

Will an IBM computer be your next mayor? - rbii
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/127647-the-internet-of-things-and-smart-cities-will-an-ibm-computer-be-your-next-mayor

======
mjn
The Mayor of Pasadena got a good laugh (and sparked some serious discussion to
boot) at IJCAI 2009 (<http://ijcai.org/~ijcai09/>) when he proposed something
like that. There's often an opening "I'm the mayor and thanks for bringing
some convention dollars to our city" speech at large conferences, which is
usually horribly boring and full of platitudes, but his was short and more or
less said, welcome to California, I wish you all luck in developing artificial
intelligence, because we're currently looking for a better government.

------
throwaway64
following the principle of headlines ending in a question mark...

No.

~~~
maukdaddy
Seriously. We need to stop up voting any stories from ExtremeTech. What a
bunch of garbage.

~~~
rehack
I just find the idea very powerful - the idea that governments can be replaced
by software. Voted it up, just for the title, which conveys that idea ... We
folks perhaps don't need to read that article, as can imagine the
possibilities.

------
drcube
The government will still run the city. The good ones have always stayed out
of the implementation details, because they are no good at it. That's why we
have a permanent bureaucracy of full-time unelected government employees, as
well as civilian contractors.

Do Ford and GM run cities now, since they implement everything from police
cruisers to garbage trucks? Do plumbers and engineers run the city because
they implement the details of the sewer system and running water?

------
metatronscube
I think its worth exploring this concept. I wouldn't mind living under an AI
controlled meritocracy ;). I don't care if an AI or a person is running a city
as long as they are good at their job and they make sensible balanced
decisions that are in the best interest of the people. If that's a machine
intelligence then so be it, I for one welcome our IBM supercomputer super
controller overlords.

~~~
mseebach
> as long as they are good[X] at their job[X] and they make sensible[X]
> balanced[X] decisions that are in the best interest[X] of the people[X]

Please objectively and exhaustively define the marked terms. That, not AI, is
the real challenge to better government. Incidentally, it's also pretty much
the definition of politics.

~~~
metatronscube
Erm...No :)

Well ok, I get what you are saying, but a machine intelligence would
faithfully and honestly apply these perfect values every time without bias.
When have you ever known a flesh and blood Government to do so?

~~~
mseebach
My point is that you can't establish criteria that will predetermine your
response to a given situation unless you subscribe to an extremely simplistic
ideology. Politicians with these ideologies don't generally get elected for
executive office - and it's NOT out of fear they won't faithfully and honestly
apply their ideology, rather the opposite - so why would an algorithm?

~~~
drcube
>...unless you subscribe to an extremely simplistic ideology. Politicians with
these ideologies don't generally get elected...

 _Only_ politicians with simplistic ideologies get elected. What world have
you been living in? "Soundbite philosophy" is a big part of why our
governments are so terrible at their jobs. Nuance and subtlety don't earn you
votes.

~~~
mseebach
No, they _run_ on simplistic renderings of whatever _issues_ are fashionable
whenever they run. Most have no discernible consistent ideology at all, and
are elected on vague metrics such as "good leader" and "likeable".

------
ragmondo
I think the author accidentally a verb "Once you replace a skilled worker with
a computer-controlled robot, it’s very to go back."

~~~
mrsebastian
Thanks; fixed.

------
FelixP
Of course the answer is no. Far too many legal and social hurdles to cross
(not to mention technological).

However, in the spirit of playing along, and in light of the fact that it's
Friday, I'll throw in this quote from Deus Ex which I always found
interesting:

> The checks and balances of democratic governments were invented because
> humans themselves realized how unfit they were to govern themselves. They
> needed a system, yes. An industrial age machine.

> Without the use of computing machines they had to arrange themselves in
> crude structures that formalized decision-making. A highly imperfect and
> unstable solution.

