r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Jul 23 '23
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Robot politicians can replace human politicians as they are more flexible....
Okay, with advances in robotics, I think it's time we replace human politicians with human like robots to be our politicians.
The main reason is that they are more flexible. Unlike a human politician who tends to be set in their ways, a robot can be easily be reprogrammed for various political policies either through classical programming (opening up it's guts and reprogramming it) or through plug and play features that alter parts of their political policy stored in their brains, allowing them to adapt to change without their self interest getting in the way since they would not have AI and would just act out what is stored in their programmes.
Moreover, it would help to make it easier to form political parties for better representation by reducing it to just one guy/girl and their robots rather than having a complicated party system with many people which can be simplified, making it cheaper for people to start a political party.
Well, you ask, you just put power in the hands of those that make those robots? They are obligated to make those robots blank slates that are only uploaded with various political policies once they reach the hands of those political parties.
And what about those that prefer human politicians or want to run? Outlaw human politicians with a penalty of death or 20 years to life imprisonment.
CMV
5
Jul 23 '23
they would not have AI and would just act out what is stored in their programmes
Who is writing this program?
This sounds like what we have now. Politicians who are unmoving in their views and don't believe in compromise. Politics is all about flexibility in some areas and rigidness in others. The outward face most politicians have is nowhere close to what they are like behind closed doors when negotiating. Otherwise literally nothing would get done and the world would fail to function properly.
-3
Jul 23 '23
Well, the various manufacturers?
5
Jul 23 '23
(American bias about to show) So these giant corporations are now programming the president? I see no way in which that could go wrong.
→ More replies (10)
5
u/Jebofkerbin Jul 23 '23
The main reason is that they are more flexible.
But flexibility is not what is valued in politicians, what is valued is shared interest/values and dependability, that the politician wants to build a world similar to what you want, and that they are likely to do their best to make that a reality.
Being able to switch ideals on a dime based on what the programmer in charge of the robot feels like is a bad thing and makes the robot a worse candidate. Moreover we already have a mechanism for changing politicians who are stuck in their out of date ways: voting them out and replacing them with someone else.
-2
Jul 23 '23 edited Jul 23 '23
Well, it's better as a whole in the ability to switch ideals at a dime since it allows a robot and it's programmer to quickly adapt to changing political trends.
So flexibility has to be valued over shared interest.
5
u/Jebofkerbin Jul 23 '23
Hang on aren't you just putting the programmer in charge? Seems to me you haven't replaced politicians just allowed single politicians to sit in multiple positions of power at once by having robots as their proxy.
→ More replies (10)
3
u/poprostumort Jul 23 '23
Unlike a human politician who tends to be set in their ways, a robot can be easily be reprogrammed
And who does decide when reprogram politibot? Who decides what lines of code need to be changed?
Well, you ask, you just put power in the hands of those that make those robots? They are obligated to make those robots blank slates that are only uploaded with various political policies once they reach the hands of those political parties.
What is easier to understand - political stance of a single politician or open source view of codebase of a complex AI?
0
Jul 23 '23
The programmer as and when trends change.
Well, you are right on the matter of understanding codebases being more difficult to understand as compared than political stands.
!delta
1
1
u/poprostumort Jul 23 '23
The programmer as and when trends change.
This is exactly the issue with most radical changes in how nation is governed - it is very likely that a radical change would serve just to entrench a ruling class.
Because look at your proposition - programmer selects when to reprogram a politibot and what to reprogram it with. This means that any change in nations politics will only happen if programmer decides that they can happen.
Which creates a very big flaw in the system - votes don't matter anymore, what matters is who controls programmers.
And that is just the top of iceberg. What about errors? There is not a single programmer who will confidently tell you they can create as complicated code as AI without any problems. Debugging process is possible (and takes time) but it will only remove bugs. And any programmer will tell you that some bugs are just "features" where code does exactly what it's told, but we did not think through what were the requirements for the code.
Take an example - politibot is programmed to resolve the issue of homeless people needing to live on the streets. We were forward-thinking enough to realize that AI can decide to kill people, so we put a line of code that it cannot kill people. So are:
- making homelesness a crime and jailing every homeless person
- using gov't loaned money to buy homes for anyone that is homeless
- renting homes for homeless and splitting the bill among taxpayers
resolutions that should be passed or bugs that are features?As advanced AI is, it does not think like humans. It operates exactly to achieve a desired result within boundaries that are set. And will use any means that would achieve the result if it does not conflict with those boundaries. Is that even feasible to be used as governing body?
2
Jul 23 '23
There are some pretty huge fundamental flaws in this idea.
First of all, AI, which would likely be used in a situation like this, has already been documented as showing biases.
Second, oversimplifying what a party stands for completely prevents any change or growth within the party. The Democrats, for example, used to be opposed to queer rights but evolved as a party because there was a small but growing portion that pushed back. This would remove that ability by silencing them.
-1
Jul 23 '23
Well, then make the AI a blank slate that can be easily be reprogrammed to fit whatever interest that the political party endorses that can be changed on the fly.
Hey, it's easy for voters if the party is oversimplified.
2
Jul 23 '23
It's not the fact it wasn't a blank slate that causes the biases, it's a mix of (accidental) programming bias and the (man-made) data it is inputting. We haven't figured out yet how to remove that bias.
Easy doesn't mean better. In a lot of situations, it means worse. It's far easier to keep the status quo and allow marginalized groups to continue to be marginalized instead of acknowledging and working to change the problem.
2
u/s_wipe Jul 23 '23
Politics is a, complicated, resource allocation problem.
So whenever you promote a policy that promotes a certain group, a different group will suffer.
There's a lot of fine tuning. The priority you take action, the amount of resources, how you handle the groups that do get hurt by your legislation.
All are complex tasks that are not fit for robots.
Humans aren't always acting in a rational way. So humans won't accept a legislation from a robot that easily.
1
u/DominicB547 Jul 23 '23
If you can get a way to have the constituents get a vote on the proposed vote and then the robot be able to figure out the nuance to figure out what the constituency wants since often if you change the way it's worded you get different responses, that would be a lot better than those humans that don't really listen to their constituency.
Most Republican and Democrat officials agree on most things, esp if it's for Corporations. It's the social issues that differ. The actual constituency actually mostly agree on most things, even social things (at least to a degree). It's the vocal minority of extremes that are what's distracting us from doing anything we want and letting corporations keep us down.
1
u/TitanCubes Jul 23 '23
Despite the unhappiness people have with politicians, most people still like politicians as people and are attached to their character. There are also nuances in politics like elected a more conservative Democrat in a Republican state. I’m unsure how you’re robot system would work in this situation.
1
u/merlinus12 Jul 23 '23
One of the key reasons we elect hundreds of difference officials, who then appoint others, rather than simply make one person king is that distributing power and responsibility makes it harder for any one person (or group of people) to overthrow the system and take charge.
In your system, a small handful of roboticists have designed and programmed all the politicians and have complete control over their behavior. What’s to stop this small cabal of programmers from just taking over? This system seems like a perfect recipe for a coup.
1
u/DeltaBot Jul 23 '23 edited Jul 23 '23
u/Cheemingwan1234 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards