Good luck convincing those who hate the “managerial elite” — or technocrats — running the…
William O. Pate II
11

That’s certainly one of many points of contention. I think it might be something that would appeal to those who hate human administrators. The dislike for bureaucrats is based on the problem that causes me to look at the alternative. People are emotional animals committed, often, to personal power games if not blatant aggrandizement. Administrative rules become mind bogglingly complex because of that both to prevent that activity and to achieve it at the next level up. So we get screwed over both coming and going. AI can both implement administrative rules unemotionally (shorthand for eliminating all the human game playing) and also, already, to rewrite them for machine efficiency to achieve the desired result. And there are large issue with monitoring and checking both process and result in AI systems that are too ‘machine’ and complex to be understood by people. That will need to answered anyway.

The thing that amazes me is that our most efficient administrations are all governmental. When they work they are supportive and not corrupted by the need to make a profit and lock a customer (market). Social Security and Medicare work very well. Veterans Administration does not probably due to political infighting but I’m not sure. Private business, unless it is small enough to be personal or big enough to be heavily automated, does not work for your interest. Private medical insurance (excluding non-profits) are far worse than any other type. Hence, public automation, limiting human intervention and political games, is the best answer. It is a fundamental change that will happen no matter what. The question is whether it will be manger we’ll or disastrously.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.