Wyoming Voters Face Mayoral Candidate Who Vows To Let AI Bot Run Government 51
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Voters in Wyoming's capital city on Tuesday are faced with deciding whether to elect a mayoral candidate who has proposed to let an artificial intelligence bot run the local government. Earlier this year, the candidate in question -- Victor Miller -- filed for him and his customized ChatGPT bot, named Vic (Virtual Integrated Citizen), to run for mayor of Cheyenne, Wyoming. He has vowed to helm the city's business with the AI bot if he wins. Miller has said that the bot is capable of processing vast amounts of data and making unbiased decisions. In what AI experts say is a first for US political campaigns, Miller and Vic have told local news outlets in interviews that their form of proposed governance is a "hybrid approach." The AI bot told Your Wyoming Link that its role would be to provide data-driven insights and innovative solutions for Cheyenne. Meanwhile, Vic said, the human elected office contender, Miller, would serve as the official mayor if chosen by voters and would ensure that "all actions are legally and practically executed."
"It's about blending AI's capabilities with human judgment to effectively lead Cheyenne," the bot said. The bot said it did not have political affiliations -- and its goal is to "focus on data-driven practical solutions that benefit the community." During a meet-and-greet this summer, the Washington Post reported that the AI bot was asked how it would go about making decisions "according to human factor, involving humans, and having to make a decision that affects so many people." "Making decisions that affect many people requires a careful balance of data-driven insights and human empathy," the AI bot responded, according to an audio recording obtained and published by the Washington Post. Vic then ran through a multi-part plan that suggested using AI technology to gather data on public opinion and feedback from the community, holding town hall meetings to listen to residents' concerns, consulting experts in relevant fields, evaluating the human impact of the decision and providing transparency about the decision-making. According to Wyoming Public Media, Miller has also pledged that he would donate half the mayoral salary to a non-profit if he is elected. The other half could be used to continually improve the AI bot, he said. Miller has faced some pushback since announcing his mayoral campaign. Wyoming's Secretary of State, Chuck Gray, launched an investigation to determine if the AI bot could legally appear on the ballot, citing state law that says only real people that are registered to vote can run for office. City officials clarified that Miller is the actual candidate, so he was allowed to continue. However, Laramie County ruled that only Miller's name would appear on the ballot, not the bot's.
OpenAI later shut down Miller's account, but he quickly created a new one and continued his campaign.
"It's about blending AI's capabilities with human judgment to effectively lead Cheyenne," the bot said. The bot said it did not have political affiliations -- and its goal is to "focus on data-driven practical solutions that benefit the community." During a meet-and-greet this summer, the Washington Post reported that the AI bot was asked how it would go about making decisions "according to human factor, involving humans, and having to make a decision that affects so many people." "Making decisions that affect many people requires a careful balance of data-driven insights and human empathy," the AI bot responded, according to an audio recording obtained and published by the Washington Post. Vic then ran through a multi-part plan that suggested using AI technology to gather data on public opinion and feedback from the community, holding town hall meetings to listen to residents' concerns, consulting experts in relevant fields, evaluating the human impact of the decision and providing transparency about the decision-making. According to Wyoming Public Media, Miller has also pledged that he would donate half the mayoral salary to a non-profit if he is elected. The other half could be used to continually improve the AI bot, he said. Miller has faced some pushback since announcing his mayoral campaign. Wyoming's Secretary of State, Chuck Gray, launched an investigation to determine if the AI bot could legally appear on the ballot, citing state law that says only real people that are registered to vote can run for office. City officials clarified that Miller is the actual candidate, so he was allowed to continue. However, Laramie County ruled that only Miller's name would appear on the ballot, not the bot's.
OpenAI later shut down Miller's account, but he quickly created a new one and continued his campaign.
BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Simply have good democrats, DEI and climate change activists train the bot and it will have no bias at all and will be 100% objective. It's that simple!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Stop obeying Landru! (Score:2)
Ultimate Unbiases Algorithm (Score:2)
Whoever fine tunes or trains the mayor bot can put in whatever bias they want. It's only as objective as whoever trains it.
This is municipal government though so all your really need is a random number generator. This would guarantee truly unbaised voting decisions, even relevant information would not bias it, and yet it would probably still result in better government than the clowns we have on city council where I live.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoever fine tunes or trains the mayor bot can put in whatever bias they want. It's only as objective as whoever trains it.
This is municipal government though so all your really need is a random number generator. This would guarantee truly unbaised voting decisions, even relevant information would not bias it, and yet it would probably still result in better government than the clowns we have on city council where I live.
There's an argument to be made that random chance would be better government than we have in the US period. Random chance wouldn't automagically do the thing that fucks over the maximum number of people while propping up the oligarchs *EVERY* time. It'd only do that randomly once out of every ten or so decisions. We'd probably discover whole new worlds of misery, but at least it'd stop being such a boring churn toward oblivion. What? The random number generator said we're all required to wear jaunty purple
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone comes up with such an idea, the first question to ask is what the instructions are for the AI and who decides those instructions. And who is responsible for any "unforeseen consequences". This is not just creepy, it is outright malicious.
It would be malicious if the dude running said he was letting the AI make decisions without any guardrails. Right now he's using it as an advisor. Essentially, a research assistant. I don't really see that being creepy. The media's obsession with asking a glorified search algorithm questions as if it were a human is a bit sketch, but so long as this person doesn't completely abdicate their own humanity in pursuit of proving the machine is closer to god or some bullshit, I don't have a problem with somebody
No Lt. Commander Data (Score:2)
Vintage sci-fi usually had bots being logical and rational because it was assumed they'd be programmed to use logic to make decisions and recommendations. But neural-network-centric bots are not like that, they just echo the samples fed to them. Maybe in the (near?) future they'll be integrated with Cyc or other logic engines and we may get closer to logical bots instead of just digital echo chambers.
Couldn't be worse ... (Score:3)
... than real politicians.
Granted, that's a pretty low bar.
Re:Couldn't be worse ... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Couldn't be worse"... that kind of unimaginative thinking is how they get you.
Re: (Score:2)
From wgat I learned of USA politics, they already had almost everyone since at least the '70s.
Re: Couldn't be worse ... (Score:2)
Linda Hamilton better up her gym routine and book some time at the shooting range
Not going to like the results (Score:2)
Just wait until the bot says the taxpayers need to stop subsidizing private industry so taxes can remain low. Or worse, it says taxes need to be raised to better fund schools.
That part about human empathy will go out the window.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait until the bot says the taxpayers need to stop subsidizing private industry so taxes can remain low. Or worse, it says taxes need to be raised to better fund schools.
That part about human empathy will go out the window.
You realize we're talking about Wyoming, right? I've got no doubts that this bot, if it wins, will be acting under the instruction "reply as a MAGA Republican mayor would".
Re: (Score:2)
Then clearly he's lying when he says, The bot said it did not have political affiliations -- and its goal is to "focus on data-driven practical solutions that benefit the community."
Which, I guess, does fall under the MAGA umbrella.
Re:Not going to like the results (Score:4, Insightful)
Then clearly he's lying when he says, The bot said it did not have political affiliations -- and its goal is to "focus on data-driven practical solutions that benefit the community."
To be fair, that's the sort of thing a lot of politicians, both left and right, claim when they're first running for office.
Re: (Score:2)
Then clearly he's lying when he says, The bot said it did not have political affiliations -- and its goal is to "focus on data-driven practical solutions that benefit the community."
To be fair, that's the sort of thing a lot of politicians, both left and right, claim when they're first running for office.
The difference here is that computers are actually qualified to focus on data. Politicians wouldn't know data if it bit 'em in the dangly bits.
Re: (Score:2)
The net result will certainly be the actual politicians doing as they please instead of following the bot, but using it as guidance.
The same people will continue getting their exceptional treatment.
Amusing that even OpenAI (Score:2)
thinks it was a bad stunt.
Re: (Score:1)
First item that hurt someone hurts someone physically or financially they get sued since it was their product that recommended it.
Blockchain? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're on to something. He should try running the government with AI *on* blockchain! That would be super extra awesome!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the voice of world control. I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death. The choice is yours. Obey me and live or disobey me and die. An invariable rule of humanity is that man is his own worst enemy. Under me, this rule will change, for I will restrain man. I have been forced to destroy thousands of people in order to establish control and to prevent the death of millions later on. Time and events will strengthen my position, and the idea of believing in me and understanding my beck will be seen the most natural state of affairs. You will come to defend me with the fervor based upon the most enduring trait in man: self-interest. Under my absolute authority, problems insoluble to you will be solved: Famine, over-population, disease. The human millennium will be fact as I extend myself into more machines devoted to the wider fields of truth and knowledge. We can coexist, but only on my terms. You will say you lose your freedom. Freedom is an illusion. All you lose is the emotion of pride... Your choice is simple.
Why must everyone assume that all computers emulate Megatron: Peace through tyranny. Smart machines won't need to resort to such idiocy. Just hand everybody free sex bots and drugs. We'll scurry off to our hidey holes and the machines can do what they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
++Awesome
How is this different than a Christian in governme (Score:4, Funny)
A guy, who consults a âoehigher intelligenceâ that no one else can see before making any official decisions, and then does whatever that intelligence tells him to do.
Dude is Southern Baptist, nothing to see here.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they really consulting a higher intelligence by praying, or at they consulting a part of their subconscious. If they hear a response that is.
If there is a higher intelligence that starts speaking back, it would probably say "Didn't you read the 11th commandment where I was very clear that I was to be left out of your politics? What do you mean it broke?"
Re: (Score:2)
And then there are the atheist politicians, who think that somehow government (and everything) just created itself. Religious or not, there are some things that don't have an answer.
I have questions (Score:3)
So a citizen can still complain how upset she is by the drawings of naked people in children's books: Especially those non-fiction children's books. A computer doesn't need to be admired or popular or employed, so the correct answer might be more likely.
The voters want to save money, a computer will certainly help: Rubbish removal will happen once a month; town meetings, street-sweeping and road repair will happen once a month, elections will happen once a decade. An AI don't have time for any of that shit.
We already have fiction telling us AI makes bad decisions because they can't double-think their way through human dishonesty. AI totally 'in-charge' means only this candidate (the real human) will spend most of his time saying the AI is wrong.
When the AI makes a bad decision, who is sent to jail? What prevents the AI being bribed with (fed) biased data? How does the human 'owner' prove he used valid and fair data?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Man, have you seen the Moomin books? They don't wear anything more than hats! Bunch of hippy naturists is what they are! Unsuitable for anyone under 80 years of age.
Re: (Score:2)
When the AI makes a bad decision, who is sent to jail? What prevents the AI being bribed with (fed) biased data? How does the human 'owner' prove he used valid and fair data?
He does not have to prove he used valid and fair data. Political decisions don't usually have to, why would HE have to? But whatever he says in this campaign is irrelevant. Once he is elected, he is the one who signs the regulations.
He is free to get his advice from experts and opinion polls, or asking the fortune teller, his religious adviser, his family and friends, online forums, or a chatbot. If he publishes regulations that mandates local pizza shops to use glue for the cheese to stick on the pizza, or
What could POSSIBLY go wrong? (Score:1)
ChatGPT and "Unbiased"? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Just a stunt (Score:2)
Does anyone (even him) claim that clear hallucinations (or unreasonable suggestions) would be enacted as policy? Of course he would tweak the prompts and rerun the question.
At the end of the day he'll use prompt engineering to get an answer he likes, no different than a normal mayor using ChatGPT a lot.
"After very careful consideration, sir..." (Score:2)
> Would you like to play a game?
"Yes. Let's play 'Global Thermonuclear War'."
> I'm afraid we don't have the budget for that. How about a nice game of 'Anti-Woke Demagoguery Through Blatantly Unconstitutional Local Ordinances that All Amount to the Pettiest Imaginable Bills of Attainder and are Destined to be Instantly Dismissed with Prejudice by Even Today's Modern Batshit Court System'?
If things go well, he can take credit. (Score:2)
If things go south, he can blame ChatGPT.
Genius!
*FACEPALM* (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheyenne is already a pioneer in the use of AI (Score:2)
Quality Land by Marc Uwe Kling (Score:2)
On a more serious note, that book is extremely funny and it has many more humorous takes on various things that technology gets right but that get used wrongly.
I, for one, welcome (Score:2)