If designed intelligently enough, the AI tools can augument the running of a country greatly, but I am wary of automating everything. Accountability has to rest with a human, so perhaps it should be a human administrator that gives the final yes or no, once the computer reviewed the data. We also have to be wary of deferring to AI on everything- these programs should allow for manual input or human interactions where novel problems or one-off ideas are tested.
Lastly, where possible, regulations should be slashed entirely, so that even AI is unnecessary. We mustn't give into the temptation of building a panopticon.
We shouldn't give into the temptation to build an entirely automated panopticon... but our leaders may well do that incidentally. It's something we should try to guard against, but at least it one be millions of useless functionaries.
I don't really know how to coherently expand on this or explain this, but I think one lens through which we can understand Trump 47 is that up until January 20th, 2025, our country was run by boomers, but now it's run by zoomers. We skipped straight over millennials, but it really feels to me like the youth are in charge now.
It remains to be seen how this works out, but I am cautiously optimistic that it's a good thing.
>The long-term plan (perhaps not by Trump, but certainly by Musk) is to replace the bureaucratic system with a far cheaper and far faster AI system. AI can already do most white-collar jobs, a sufficiently powerful AI could replace hundreds of bureaucrats with a few humans here and there to clear up mistakes.
I think it's the end-goal, even if people aren't fully aware of it yet, it's the logical direction to take a government seeking to retain full function but also de-bloat its ranks.
"The new administration is going to rip out a sizeable chunk of the federal bureaucracy. Still, for material civilization to function, roles must be managed, and international trade needs to be handled. The long-term plan (perhaps not by Trump, but certainly by Musk) is to replace the bureaucratic system with a far cheaper and far faster AI system. AI can already do most white-collar jobs, a sufficiently powerful AI could replace hundreds of bureaucrats with a few humans here and there to clear up mistakes."
While I'm happy to cheer on the ripping out of the old, color me skeptical about replacing it with AI. I'm much happier to replace it with flesh and blood, human beings. We've seen how hard it is to kill and replace bad ideas. What about bad ideas coupled with bureaucracy? It's easy to fire humans, or talk to them and force them to do different things.
We've seen how easily the public can be taken in, or convinced, that "it's just the algo's" on twitter shadow banning. Or outright banning. The same with lots of different functions. Do we trust, really, the government and its functionaries to honestly operate and set up AI to do the same?
I don't.
So, give me flesh and blood humans. Easier to replace. Easier to hold accountable. I can track down their houses, places of business, habits, etc - and protest or do what I think is right.
Oh, you're not wrong. We should absolutely be skeptical of the replacement... but it does look like that's the long-term plan here. The problem is that flesh and blood managerial bureaucrats behave almost identically to an AI, just less efficient and more prone to corruption and abuse.
The reason they behave almost identically to an AI is because the AI is programmed that way.
All I'm saying is that it is easier, IMO, to get rid of a human than an AI. The human has a family, a work place, feeling, a conscience, etc. He will, in fact, accidentally do good, even when he's trying to do evil. Or even find himself unable to do evil because he can't bring himself to be that bad of a person
The AI won't have those issues, and is harder to get rid of to boot.
A bureaucracy is just a large and very inefficient computer system for rules enforcement. The people working in a bureaucracy don't really have a conscience, they just do their job. They're programmed by policy statements. I'm yet to see an embedded bureaucrat who behaves as if their actions have real world consequences.
In rural areas they most certainly act as real humans, and as if their decisions matter. And these are the ones that are most likely to be replaced due to low funding, while paradoxically being faced with more ‘real’ situations. By which I mean less cookie cutter and more unique cases, case to case.
As an electrician I’ve had to deal with permitting offices, zoning, State registration, city and county registration, trades licensing, etc. Most of the people are easy going, very real, easy to get along with - I’m in a very red state. There’s some at the large city, and state level, that aren’t. But they’re the exceptions that I would say prove the rule.
But I, as the smallest of businesses, constantly have them want me to succeed. They really go out of their way to help on a regular basis most of the time. Even the county clerk’s assistants in the city, when I had to file a lien and was completely new at it, were super helpful.
Anyways, I get that it becomes a different thing in different regions and for different people. I simply note that it does not have to be that way and that, for many people, it still is not.
Ground level bureaucrats will still need to do much of the human level enforcement/action. The upper level bureaucrats, the ones that run massive financial departments and don't know how pivot-tables work, are getting torn out at the root.
Depends on who is programming the AI. The Zoomer generation is entirely fed up with Woke leftism, and will seek its destruction with a ferocious enthusiasm for decades to come.
If designed intelligently enough, the AI tools can augument the running of a country greatly, but I am wary of automating everything. Accountability has to rest with a human, so perhaps it should be a human administrator that gives the final yes or no, once the computer reviewed the data. We also have to be wary of deferring to AI on everything- these programs should allow for manual input or human interactions where novel problems or one-off ideas are tested.
Lastly, where possible, regulations should be slashed entirely, so that even AI is unnecessary. We mustn't give into the temptation of building a panopticon.
We shouldn't give into the temptation to build an entirely automated panopticon... but our leaders may well do that incidentally. It's something we should try to guard against, but at least it one be millions of useless functionaries.
I don't really know how to coherently expand on this or explain this, but I think one lens through which we can understand Trump 47 is that up until January 20th, 2025, our country was run by boomers, but now it's run by zoomers. We skipped straight over millennials, but it really feels to me like the youth are in charge now.
It remains to be seen how this works out, but I am cautiously optimistic that it's a good thing.
Eh, it's ok. As a millennial we're used to getting skipped over. Probably for the best.
As a millennial myself I feel qualified to say that I'd rather zoomers be in charge than my own demo. I can't explain exactly why
Thar's fair
>The long-term plan (perhaps not by Trump, but certainly by Musk) is to replace the bureaucratic system with a far cheaper and far faster AI system. AI can already do most white-collar jobs, a sufficiently powerful AI could replace hundreds of bureaucrats with a few humans here and there to clear up mistakes.
Interesting take
I think it's the end-goal, even if people aren't fully aware of it yet, it's the logical direction to take a government seeking to retain full function but also de-bloat its ranks.
"The new administration is going to rip out a sizeable chunk of the federal bureaucracy. Still, for material civilization to function, roles must be managed, and international trade needs to be handled. The long-term plan (perhaps not by Trump, but certainly by Musk) is to replace the bureaucratic system with a far cheaper and far faster AI system. AI can already do most white-collar jobs, a sufficiently powerful AI could replace hundreds of bureaucrats with a few humans here and there to clear up mistakes."
While I'm happy to cheer on the ripping out of the old, color me skeptical about replacing it with AI. I'm much happier to replace it with flesh and blood, human beings. We've seen how hard it is to kill and replace bad ideas. What about bad ideas coupled with bureaucracy? It's easy to fire humans, or talk to them and force them to do different things.
We've seen how easily the public can be taken in, or convinced, that "it's just the algo's" on twitter shadow banning. Or outright banning. The same with lots of different functions. Do we trust, really, the government and its functionaries to honestly operate and set up AI to do the same?
I don't.
So, give me flesh and blood humans. Easier to replace. Easier to hold accountable. I can track down their houses, places of business, habits, etc - and protest or do what I think is right.
Hard to do that with an algo.
Oh, you're not wrong. We should absolutely be skeptical of the replacement... but it does look like that's the long-term plan here. The problem is that flesh and blood managerial bureaucrats behave almost identically to an AI, just less efficient and more prone to corruption and abuse.
The reason they behave almost identically to an AI is because the AI is programmed that way.
All I'm saying is that it is easier, IMO, to get rid of a human than an AI. The human has a family, a work place, feeling, a conscience, etc. He will, in fact, accidentally do good, even when he's trying to do evil. Or even find himself unable to do evil because he can't bring himself to be that bad of a person
The AI won't have those issues, and is harder to get rid of to boot.
So, I'm definitely anti-AI
A bureaucracy is just a large and very inefficient computer system for rules enforcement. The people working in a bureaucracy don't really have a conscience, they just do their job. They're programmed by policy statements. I'm yet to see an embedded bureaucrat who behaves as if their actions have real world consequences.
In rural areas they most certainly act as real humans, and as if their decisions matter. And these are the ones that are most likely to be replaced due to low funding, while paradoxically being faced with more ‘real’ situations. By which I mean less cookie cutter and more unique cases, case to case.
As an electrician I’ve had to deal with permitting offices, zoning, State registration, city and county registration, trades licensing, etc. Most of the people are easy going, very real, easy to get along with - I’m in a very red state. There’s some at the large city, and state level, that aren’t. But they’re the exceptions that I would say prove the rule.
But I, as the smallest of businesses, constantly have them want me to succeed. They really go out of their way to help on a regular basis most of the time. Even the county clerk’s assistants in the city, when I had to file a lien and was completely new at it, were super helpful.
Anyways, I get that it becomes a different thing in different regions and for different people. I simply note that it does not have to be that way and that, for many people, it still is not.
Ground level bureaucrats will still need to do much of the human level enforcement/action. The upper level bureaucrats, the ones that run massive financial departments and don't know how pivot-tables work, are getting torn out at the root.
I'm a Boomer who supports the young using their talents to make things better.
Thanks! They'll need it.
The AIs are programmed to be woke. It cannot be an AI system.
Depends on who is programming the AI. The Zoomer generation is entirely fed up with Woke leftism, and will seek its destruction with a ferocious enthusiasm for decades to come.
If all goes well, I will be programming the AI