3 ms·
I know there's a lot of nuances in this, but I really with the US would head towards computer driven policies (with judiciary oversight). Think of it as Census
by syntaxing 6y ago
I know there's a lot of nuances in this, but I really with the US would head towards computer driven policies (with judiciary oversight). Think of it as Census v2.0. There's so many things that should not have human involvement like district lines (gerrymandering).
- buzzerbetrayed 6y agoI'm not saying I disagree with you, but how would this work? At some point there has to be human decision when making the computer program that runs the policy. What's to keep the creators of the program from programming in their bias? Wouldn't the humans still teach the computer how to draw the district lines in a way that benefits their political party? If politicians wanted things to be fair they could get rid of gerrymandering right now without the need for a computer program. So why would they be ok with a computer that got rid of gerrymandering for them?
- syntaxing 6y agoTotally agreed, that's why some sort of judiciary oversight is so important. But the important thing is that the cost function you optimize has to be "constitutionally" correct. Similar to the Census, more population gives your more House or Representative seats, etc. I would expect you can create something similar for other policies. E: And I also agree how today's problem should be able to be solved if policy makers wanted to. But if we went towards a data driven approach like the Census, these crooked policies should never been able to been in place to begin with.