Would you vote for a rational Artificially Intelligent president?
Not a human hybrid but a pure silicon president.
14 comments
No, because I would not accept it as sufficiently Artificially Intelligent until it had proven itself capable of irrationality.
Very interesting idea, there must be some SciFi works on this subject.
Would the ePresident be fixed for their term of office (no upgrades whilst in post)? Could you ask it questions as a citizen before voting to know how it would respond for any given parameter set? Would it be programmed according to the Three Laws?
Perhaps all parties could submit an ePresident candidate and each could get a vote on all actions based on the proportion of the population who voted for it.
Would the ePresident be fixed for their term of office (no upgrades whilst in post)? Could you ask it questions as a citizen before voting to know how it would respond for any given parameter set? Would it be programmed according to the Three Laws?
Perhaps all parties could submit an ePresident candidate and each could get a vote on all actions based on the proportion of the population who voted for it.
The problem is not rationality, but the goals that rational being has to fulfill.
Hello No. But it is a very interesting idea.
Only if it was open source, I'd be worried about people tampering with it to give it biases for special interests etc.
The compiled version might be different. A solution would be to allow everyone to run a local copy of the president which gets the same data-feed so it would respond the same in all instances. The problem is of course that a president deals with confidential information which you don't want to just broadcast over a network for anyone to see.
Depends who programmed it.
Yes, coxaqui. Especially if the alternative is you destroying us.
Yes. Anybody or anything but the current crops of politicians.
As long as it follows the three laws of robotics, yes.
iPresident or gPresident? Or maybe President Blue or BBpres?
No: it would be government by engineering which is wrong. States are not machines.
No: it would be government by engineering which is wrong. States are not machines.
Would you not just end up with utilitarianism?
No. Only an imaginary one.
does "he" break the rules when they need to be borken ?does "he" have feelings ?