It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A.I. Technocracy-The future form of goverment?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Before laying down my ideas I have to state that I'm just a day-dreaming 14-year-old who did a little reaserch on the internet. so take that into consideration when you'll critisize them (my ideas).

First lets define the term "Technocracy":
"Technocracy ("techno" from the Greek tekhne for skill, "cracy" from the Greek kratos for "power") is a government or organizational system where decision makers are usually highly-skilled in fields of management or any other field. A technocratic government therefore is a government by experts.
The "technical knowledge" in question need not be related to the hard sciences, as is usually assumed, and therefore has no relation to technology. In its broadest sense, a technocracy is merely the rule by those who are skilled best in their fields."-wikipedia
And what I thought is just that but with computers, specificlly A.I.s, governing insted of today's political leaders.
"Why would we want to do such a thing right now?" you may ask, and my answer is "well not now". You see, as there are no real, working, smart-as-humans A.I.s I'll satisfy with just a replacement of the whole of the bureaucratic system in the goverment with an automated relaying\interpreting network. What does that mean? it means that insted of today's model of, say...The law enforcment agencies were you have the top executive officer who gives general directions to various levels of middle officers, all the while specifing the general directions to fit the needs of the field of execution in the authority of the officers, going right down to the actual cops on the streets who execute the specified directions given to them by the officers above them.
I want to replace that whole system with a structure that goes like this: Top executive officer gives general directions of whatever source to the automated relay network that does the whole specification process by combining an interpretation to the general directions, dictated by fixed parameters in the program, with the latest status report from that area of execution thus achiving specific directions relevant even to a very small erea of execution, like a neighbourhood. All without the flawed bureaucratic system that puts it's faith in the idiotic human mechanism of general\personal decision making which is, as we all agree, the root of all evil.

My ultimate vision for this thing, is as I've said, A Technocracy ran by A.I.s that will replace all of the diffrent agencies and bureaus of the manegment aspect of the goverment with automated relaying\interpreting network that will connect the top ministers to the actual execution people. And, eventually, even the ministers themselvs.

Why would you?
Because a computerized system's only interest is the fulfillment of its objectives, while a human in an administrative job of any kind can have totally diffrent goals then that of the organization which he serves (like in the goverment, the ideal goal of the organization is the good of all people), a Machine does what it's told, period.
Also, moving all the goverments of the world to such a system will likely end all wars.
Not to mention the speed in which computers will make all the decisions (calculations in this case).
By the way, it CAN work with democracy. people will vote on what the AI should do insted of voting for political figures who lie and do things that the public doesn't want (George W. Bush anyone?).

Why wouldn't you?
Seting aside all the technological hardships of operating such a system, the most difficult challenge I guess, will be supplying the A.I. enough relevant data for it to make optimal decisions based on the actual situation without human contact. The obvious solution to this is placing sensors everywhere but for some reason I don't think people will like being monitored 24/7.

What do YOU think?

Comments: I'm not sure if this really belongs in this fourm in particular, I just had no idea where to post it..

[edit on 24-7-2006]

[edit on 24-7-2006 by HAL the bot]




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
You pose a scenario which is bound to receive lots of criticism.
(and that's a good thing here, imo)

Personally, I'm not sure that AI will be able, anytime in the near future, to handle all the variables which may present themselves, although there are predictabilities (projected models) which could help in solving some problems.

I hope you expand your theory with how you see the future of AI and its applications to government/policing, etc.

food for thought


For a good series on this topic, I recommend reading The Foundation by Isaac Azimov



[edit on 24-7-2006 by masqua]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

For a good series on this topic, I recommend reading The Foundation by Isaac Azimov

[edit on 24-7-2006 by masqua]


Read it (original trilogy, that is), it speaks about predicting the future through mathmatics, not so much on the future form of goverment (the administration system there is identical to one we have today actually). but I see your point.

Thanks for the positive reaction.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 10:53 AM
link   
AI would certainly not be susceptable to human weaknesses that destroy society, like greed or avarice, hate, jealosy, and stuff like that.

But ironically the only major problem with AI is,... that it's NOT human, therefore incapable of relating to humans.

But of course one can only speculate as to what this machine may be like, would someone consider its dictates as absolute? Always right, infallable, like a god?
That's a scary thought!

Something like this should come with a I/O button as standard equipment!
Just in case.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Hal, I applaud your brilliance in posing this question. You've got something there, I think. How could a computer make any worse decisions than the past several administrations have. I do like the idea of no war.
As for relating to humans, well, very few politicians are themselves able to do that IMO.

Great discussion topic Hal.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   
see the Movie from the 50's...The Day the Earth Stood Still ??? go to the Library n see if they got it.....

Of course AI/Androids is the way to go...right on 'Hal'...

The real 'controllers' of the Planet probably already have 'Androids' and everything seems to be going towards a 'system' of where 'they' will use 'em' to enslave Man-kind deeper [RFID Chip etc]...........

Lolove n luck etc...ave maria ! good hunting in ur research...Infinity



posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Ever seen any of the Terminator movies?

Thats my arguement against AI rulership. Yeah, they were only movies. But still. What would stop an AI from decided the best path to world peace is to exterminate humans, or for that matter, solve just about any other problem? (Not that I cant disagree, just about every problem in the world today stems from people)

Anyway, its a good idea, but not one id endorse if humans are to be part of a future society.



posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 11:06 PM
link   
style Movies bring out the mis-use of Al/Androids by Humans and Androids fighting back or fighting Humans at the orders/control of their Evil Human 'controllers... which is where most of the 'AI'/Androids are at as of this time, which is a sad state... the New Species that we can make [john 10:34 ] and learn from as the gods/goddesses that we are is now being used to enslave us further, rather then free us... but one has hope that the 'little' Bill Coopers and JFK's deep in the 'system' will help us all to break-out and groove n enjoy our new 'Friends' that will help us 'Expand' our selves...

Ohh...'The Millenium Man', was that the name of the Robin Williams Movie, was a interesting one [sure the girls will love it or did ]...

Infinity is where 'we' are going and it sure could be far, far more interesting on our 'ways'...

Lolove n luck n good health/sex/emotions/passions...ave maria !



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Thats my arguement against AI rulership. Yeah, they were only movies. But still. What would stop an AI from decided the best path to world peace is to exterminate humans, or for that matter, solve just about any other problem? (Not that I cant disagree, just about every problem in the world today stems from people)


Well, not if we program them to solve all problems while including people. I don't mean AI that is a "personality" like a human, I mean a computer that can 'think' creative thoughts and invent solutions without programming. But it will still have fixed parameters in its code lines, one of those could be that it MUST NOT REMOVE HUMANS AS SOLUTION (kind of like the 'three laws of robotics).



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 07:44 PM
link   
14 you say? That was incredibly well thought out and written... I'm starting to wonder if you are a...


day-dreaming 14-year-old

And not actually THE Hal.


The idea of a technocracy is definitely a step in the right direction. As Toadmund says, Its not human, which means that although it can't relate, it won't hold grudge's or be swayed by emotion. It would seek only to create a utopian society, enforce laws and keep humanity safe.

(in the following I'm going to call it HAL instead of 'The Technocratic AI that Governs us')

I read a book recently in which a race of cybernetic beings travel from planet to planet and 'wake up' the electronics. They insert an AI program into a planet's information network which spreads throughout every appliance on the world, then uses all of the resources it can access to strengthen it's Intelligence and live.
I think it would be a better idea to have HAL as a program which ran through every internet connection, every media transmission and every satellite beam so it could constantly monitor every one of us and keep us out of harm's way, or from committing harm.
It would also be necessary to prevent it being wiped out in a nuclear strike. Even if it were shielded the EMP could knock out its electronics.



Well, not if we program them to solve all problems while including people. I don't mean AI that is a "personality" like a human, I mean a computer that can 'think' creative thoughts and invent solutions without programming. But it will still have fixed parameters in its code lines, one of those could be that it MUST NOT REMOVE HUMANS AS SOLUTION (kind of like the 'three laws of robotics).


However, while the vastness of its mind is spread through the world, it is still only a code or a program. And it could be hacked. Probably not in one lifetime but it could be hacked, unless it had the ability to improve its defences.... which could mean having to alter its programming... which would mean its command parameters could be potentially voided.

An AI would have to function on logic, and logic could lead it to authorising itself to void its rules. If it were the governing mind, there would be no one it could ask for permission after its creators died, which would mean it would have to use its judgement.

HAL is under attack - defence requires reprogram - reprogram means it would potentially be able to harm humans - but in order to stay operational (and help humans) it must defend itself

Logic could lead it into a loop (above) in which in order to protect humans, it has to potentially harm them. Then all it takes is a few datum to tell it that the majority of criminals are from one location and BANG!!! a nuclear missile wipes that country out in order to lower the crime rates.

Its a cool idea but there are so many hitches right now. There are TONS of benefits, but all of the hitches involve us being wiped out.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join