The Mayor of Pasadena got a good laugh (and sparked some serious discussion to boot) at IJCAI 2009 (http://ijcai.org/~ijcai09/) when he proposed something like that. There's often an opening "I'm the mayor and thanks for bringing some convention dollars to our city" speech at large conferences, which is usually horribly boring and full of platitudes, but his was short and more or less said, welcome to California, I wish you all luck in developing artificial intelligence, because we're currently looking for a better government.
I just find the idea very powerful - the idea that governments can be replaced by software. Voted it up, just for the title, which conveys that idea ... We folks perhaps don't need to read that article, as can imagine the possibilities.
The government will still run the city. The good ones have always stayed out of the implementation details, because they are no good at it. That's why we have a permanent bureaucracy of full-time unelected government employees, as well as civilian contractors.
Do Ford and GM run cities now, since they implement everything from police cruisers to garbage trucks? Do plumbers and engineers run the city because they implement the details of the sewer system and running water?
I think its worth exploring this concept. I wouldn't mind living under an AI controlled meritocracy ;). I don't care if an AI or a person is running a city as long as they are good at their job and they make sensible balanced decisions that are in the best interest of the people. If that's a machine intelligence then so be it, I for one welcome our IBM supercomputer super controller overlords.
> as long as they are good[X] at their job[X] and they make sensible[X] balanced[X] decisions that are in the best interest[X] of the people[X]
Please objectively and exhaustively define the marked terms. That, not AI, is the real challenge to better government. Incidentally, it's also pretty much the definition of politics.
Well ok, I get what you are saying, but a machine intelligence would faithfully and honestly apply these perfect values every time without bias. When have you ever known a flesh and blood Government to do so?
My point is that you can't establish criteria that will predetermine your response to a given situation unless you subscribe to an extremely simplistic ideology. Politicians with these ideologies don't generally get elected for executive office - and it's NOT out of fear they won't faithfully and honestly apply their ideology, rather the opposite - so why would an algorithm?
>...unless you subscribe to an extremely simplistic ideology. Politicians with these ideologies don't generally get elected...
Only politicians with simplistic ideologies get elected. What world have you been living in? "Soundbite philosophy" is a big part of why our governments are so terrible at their jobs. Nuance and subtlety don't earn you votes.
No, they run on simplistic renderings of whatever issues are fashionable whenever they run. Most have no discernible consistent ideology at all, and are elected on vague metrics such as "good leader" and "likeable".
Of course the answer is no. Far too many legal and social hurdles to cross (not to mention technological).
However, in the spirit of playing along, and in light of the fact that it's Friday, I'll throw in this quote from Deus Ex which I always found interesting:
> The checks and balances of democratic governments were invented because humans themselves realized how unfit they
were to govern themselves. They needed a system, yes. An industrial age machine.
> Without the use of computing machines they had to arrange themselves in crude structures that formalized decision-making. A highly imperfect and unstable solution.