[dleeftink]

That would be a welcome future, indeed. And hopefully, not just upheld in some regions of the world, but everywhere where AR-backed AGI gets off the ground. And this governing structure would need to work for some decades at least. Which would be quite a feat.

That still leaves my first question regarding observer effects and how people would respond to such a technology on an individual level. It would have the capacity to reshape behaviour towards preferential and/or optimal interactions, would it not? Seeing how we do not want reinforce models with 'erroneous' interactions?

[AndrewKemendo]

TBH I don't know, and I think there's a real chance that there's going to be actual changes in how people behave as a result - which, if it's integrated like many other social changes will become another layer in the fabric of society, displacing another layer. For better or worse I think it's just an exposure thing.

You are persistently surveilled in London and Shanghai and New York City - yet people act just as unhinged in ways they did before cameras were installed.

I'm not sure what other data acquisition/technology arc is possible though, and open to ideas.

[JohnFen]

> You are persistently surveilled in London and Shanghai and New York City - yet people act just as unhinged in ways they did before cameras were installed.

Unhinged people do, but ordinary people? I'd be willing to bet that normal people who are in areas where they are aware they're on camera don't behave as their normal selves. It's hard to see how it could be otherwise.