Could technology replace human government leaders?

Who knows, anything is possible, but is it probable?

Just all the more reason this little earth mama is staying in the woods forever, regardless.

I already think “technology” is teetering on the brink of doing more harm than good.

I like to quote Sam Clemens famous words that ” technology was once a fine thing but it has gone on far too long.” lol

Hell, that was written a 100 years ago!

Going back to the starting point, someone has to program computers and someone has to change its tapes.

Computers are not completely self-reliable and I pray it never gets that way.

Would there be some sort of algorithm that would calculate an equalization factor based on income, familial status, zip code and overall health??

Oops, disclaimer..the quote reads ‘PROGRESS was once a fine thing, but it has gone on far too long.”

If I were the programmer of the initiating system, I’d set all things equal.

Now, if popular vote one day decided that healthy rich people’s vote counted twice as much as unhealthy poor people… then so be it. Don’t like the outcome, then present the counter argument to the cloud and raise enough awareness that it qualifies for public vote again.
________

I see this system as combined with a forum of sorts. And the more you educate yourself on any issue, perhaps your vote would count for more than one who was uneducated about an issue.

Let’s say that a law involving clean air is on the ballot. A forum would allow public debate and discussion before the vote took place. Industry insiders would have a special arena to present their arguments in detail. Forum users would be filled with debate on that.

So a series of questionnaire’s are presented for education purposes. Some would chose not to take them… So their vote counts as 1. But someone who has completed questionnaire #1 gets a vote that counts for 2. The more questionnaires you pass, the more your vote would count for. Those among us who chose to educate themselves on the issues would weigh heavier vote.

The questionnaires would be totally unbiased. Here’s how… Use the Google search engine to pull quoted statements from industry insiders. Develop the questions based upon the facts of their presentations… right or wrong… what’s important is that the potential voter has educated themselves as to what that professional said.

A person who passes 5 questionnaires has definitely educated themselves upon the issues at hand. I think their vote should weigh much heavier than one who hasn’t put a thought to it. This system of questionnaire education would also have the unwitting effect of cutting the bite out of biased opinions based upon private agenda. The process of educating takes its toll upon dogmatic perceptions.

The same people would just control the program.

@Blackberry haha ZING! ;-)

There are 12 year old kids who could punch up a script in an afternoon that would be more dencent and efficient than your average politician, I’m all for experimenting with this.

The benefits of running a government totally with computers are almost endless. Tired of living on a dark street? text “lamp” plus your postcode to the government number, or go on an online poll. Perhaps you feel your country is in need of some help? well just use paypal to donate $10 extra in tax.

It could have benefits @poisonedantidote. And you’re right… it’s a pretty simple set of programming.

@Blackberry “The same people would just control the program.”

I don’t think so. An open source system would be under too much scrutiny by peers. Everyone has access to the data results… so catching fraud is a matter of minutes, rather than years.

I’d even go as far as to denote difference between local community, city, state, region, and national law. Nothing could be national law until it passed through all the others. But if a local township wanted to allow gay marriage, no problem… let’em do it. It could act as a closed micro system that data would be gathered upon. Other communities could freely access the data results… less or more crime, drop-outs, teen pregnancy, income levels, homelessness… you know, real data… and thoughtfully consider that data from other communities as counting for more informed voting on their own policies.

The idea of direct democracy has some appeal but there are lots of possible issues, even assuming our opinions will be propagated and our votes will be tallied without tampering.
[ it’s not even clear our votes are tallied without tampering now ]

It’s difficult to protect minority rights in such a scenario.
The speed with which a really stupid idea can propagate is amazing.
Intelligence don’t get no respect.
A lot of people don’t care, or don’t care enough, about enough issues, to participate in each and every vote that could come up.

So you think we may not be smart enough to take care of ourselves? Maybe we need to elect overlords?

My comments two posts above laid out a structure which allows those who educate themselves on the issues to have a weightier vote than someone who hasn’t.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies First I’d like to give you the answer that came to mind when I had read your question, and before I read the details of your suggestions below it. Leader? What leaders? I don’t need all my digits to count the elected government officials I consider leaders. There are some, precious few. Most politicians could be replaced by a stationary rock for results that are more productive for society at large and less harmless (not a flying recklessly aimed rock the ways some politicians feel compelled to act, one of those nice ones that is content being a stone and think for the long term the way only a stone can).

I see where my words could have suggested that we can’t take care of ourselves. I think in aggregate we can take care of ourselves and I agree education is important for doing that well. But I don’t think we can take care of ourselves by going to a completely flat democracy where everyone is essentially in the same role.

While we have equal rights and responsibilities, in day-to-day government we need people in ‘manager’ positions to coordinate and direct operations to get the job done. In the great organism of society we can’t all be blood cells or cells in the brain, Some of us are muscle.
If we all try to be dorsal root ganglia, causing activities in response to perceived inputs, we’ll probably get the societal equivalent of an epileptic fit.