Trolley problem is not exclusive to AI but consequences of a dissociated program taking a decision is less acceptable as compared to a committee of humans. For all AI it would merely be an equation to solve with no inkling of what that consequence mean. As a human condemning another human to death is much more than a mere dilemma.
The solution as you proposed is human intervention. The question arises however that who would choose those humans. A learning AI might learn to choose only those humans who would not oppose is decision. Any product of human intellect will have the same biases and faults as the humans those who have made them. There are no true creations but rather inspiration from who we are and what we see.
Whereas human overseers chosen by us would have the same problems as it is with democracy.
I am not against using ai but replacing humans is not and should not be the aim.
I appreciate the insights you’ve shared. Here’s a clarification on the core points:
Algocracy vs. Human Emotion: The objective isn’t to replace the entirety of human decision-making but to use algocracy in areas where certain human flaws can be systematically minimized. Algorithms, when designed properly, can reduce the impact of biases and inconsistencies.
Selection of Human Overseers: The selection would remain transparent and lean towards open-source principles. Individuals would be chosen by peers and those deemed competent within the community. We migh utilize a meritocratic governance model combined with token-based voting for stake, enhanced by a reputation system to ensure decisions are made by competent, committed individuals, all underpinned by open-source principles for transparency and collective oversight (this is oversimplifying it, there is a huge amount of great ways; I hope to have time later to write about them).
Purpose of Algocracy: The goal is not an AI or algorithmic “takeover.” It’s about integrating algorithmic governance in specific areas to achieve consistency and fairness, always with human oversight at its core.
The emphasis is on refining our governance systems, not replacing the human touch. Challenges exist, but with collaboration and transparency, we can navigate them effectively.
Thanks for the discussion.
Trolley problem is not exclusive to AI but consequences of a dissociated program taking a decision is less acceptable as compared to a committee of humans. For all AI it would merely be an equation to solve with no inkling of what that consequence mean. As a human condemning another human to death is much more than a mere dilemma.
The solution as you proposed is human intervention. The question arises however that who would choose those humans. A learning AI might learn to choose only those humans who would not oppose is decision. Any product of human intellect will have the same biases and faults as the humans those who have made them. There are no true creations but rather inspiration from who we are and what we see.
Whereas human overseers chosen by us would have the same problems as it is with democracy.
I am not against using ai but replacing humans is not and should not be the aim.
I appreciate the insights you’ve shared. Here’s a clarification on the core points:
Algocracy vs. Human Emotion: The objective isn’t to replace the entirety of human decision-making but to use algocracy in areas where certain human flaws can be systematically minimized. Algorithms, when designed properly, can reduce the impact of biases and inconsistencies.
Selection of Human Overseers: The selection would remain transparent and lean towards open-source principles. Individuals would be chosen by peers and those deemed competent within the community. We migh utilize a meritocratic governance model combined with token-based voting for stake, enhanced by a reputation system to ensure decisions are made by competent, committed individuals, all underpinned by open-source principles for transparency and collective oversight (this is oversimplifying it, there is a huge amount of great ways; I hope to have time later to write about them).
Purpose of Algocracy: The goal is not an AI or algorithmic “takeover.” It’s about integrating algorithmic governance in specific areas to achieve consistency and fairness, always with human oversight at its core.
The emphasis is on refining our governance systems, not replacing the human touch. Challenges exist, but with collaboration and transparency, we can navigate them effectively.