3 ms·
Clearly we aren't running in circles! I agree that those coinflip cases exist, but if cases are so close a coinflips (or elections) can decide them then why do
by sqeaky 10y ago
Clearly we aren't running in circles!
I agree that those coinflip cases exist, but if cases are so close a coinflips (or elections) can decide them then why do sums like $500 million depend on them as in the article?
A system which promotes charisma instead of factual accuracy doesn/t just result in muddy grey areas where things were already close. Things like climate change, which pretty much all experts agree on, are grey areas to many people. Charisma is how we get trump instead of any other politician.
Every year that passes I am less in favor of the idea of democracy than I was the year before. The aggregate of a great many untrained people is generally stupid. Its just better than any system reliant on experts we have devised so far. This seems to be caused by the corruption of our method of choosing experts. Once we a get a reliable system that empowers experts I will be behind wholeheartedly.
- seanp2k2 10y agoThe problem in your last sentence is the trick, one which humanity has yet to solve in any sort of sustainable way. Maybe strong AI can finally save us from ourselves.
- sqeaky 10y agoEven that that pushes the trust problem one step further. Presuming making a Benevolent and Obedient AI leader is possible, how do we trust the people making it? If western industry creates the super AI and somehow Google, MS, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and western society in general trust it why should China and Baidu?