I think this article taps into a genuine problem identified in two important essays - AI 2027 and Europe 2031 - but falls far short of a solution. The problem is this: "A small number of people make decisions for everyone else, without their input. Neither essay asks what ordinary people actually want from this technology or proposes a way of finding out." Quite so. Indeed, I dare say most people wouldn't see much difference between a society ruled by AI and a society ruled by wealthy out-of-touch elites. But asking AI companies themselves to "help bring democratically written global and local constitutions on AI into being, because right now no government is moving fast enough, or has the will or standing, to do it alone." The reason is that AI is only one of many issues that would benefit from the people having a genuine say in the outcome. The real question here is: could AI help society become more democratic? But I don't really see people addressing this.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
