Will AI replace politicians ?
Might get some sensible decisions made ?
Will AI replace politicians ?
Might get some sensible decisions made ?
" People tend to vote for their own self-interest. " ( Trendie )
That's the crux of it. I don't suppose AI would have a self interest or would they ?
There has been a lot of speculation on what human jobs will survive the coming robot age. One that I think will live on for a long time will be professional athletes.It is true some people like to work and not just for the money. There are interesting jobs out there and many will not be filled by robots. I think and perhaps hope that human beings will never be totally redundant and machines stay subject to our wills.
Politicians will be increasingly aided by AI but probably never fully replaced.
Keep that on/off switch handy just in case imho.
trendie,The problem here is deciding what constitutes "sensible"?
If AI have their own terms of reference, they may decide on a set of rules that may be sensible, but only in the abstract.
People tend to vote for their own self-interest.
The idea of feeding the world may be a noble aim, but AI may decide to achieve it is to not allow the importation of excessive foods into the first world, and allow it to be distributed to the needy. Resulting in less choice, which we may interpret as shortages. (even though I think we throw away quite a lot of spoiled food because we buy too much).
AI may solve the CO2 problems by raising the cost of power, and enforcing blackouts to conserve what fuel we do have.
We wont suffer, but will force us to use power wisely, which we will interpret as "meddling", or "inhumane".
People, generally, are idiots.
trendie,
Future machines may not be as hostile towards humans as some may fear. What we need is smarter humans.The only thing stopping genetic researchers from making smarter humans is fear mongering which wrongly leads to government regulation.
I can see a future maybe 150 plus years from now where the "dumbest" person on Earth has what would be considered a 300 IQ in today’s measurement. Which of course, nobody today has. Future machines may actually respect us if they see our intelligence increasing over time.
The biggest problem I see with using genetics to engineer people to be much smarter is not so much an intelligence arms race against robots but a genetic arms race against rogue nations. If China and other bad actors start making their citizens super smart, the rest of the world will be forced to compete genetically or fall behind and eventually lose.
Would'nt surprise me if a new era of Luddism were to materialize all around the world if AI takes millions of jobs.
This could force politicians to restrict the use of robots to niche and specialist jobs just to keep the population off the dole queues.
The owners of the robots will be making the big money.
The problem as I see it is not of intelligence, but of wisdom. Geneticists may be able to produce super genes to boost our intelligence but as far as I’ve read about the subject, there is no such thing as wisdom genes in our genetic code.You seem to be concentrating on the wrong thing. Super clever people will no doubt produce amongst other things worse weapons as they battle it out for supremacy. Ideally this increase in IQ would also be used to make people more moral and not start wars, exploit deadly viruses etc. With the present set up of dog-eat-dog I think it is highly unlikely their increased talents will be put to good use exclusively.
Vast amounts of money and talent is wasted on the militaries around the globe. People worry that malicious AI will be developed to bring down the infrastructure of rival nations. Without power, water and food the world could easily be plunged into a new dark age.