare with me here for a sec. (Sorry, English is not my first language after all.) In essence, consciousness is merely awareness of your surroundings. This can be done fairly simply by using sensory. This is the kind of technology that is already available and still improving. Algorithms to process this information is also available, but needs to go to a much higher level in order to be useful in combination with AI. I will make an analogy here that I think helps me a bit to explain myself. It is easy to make a robot that looks like a human. It is, as of yet, not possible to make a robot which we can not distinguish from a human. I think it is the same with consciousness. It is easy to make all the sensory, but it is not yet possible to create a set of data as detailed as humans can themselves. Yes we can feel a surface. But it is not possible yet (or maybe in early development stage) to feel a surface and feel all the same things that we can feel with our fingers. Because we do not just feel with our fingers. We feel with our fingers, but at the same time we look at it and we listen when we move our fingers over the surface and all this is additional information. The complicated combination and interaction of a high number of sensors (eyes, ears, nose, skin, tongue etc. etc..) with its correct interpretations is what will allow consciousness as we know it today. Yes, this will be one of the hardest things to do with AI. Anyway, this is only an example I am using to explain that consciousness is possible but we're not quite there yet to say the least. But ultimately, it will be the self learning capabilities of AI that will overcome such burdens.

So I guess what I am saying is that consciousness itself (feeling what the temperature is and drawing the conclusion that the temperature is 57 degrees) is not the problem right now. But the complete and total interaction of all sensory in a useful manner is not the kind of technology that is about to be mastered tomorrow. I still believe at the same time that all this is moving forward a lot faster then most people realize.

Now my example was obviously a bad example, because in the context of AI and its purpose to aid us with governing we do not need fingers and eyes, but all we need is a brain. In our brain we also have a level of consciousness in our thought patterns. So if I may be so free to translate your comment regarding consciousness to the difficulties we will face to make this work inside the brain, yes, problematic right now. But if we talk semantics, we are pretty much there right now. We do have awareness and we have managed to recreate most sensors in our human body in a fairly reliable manner, some even way better. But like in the animal kingdom where many animals outperform humans on 1 or a few points, there is no other animal that outperforms us overall, and hence the reason we are on top of the food chain. So to get it all right and functioning at the same or a higher level as we humans can.....

Joey

Click to expand...

We can already program machines to sense temperature, pressure, acceleration, motion, etc and we can program them to sense those variables and then output a corrective action to maintain or monitor a desired condition.

But thats not AI, not even close, its just a basic close loop control process and we are no where near achieving real AI.

Consciousness is not inputs and outputs, its not a set of instructions, or algorithms. If that were the case we would be relagated down to emotionless beings that acted and reacted purely out of instinct.

There's a theory that our consciousness is a function of quantum calculations that happen deep inside our neurons and and to support that theory scientist have recently discovered quantum vibrations inside microtubules that reside in our nuerons
https://www.google.com/amp/phys.org/news/2014-01-discovery-quantum-vibrations-microtubules-corroborates.amp?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

This theory of quantum cosciousness explains everything from out of body experiences to NDEs.

Largest study on NDEs prove that cosciousness can survive death
Life after death? Largest-ever study provides evidence that 'out of body' and 'near-death' experiences may be real | The Independent

My first reaction is no! However if the definition includes computer programs, then I can see advantages. The immediate example is using a program to fairly draw congressional districts. This has been developed already and I would love to see it in universal usage.

Fenton said:

We can already program machines to sense temperature, pressure, acceleration, motion, etc and we can program them to sense those variables and then output a corrective action to maintain or monitor a desired condition.

But that's not AI, not even close, its just a basic close loop control process and we are no where near achieving real AI.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, but I think we both have a different definition of consciousness. It is the actual AI that is needed to interpret the information it receives. But gathering that information is not AI in my opinion. And the AI we're talking about in this article is of a different magnitude than what we see today. When a production line detects the number of bottles passing by with a sensor I think you can already say you have a very limited form of AI. However, when the computer controlling this production line can measure if the bottle is acceptable for a customer or not and reject it consequently you are already talking about a different level of AI while you are still using the same sensors, conveyer belt and computer. The only difference is the program that controls it all. And this is where the AI is all located. I think there is a grey area between a normal computer as we know it today and true artificial intelligence that understands the consequences of its actions. Just saying that it is a routine in a program is not good enough I think. the end of the day, AI is also just a routine that requires input and creates an output. It is a smart routine though that can do things that most computer applications today are not capable of. Having said that, In 2012 Google used a few routines that contain some form of AI inside of them. In 2015 this had increased to 2700 routines if I am not mistaken.

Also, when we think of AI we do not necessarily have to create something that resembles a human brain. As long as it does the task we want it to do, it is completely irrelevant how it is being done. And again by example. When we wanted to fly we tried to recreate a bird. But there are no airplanes today that look like a bird, but they still fly and work well.

Joey

It depends. Government is not suppose to simply "do what's best". Government is suppose to represent the people. The AI would need to be able to keep up with that and balance it accordingly. What I primarily look for in a representative is not necessarily that they agree with me on important topics, but rather that they have good reasons for their beliefs. So if the AI can reason well, then yes, I think we could allow it to help run government. HOWEVER, it would need to be the people to put the AI into power, and the people should need to be able to take that power away from the AI, just as it can any representative.

fredmertzz said:

It depends. Government is not suppose to simply "do what's best". Government is suppose to represent the people. The AI would need to be able to keep up with that and balance it accordingly. What I primarily look for in a representative is not necessarily that they agree with me on important topics, but rather that they have good reasons for their beliefs. So if the AI can reason well, then yes, I think we could allow it to help run government. HOWEVER, it would need to be the people to put the AI into power, and the people should need to be able to take that power away from the AI, just as it can any representative.

Click to expand...

Love your comment. So true. However, both at present as well as with an AI playing a role in decision making, you can not always do what the people want. If all the people say that they do not want to pay taxes, then it would become a little bit problematic to say the least if this was to be implemented. An AI would also be able to show the people both the advantages and disadvantages of any decision being made. A good present day example is of course how Trump got elected. He simply said all the things which the people wanted to hear without ever saying how he wanted to achieve this and knowing full well that it would not be possible to implement much of it. And consequently he cancelled/changed most of the ideas from the campaign era. And if AI can help to avoid such disasters from happening again in the future than this would be a great benefit to our society.

Joey

JoeyJoystick said:

Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Technology moves fast and soon it will be possible to allow AI to overtake many tasks we now do ourselves. Should we allow AI to aid us in decision making? Should we allow to use AI to aid us with policy making? Should we allow AI to rule as a judge in a court of law?

I think that when we introduce AI into our governing bodies that decision making will be more fair, more cheap and more quick without having to deal with different personalities and interests of different people and groups of people. In case of AI used as a judge I can see some clear advantages because rulings will be less biased. Things like colour, social background, religion and all that kind of stuff play a much lesser role which could result in fairer judgements.

Joey

Click to expand...

Depends on what the AI helps govern and to what extent it does obviously.

That said, is there a role for AI to assist and advise in some capacity? Absolutely and without question.

JoeyJoystick said:

Should we allow Artificial Intelligence to (help) govern?

Technology moves fast and soon it will be possible to allow AI to overtake many tasks we now do ourselves. Should we allow AI to aid us in decision making? Should we allow to use AI to aid us with policy making? Should we allow AI to rule as a judge in a court of law?

I think that when we introduce AI into our governing bodies that decision making will be more fair, more cheap and more quick without having to deal with different personalities and interests of different people and groups of people. In case of AI used as a judge I can see some clear advantages because rulings will be less biased. Things like colour, social background, religion and all that kind of stuff play a much lesser role which could result in fairer judgements.

Joey

Click to expand...

Not now. But someday? Yes.

No.

Automation causes job loss.

Caine said:

No.

Automation causes job loss.

Click to expand...

That is not true. People have always claimed a loss of jobs and held strikes over this from the very beginning of the industrial revolution. History now tells us that this was never an issue. Trades come and go. So yes, people lost their jobs. But new jobs were being created again. The balance was always zero, because the unemployment has always remained roughly the same.

Joey

JoeyJoystick said:

That is not true. People have always claimed a loss of jobs and held strikes over this from the very beginning of the industrial revolution. History now tells us that this was never an issue. Trades come and go. So yes, people lost their jobs. But new jobs were being created again. The balance was always zero, because the unemployment has always remained roughly the same.

Joey

Click to expand...

Yes. Sure. However machines were doing menial tasks (sewing, moving this thing from here to there, screwing in screws, etc) during the time you are talking about. Machines making decisions? They can replace people in a wide variety of positions, making the only jobs available those who make and program the machines.

As far as "unemployment rates". That is merely a statistic. Statistics can show whatever someone wants them to show by tweaking how the data is viewed/collected. When political gain is obtained from a statistic.... it makes it that much more questionable.

JoeyJoystick said:

Love your comment. So true. However, both at present as well as with an AI playing a role in decision making, you can not always do what the people want. If all the people say that they do not want to pay taxes, then it would become a little bit problematic to say the least if this was to be implemented. An AI would also be able to show the people both the advantages and disadvantages of any decision being made. A good present day example is of course how Trump got elected. He simply said all the things which the people wanted to hear without ever saying how he wanted to achieve this and knowing full well that it would not be possible to implement much of it. And consequently he cancelled/changed most of the ideas from the campaign era. And if AI can help to avoid such disasters from happening again in the future than this would be a great benefit to our society.

Joey

Click to expand...

Oh definitely. People can't just get their way by majority. It takes balance, and good reasoning. Too many people limit what a true "AI" would be able to do. We're talking about a learning, reasoning machine. It doesn't have to have emotions in order to understand that others have emotions and make those emotions a priority. And I certainly don't even limit its ability to have emotions! With 5 generations, this world will truly be a different world. Once the AI can solve problems in ways we had never considered, simply by understanding the problems from and objective, more omniscient view, the world will be in for a real treat. We just need to prioritize it a little more, and not blow each other up in the mean time.

Fenton said:

Black box trading is not AI, its just a set of complicated pre-programmed algorithms or intructions that account for variables like price and time and it was developed to automate a very time intensive process of sending out small trades ( child orders ) out to the markets.
Its wasn't deveoloped for profit, instead its was developed to minimize cost and risk in order executions
If another Nation claimed to develop true AI I would be highly suspect in their claims

Click to expand...

You are confusing strong AI (or AGI, artificial general intelligence) with just vanilla AI.

We've had AI for a long, long time now, and its already used in nearly every industry, and certainly in government.
Sophisticated wargaming iterative simulations are a form of AI, and they already help guide war strategy.

As I wrote, it's already well under way. It happens so gradually that when sentient AI coems onlnie,

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

AI is relevant to any intellectual task.[SUP][202][/SUP] Modern artificial intelligence techniques are pervasive and are too numerous to list here. Frequently, when a technique reaches mainstream use, it is no longer considered artificial intelligence; this phenomenon is described as the AI effect.[SUP][203][/SUP]

High-profile examples of AI include autonomous vehicles (such as drones and self-driving cars), medical diagnosis, creating art (such as poetry), proving mathematical theorems, playing games (such as Chess or Go), search engines (such as Google search), online assistants (such as Siri), image recognition in photographs, spam filtering, prediction of judicial decisions[SUP][204][/SUP] and targeting online advertisements.[SUP][202][/SUP][SUP][205][/SUP][SUP][206][/SUP]
With social media sites overtaking TV as a source for news for young people and news organisations increasingly reliant on social media platforms for generating distribution,[SUP][207][/SUP] major publishers now use artificial intelligence (AI) technology to post stories more effectively and generate higher volumes of traffic.[SUP][208][/SUP]

Click to expand...

DaveFagan said:

AI would inevitably conclude that the human race is a disease upon the Planet Earth and destroying the Planet and cure the problem. My answer is no, although I empathesize with AI as regards this matter.

Click to expand...

To which 'human race' exactly are you referring to? Are you a racist or are you merely confusing race with species? Too much StarTrek or too much Ku Klux Klan???

Sent from my LG-V490 using Tapatalk

ttwtt78640 said:

That (bolded above) is the problem. When AI is allowed define "success" (what works?), rather than have that defined (refined?) externally, it (I.T.?) is in control.

Click to expand...

You can not possibly know whether that is the problem or not. You are afraid that this could be a problem. And that is the problem. Everybody is always afraid of everything they don't know, stop any and all progress and let us hold on to how it was before because that is what we know. Because something we know, no matter how bad it is, is always better then the unknown which could bet better, but we keep focussing on the possibility that it is not, not on the potential it offers.

Joey