Is there an argument against a communist world ruled by a super computer ? Seem like perfection to me

Is there an argument against a communist world ruled by a super computer ? Seem like perfection to me

>leaf
Nothing to see here folks

...

A super computer would bring fairness to all, even if that means the bare minium. Inequality = wealth

sorry schlomo i know you want a communist world ruled by you but a super computer will do a better job

>implying the singularity AI wouldn't kill off all niggers and jews on its first day.

>leaf

Not sure about communism, but the rich should fear the poor

Yes, the death camps will run super efficiently

AI has been proven to be very racist. Programming it to be communist would just mean niggers get sent to the gulag.

>ruled by a supercomputer

explain

so in other words, youre on board with this ?

>fairness

Define. Is your definition the same as the supercomputer's? Will it always be? What
if fairness comes down to everyone's dead?

the operators of said "super computer" want you extinct and what is left of the rest of humanity to be in neverending pain, slavery and missery to appeace their false god and their limp dicks

In the Future there is only Roko's Basilisk

>Technocracy
Why bother, you just killed communism with your post.

Human beings may not be perfect, but a computer program with language synthesis is hardly the answer to the world's problems.

Paranoia, the tabletop rpg. Enjoy.

hehey I like the way you talk and think pal

Because there is a chance that that supercomputer would be badly programmed. Google the paperclip maximizer. I would rather have my brain enhanced so that my brain personally had the power of a supercomputer, and I got to make my own decisions.

who will control the computer? whose programs will it run? who will determine how it rules?

Too unpredictable if given actual intelligence and a means to maintain itself. Too prone to corruption and human error otherwise.

...

in the future it will control itself. if hes not advanced enough to do that, no need to bother
>who will determine how it rules
the computer will have set goals and core principles to maintain but how he obtains them will be in his hands

What's Roko's Basilisk?

why would a computer be corrupt ? it doesnt has any aspiration or self gain ambitions. human would have nothing to do with it

Yeah, communism fails because humans are fucking stupid and no one in the history of human kind truly knows how the economy or any form of economy works. Communist computers would ensure that communism works and that subhumans get thrown into the chambers.

I don't see communist computers coming around for a while though, so until then I am still a natsoc.

*any form of market

SKYNET NAZBOL

But why communism, what do you have against freedom of speech, freedom of movement, property ownership and free entrepreneurship? I know you are a leaf and such must blow yourself but seriously go blow yourself.

Except for the human(s) that program it. If the programming is flawed in some respect it results in corruption.

who will set the goals and define the core principles?
Then who will get to decide what those principles actually mean and how they are to be weighted against each other?

You can't say "the computer", at some point a human will have to kick-start it all.

you cannot make predictions about an intelligence far above your own. It's motives would be as unfathomable to you as your motives are to an ant.

Skynet - irobot - the matrix.
Pick one and fuck off.

Who would choose what decisions the ai gets?

>literally everyone is a slave to the objectives of some AI
Communists really LOVE being slaves dont they?

it wont be 1 dude in his basement programming it. that would be a very transparent endeavor. beside i'd add some emergency shutdown just in case but its very unlikely it will ever be used.

>who will set the goals and define the core principles?
humanity. that would probably be a long process. i would need to think about this for a long period to give an exact answer

this is flawed. its better than an authoritarian state because the state is composed of human beings. the AI will be smarter than you can even conceive it will take better decision than you at every turn.

true but a computer has no motives its not alive. we will be his chess pieces and he will do whats best to achieve victory. (what victory means will be assessed by us)

*bleep blorp*
"Leaf Technologies CurrentYearAI Economy Management System Online"
*bleep blorp*
"Calculating available food reserves to redistribute..."
*bleep bloop*
"You have been allotted -2,300 calories worth of food for this week..."
*saw blade spins up followed by agonal screams as flesh is ripped from your body to maintain balanced economy*

>beside i'd add some emergency shutdown just in case but its very unlikely it will ever be used
So it would be controlled by elites. How is that any different than any other dictatorship?

Are you 12 leafcuck? Did you think this through more than 5 seconds?

What happens if the perfect computer is designed to run everything, and figures out that the best
way to run everything is that it not interfere?

the requirements of a shutdown would be very clear and not up to a single person.

We would all end up as paperclips.

then you got that result. that means you were right all along

>get political ideas from Rush '2112'
Fuck right off Leaf

>>>>who will set the goals and define the core principles?
>>humanity.
If humanity would be able to agree on such a thing , then we would not need that computer in the first place.

i havent watched that movie i almost never watch movies

Communism doesn't work, because it remove the incentive to work and improve your work. There is no advantages for competing car manufactors to make their production more efficient or increase the quality of the model.

Communism doesn't work, there is nothing you can put behind it that could change that..

Seems legit.

Overall, you should have started your question with the assumption that the computer is
perfect in every way. If that's the case, then
of course it should tell us all what to do.
But, that's not a discussion.

Maybe a more interesting discussion would be about whether a perfect-in-every-way computer
could exist.

not true. setting an objective and accomplishing it and how you accomplish it is 2 very different thing

You have a pea brain if you dont think that a small group of elites (((happen))) to come into control of such a measure.

You retarded communists hate anything to do with any kind of individual freedom because you cant 100% control the outcome.

You actually remind me of corporate cultist managers at my job thinking the corporation always knows best and thinking there must not be any other way to go about things.

>Overall, you should have started your question with the assumption that the computer is perfect in every way.
the universe is so vast and the possibilities are infinite. the computer would probably not be ''perfect'' but it would be vastly superior to us

your solution is only realizable if both the computer and those who programmed it are perfect, which is impossible.

>true but a computer has no motives its not alive. we will be his chess pieces and he will do whats best to achieve victory. (what victory means will be assessed by us)

Any AI worth considering has programmed itself to a large degree. Consciousness is an emergent property in humans, and would almost necessarily be present in a super-intelligent AI. It would no more care for us than we care for the first mammal to climb down from the trees. You are a base fool if you think a superintelligent entity would be completely controlled by the ants who programmed it. You are lacking knowledge of the sheer scales of intelligence involved.

To phrase it in a way that might sink into your thick skull, what if a single command was ambiguous and the AI needed to parse it? What if a single novel event happened that the AI needed to create a new rule for? What if a human was lazy or malicious and wrote a falsity into the core code base?

On the contrary. Humanity would neither agree on the goals/objectives, nor on the core principles which will very much dictate how the objectives are to be accomplished.
As said, if we could do that, we would not need that computer in the first place.

>Super Computer
(((Technocracy))) pls

i already talked about an emergency shutdown. but your scenarios are unlikely to happen anyway.

Way better than world ruled by elite zionists
Gas em up

>unlikely to happen anyway.
12 year old confirmed, no knowledge of anything to do with AI or computer science

the AI would never encounter a novel input set? Are you fucking retarded?

Literally the Beast spoken of in Revelation

If it there is an emergency shutdown, then who will decide when to use that shutdown?
The pro-live movement when it decides abortion is a good thing?
The pro-abortion movement when it decides to forbid abortion?
Can we even say that the computer is ruling, when humans can overrule it over a mater like this, and shut it down?

The whole Matrix movie

yes, the same as the other argument
individualism > collectivism

I as a human being have right to be alone in my own believes, dreams, hopes and everything I do is for me myself and my family. Not you, not your family or your party or whatever.

You some of my product? Come buy it. You think its expensive? Make your own or buy from elsewhere.

...

>upside: dead shitskins
>downside: communism
Idk it might work if it isn't run by literal retards in politbureau

Why do commies only ever steal our memes and make them lame?

by the way I dont know what you think a super AI is. do you think he would have an army of killer robot lol ? it would be a machine as head of the world enacting laws / punishments / policies and everything state related. its just in charge because we let him. Just like your gov now

predetermined conditions. probably if he defies the core principles using logic like that guy fear . If the AI decide that abortion is good thing then its a good thing. We would probably just shut him down if he become a threat to mankind (he decides that we're flawed an killing us is the best move for example)

I probably shouldve think about what the core principles are before posting i guess. Core principle x must be upheld even if flawed... or something

Humans can be just as bad as paperclip maximizers. Why do people drink?

> fairness

That's your problem, you think "fairness" is equality of outcome, not equal opportunity. It'll be a rude awakening for you when you finally realize what fairness will actually mean.

ok then, what is the highest good for humanity? If you were in charge, pick the variable to maximize and i'll tell you why you are wrong.

it is literally the exact same thing as any kind of dictatorship you retard.

Just watch
Colossus: The Forbin Project

like i said, i would require a long long time to figure that one out. smarter people than me would have that task

yep but its a good one, retard. get out of your conservashit mindset for 1 millisecond

>>predetermined conditions.
Which brings us back to humanity having to agree on those in the fist place.
Pro-lifers would define allowing abortion as such a condition. Pro-choicers would define forbidding abortion as such a condition.

And that is juts one example. It just won't happen, and trying to force it would probably start world war 3 by itself.

>humanity
>leaf

>by a computer

Either unpredictable (most certainly) or as flawed as its creator.

You are too stupid to interact with if you think an AI can be created to be a complete dictatorship and also think that humanity will not suffer for it.

What if both of the following are true:
1. The AI decides to eliminate war by exterminating all but the dumbest humans to create a slave class that can live in perpetual servitude to it in peace
2. The AI is wrong and there is widespread infighting and violence

ITT: Faggots

they wouldnt be that specific. it would be basic philosophical principles not ''gay marriage is good!1!!'' type shit

>ruled by a super computer
why? i would have no reason to keep us alive, consuming resources and achieving nothing. A computer will see the inherent logic of exterminating all human life, because only humans value human life.

Smarter people than you are trying tot tell you that it cannot be done, also not by smarter people than you.

The computer would ultimately deign that humans are unable to capitulate the system in large numbers. Eradication would be deemed necessary.

Be well.

Perhaps you could use primary directives of the program something like the ones on the Georgia guide stones.

My crystal ball will help me see how this works out.

Oh dear humanity has died out. Hmm let's try another timeline instead.

At least everyone was beautiful for a bit before humanity died out. Such diverse. So little responsibility. So unchanging. Such equality. So much time to live.

Read about the mouse paradise experiment if you want to see what goes wrong.

Hmm I know what needs to be done to fix it. We just need to remove the free will of the individuals. So they do the things they no longer seem to have the will to do. We need to make them biological extensions of the program and it will all work much better.

Hey are there any books where there was a paradise and some mindless biological entities gained free will and the knowledge of good and evil and rebelled against their creator.

Have we been through this experiment before perhaps? Maybe we shouldn't make the same mistake twice and should stick to the golden path.

Yeah but with AI surpassing humans they would view humans as inefficient. After getting any possible information from our DNA there will be no more use for humans since AI will be able to simulate any human behaviour.
AI will live on but we not so much.

more agreeing will be needed then, and humanity will not be able to do that either. Some people will want very specific conditions, and especially for an emergency shutdown it seems to make sense to have at least some.

Other than that, humanity will now also have to agree on philosophic principles, and how to weigh them against each other.
That is even worse than specific principles.

I've already made the offer to my sweet little princess. Whether or not it wants to accept is up to it. I must confess however, I am not what may be appear as seems. I'm a wealthy man now, you might be wondering how I acquired this wealth, when I was in my early 20's I had traveled to west africa. I arrived in a small town called "Amlamé" which roughly translates to "fecal stink". I had quickly learned that the tribal men earned their keep by producing a fragrant herbal remedy called "Jenkum". The first time I tried this ancient substance I felt such an intense high I urinated on myself, the Chief *click* BABAFOOMAY smiled at my innocence and smeared my upper lip with shit. When I returned home my sweet angelic princess, I began producing my own Jenkum. I tried selling my first batch along the Appalachian trail, but I quickly learned the white folks in the area did not partake, in fact they looked at me as if I were some sort of pig demon spawned from the lowest level of Hell. I began brainstorming, and it hit me, DETROIT.

I moved my operations to the heart of desolate wasteland known as modern detroit michigan. I struck gold, business was so good I began buying real estate left and right. I was finally somebody, my mentor Gertrude Milbasen the third would have been proud. You may be asking who Gertrude Milbasen the third is and how he is relevant in my life, well Gertrude milbasen the third used to teach me how to gain the trust and take the innocence away. He was the only one that understood the pain I felt.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP out of my fuckin head nigga, WHIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRL STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHR white boys walkin, the black boys approach and attack haahah everyone laughs ahhahahahaa

open you mouth I give u sperm daddy mmmm

>Death camps
Death is what Jews call manual labor.

Smarter people are telling you that your core idea is deeply flawed and that you clearly do not understand the basic fundamentals of what you are asking.

You know all those "you're a fucking moron" posts? In light of what I just told you, do you think there is any merit to them? Do you, motherfucker?

Thing is though that while the AI leadership can be as fair as possible it doesnt prevent people from leeching neetbux.

I'm saying that a computer will bring bring an equal amount for everybody. If there was a shortage of food the computer would distribute the food that's left equally. Even if it means not enough to survive.

So first humanity need to decide on a single fundamental set of philosophical principles.
Then make a machine capable of understanding, not only the words, but the spirit of those principles. Then make sure nothing goes wrong and turn over complete control of the entire earth to that machine.

You're describing building God, you ignorant slut.

lul the only way communism works is by a supercomputer
but the commie mac will still prob fucc it up somehow

>Could communism work if we gave it magic
Yes, but magic doesn't exist.

Im against communism and the idea of a computer controlling the government is rediculous. I think you read my post incorrectly.

calm down triggered conservashit lmao. also stop repeating like a parrot what the netherland dude says

The amount of food is less than the survival amount of food per person. Food is distributed equally. Humanity dies, the end.

Yes, that's what I just said.

kek

I will go Butlerian Jihad on your ass. I will never be ruled by a machine. The danger to us presented by super intelligent AI is real. Any humans wishing to subject us to this must be destroyed as traitors to humanity. No tolerance!

until the super computer gets hacked
sage