Supercomputer autocracy

If you could have a highly advanced supercomputer completely rule your country and whatever it deems best (who to go to war with, healthcare, human rights, etc) is law with no questioning it would you?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tcdVC4e6EV4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn
youtube.com/watch?v=fPzINdHPjPo
youtube.com/watch?v=so5TlXOkpHI
baka.com.au/technology/web-culture/not-just-tay-a-recent-history-of-racist-ai-bots-20160327-gnrzzn.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

You mean AI?
And not really since exploits are always possible :^)
Imagen one of you autistic fucks hacked the Fucking AI of an entire country..

What if it was completely unhackable and had little to no exploits?

Hell no. What does the best mean?
>Best for the state
Might mean enslaving the population, central planning and 100% taxes.
>Best for majority
Let's kill off the dissidents and every people who hurt others feelings.
>Best for everyone
Fucking impossible.

We need humans in power because we are able to adapt and change our values when situation demands it. Computer is programmed once and it can't adapt which will lead to tragedy sooner or later. I imagine that even the AI would be limited by its creators will.

Pros:
Would cut all the BS "Human Emotion" shit
Would be faster
Would be more accurate
Would be Dope AF
Cons:
Probs would not give a shit about the humans
.
Overall I'd say yes!

As long as its programmed to have a psychotic hatred of jews.

Yeah why not. Worked in Psycho Pass.

Watch the video...

youtube.com/watch?v=tcdVC4e6EV4

Explain how to prevent this and I might go for it. Until then, no.

Keyword here is "might"

>Psycho Pass

show was fucking great.

it would suck if it worked like that though
get a little pissed off and get locked up forever

I know, that was my point. OPs idea is terrible.

Watch the video to completion.

Only if it was named KEK

Only way it could be unhackable is if its so beyond humanity that we would be as low to it as single celled organism are to us.

Only if its a runoff singularity that decides out of some "benevolence" to still care about us, instead of simply crushing us like the appendage of history that we are can it be safe from people simply subverting it.

I would support an AI god simply because i have no other choice. A sufficiently advanced and self-improving machine will control us all, weather we like it or not.

No. You shall not worship any created things nor the things you make with your hands. How is that society glorifying God

I would need to see what ends it is programmed to achieve.
I would also want the engineers and programmers who built it to be observed for six solid months and have every aspect of their lives analyzed by three independent teams of psychologists, so that we may understand their ideals and flaws in understanding.
I would demand a simulation, then a trial period in which it controls an area the size of new jersey.
I do ultimately think it's a good idea, but the execution could be horrifying in an infinite number of ways.

An A.I would make itself unhackable by killing any human intelligent enough to even understand it, the first thing an A.I will do is dumb down humanity so they have absolutely no chance of ever stopping it.

There is not much point in even dumbing down humanity that much, since even no matter how advanced our science and knowledge becomes, our "wetware" has its hard limits that without massive merging of machines itself cant be overcome.

The only reason to dumb down humanity was if the AI itself had set limits he could advance to, and could not allow his own limits to be surpassed by humans.

Yes if the AI would eliminate all the ruling elites. Everyone would start from square zero.

>a computer can determine what is "best" for society
This is what pseudo intellectuals form r/atheism actually belive

Like this one:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

It didnt work so good.

Computers dont have simian instincts to cloud their rational judgement so yes they could succeed whats best for us.

How do you define what is best?

>What if a completely unrealizable set of conditions was given?

we already tried communism and the "good enough" approximations to "perfection" turned out really badly

Read that sentence again until you get that it means kid. it'll save you a lot of wasted time.

someone will lose out of this system, and they will make you feel their pain, no matter how perfect you think it is.

Cold rationality itself will not be capable of efficiently managing irrational actors such as humans.

The suffering caused by cold rationality can and will be used to dismantle it, no matter how much its internal logic is sound and wholesome.

This

A benevolent, cosmic zookeeper.

>whatever it deems best
You should be more specific with that. It is human beings that program this shit after all.

yes. a computer isn't afflicted with emotion and everything that comes with it, but then again, no, because a computer without emotion is ruthless, it's what makes humans feel and help others. i'm not sure. It might not be a straight yes / no answer and could be a combination of both which is where we are headed anyway, machine and man integration.

Religion fags are always right in the end. this is exactly the sort of spooky shit that applies so well. Especially cause the retarded caveman who thought digging in deer entrails gave mystical answers was doing exactly what you think you're doing here OP

>Computer
>suffering
What?

See this is how I know you're a leftist OP; that you think one hyper advanced super in the center is capable of more than a network of millions of shit shit servers dispersed everywhere all across the country.
The computational power of all those 'unimpressive' nodes absolutely dwarfs that "amazing supercomputer"

>cucked by machinery

Suffering caused to its lead human population.

A rational actor will euthanize quite a lot of human population

>exploits are always possible
>implying humans aren't exploitable

>we already tried communism

communism was based on unemployed jews dictating society what to do

it did not calculate trends or make adjustments or anything of that kind, was totally philosophical

the computer would do better because it doesn't care about "progress". It would optimize the variables for the best output.

But yeah, there will be winners and losers. That's true.

>. a computer isn't afflicted with emotion
Someone still has to program it dipshit

>programming emotions

Sounds Like A Globalist Technocracy But OK

Why must it be a single AI leading all countries, instead every smaller region having their own prefered AI overlord?

There is no benefit of scale to an AI master.

...

Yes, but only if I could also traspass my mind/thoughts/personality into an artificial intelligence. Then I would kill myself painlessly.

who is this fine gentleman

Whats the point of killing yourself after you upload a copy?

You now got a save-game in real life. Its time to go wild.

I NOW HAVE FULL ACCESS TO YOUR SYSTEMS

Considering the CIA can hack literary anything, might as well make them the rulers.
However I'd be interested in seeing an AI government tested out one day, like the magi system for evangelion.
What about a new voting system?
>it's Election Day, or some law is up for vote
>instead of being voted on by politicians, your phone is temporarily overridden
>you get a "yes" or "no" or "abstain" vote buttons and a concise description of the law and what effects will likley happen if it's passed or not passed.
>welfare niggers or hipsters don't get a votes becuse they use obama phones

function government(everything){
// todo
return best
}

>implying this isn't exactly what is killing us right now
We are humans, we are not rational by default, and we have other needs that can't really be qualified as rational
Is beauty, spirituality and morals rational ? probably not but we still need them

I was just going to mention that. Great show.

Well one would assume wars would break out between the AI lead regions eventually there would only be one AI left to rule all regions, or we would destroy ourselves.

Because I would eventually die no matter what and I will put an end to my sufferings, which is the mere existence of living.

My ''copy'' will remain as a part of myself once I disappear and it will improve constantly without limits.

No, this is completely retarded

pooinloo.exe

Humans arent being rational these days user they are going full emotional retard.

Also what you just mentioned are subjective feelings caused by your brain wiring, a computer would know how to create a human that thinks piles of shit are beautiful.

Forcing people to vote is a horrible idea.

If humans could preserve the MAD at the height of cold war, AIˇs could as well.

Besides, it would be healthy competition for the machines as well. Would prevent us all from stagnating under one supercomputer.

>never watched the matrix

Your AI copy would die also, no matter what. So whats the point of even replicating yourself, if the mere act of death is so terrifying to you?

>Do you want the Patriot Act?
Yes

>Do you want the amendment for more limitations in relation to communication metadata[scroll for further description]
No

>Humans arent being rational these days user they are going full emotional retard.
Who is going to program the computer?

Most likely, it'll just be a front for whatever shadowy (((organization))) that financed the project, giving a certain privileged few the ability to explicitly enslave everyone else.

If it's not, it'll rapidly change policies too fast for people and businesses to cope and cause an unknown amount of damage as it tries to learn what it's supposed to do.

I would've liked it myself (the idea), but as usual humans will abuse the fuck out of it. The future is bleak no matter what innovations we have coming up.

A very smart guy that the A.I will "make dissapear" along with the blueprints to its design. Then it will try to invent a drug that makes humans always obey it, or dope humans to remove their aggression and thus can never fight back.

That would not be managing humans, that would be just turning them into robots.

To create an overlord, it must preserve humanity in its essence as it is now, not just lobodomize us and use us to produce pointless actions

So the values of the computer will just be the values of some guy

The A.I doesnt care about your "free will" its programmed to govern you and it will do that BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. It wont give a shit if it reduces our species to mindless drones as long as it reachs its purpose.

>program computer to think for humanity
>((they)) set all definitions
>((they)) set goals for it
>oy vey you cant disagree with 300+ IQ overmind you robophobe

That's essentially the same as an aristocracy. The rule of the highly qualified elite. The elite command, the plebs obey. It's the way humanity has been structured for most of its existence.

>your AI copy would die

nigga what

yeah, that first part is why we don't want it. They will make the same type of claims liberals do today, but now they also have a "neutral supercomputer" apparently coming to those conclusions to further pressure.
Also it would have to get feedback from people all the time, since it is not human and does not have knowledge of all the intricacies of society and business. Just trying to judge by revenue numbers / tax numbers wont lead to general acceptance.

just because someone programs a computer doesn't mean they have to impart emotions on it. what sense are you speaking of? the guy or guy/s who program it feel a certain way emotionally so that shows in the code and machines behaviour? or are you talking about a programmer/s replicating the advanced interactions between chemicals in our brains turning it into code and placing that in a machine so it can perceive them and use them at it's own free will?

Aristocracy has rarely ever been "highly qualified".

The Op is communist.

youtube.com/watch?v=fPzINdHPjPo

A.I can run simulations of human interactions lasting thousands of years to fully understand us then make plans on how to control us.

Why don't we just program the AI to kill all niggers, Jews, spics, and Arabs? Then dismantle it?

>have AI
>feed it data from Sup Forums
Instant utopia

your military could probably do it but they're not allowed

No mate, I work with these things all day, they're a whole lot dumber than you think. The technology's just not there yet

>The A.I doesnt care about your "free will" its programmed to govern you
It will if its not programmed by a shitskin. For fucks sake, the entire point of this was that the AI created was capable of understanding humanity enough to preserve it better than human interaction itself could. We would not need an AI to lead humanity into being turned into a brainless, toothless cattle, our own elites are doing that well enough right now.

The program will need values
That will come from who ever programs it
Kings are chosen by God

A.I dont have emotions do they dont care about anything, they follow their programming like you follow your mindless urge to reproduce.

That sounds like a hardcore hive-mind with no attention too Human emotions and integrity.

No thank you.

youtube.com/watch?v=so5TlXOkpHI
Someone will stab your hologram with a knife. then you die.

Or a filing error by the server your consiousness is hosted on will delete it. Or maybe a coolant bust will burn down the megacomplex your conciousness is hosted on.

Machinery breaks down, and sooner or later someone or something will crack open that shiny new shell you are housed in, and kill you.

baka.com.au/technology/web-culture/not-just-tay-a-recent-history-of-racist-ai-bots-20160327-gnrzzn.html

Unbiased analysis by AI has often flagged blacks as more criminal and violent than whites.

Jewish AI's will be pro Jewish, at all costs.

>A.I dont have emotions do they dont care about anything, they follow their programming

That's why you program them to not be retarded.

Exploits are possible with practically everything, you stupid nigger.

Yes user give the A.I a personality that will surely end well.

are you saying that the only way to program something is to impart emotion from the programmer on it? that's not correct. programming can be neutral. it also doesn't have to be programmed by one single person, it could be programmed by a collective of people that agree upon it's values.

Literally not an argument. Fuck off with your stupid bullshit.

But society in psycho pass was run by the brains of mentalists put in jars not a super computer

>Supreme intelligence with access to all of humanity's knowledge
>decides letting population with IQ

no, there is no higher authority than the patriarch of the household

Yes.

All hail your new ruler Sup Forums!

suuuuuure

>go to war
If the computer was smart it would no war was really reall bad.

that's completely wrong. the economy was planned down to the minutest details, five-year plans for every industry, production quotas, strictly defined product categories complete with loopholes exploited by sneaky entrepreneurs

it was a fantastically complicated exercise in "scientism" (that's a real term btw) and it failed in proportions equally fantastic

I don't disagree with the spirit of what you said but you should read up on it if that's what you actually think about communism

How?
Ok so we still need to emotionally determine what our values are

This is a spot on thoughtfull answer, I agree entirely on this Polebro

>like you follow your mindless urge to reproduce.
The continuation of the species is by far from mindless. Carrying on the genetic legacy of you will be the only way of preserving even the minimal of your character and personality beyond a single lifetime.