Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by rnk on Thursday March 16, 2023 @09:44PM
(#35191767)
Our almost 80-year-old leaders in the house & in the Senate & in the presidency are not well equipped to make good choices in this area. I'm not convinced professional computer scientists are really well equipped but at least we have potential to understand the scenario. But instead it's going to be people that think global warming doesn't exist because they brought a snowball into the Senate that make choices.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by SoftTalker on Friday March 17, 2023 @12:04AM
(#35192955)
Strongly agree, we need mandatory retirement at 65 for elected office.
Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by moshegramovsky on Friday March 17, 2023 @12:17AM
(#35193044)
What are the benefits of this?
Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by lazyasciiart on Friday March 17, 2023 @01:28AM
(#35193505)
De facto term limits is a big benefit in itself, in my opinion. But also, we know that we haven’t solved the problems of aging, and old people as a class suffer from distinct cognitive problems. If it’s reasonable to ban people under 35, or under 21, from the presidency, it’s reasonable to ban people over 65 as well.
Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by moshegramovsky on Friday March 17, 2023 @02:10AM
(#35193764)
Thank you :)
ageist much?
I have occasionally been toying with the idea that the number of votes you have would be dependent on your expected lifetime left. The longer hou have to live with your electee's decisions the more say you should have.
Re:OK, it’s time to freak out about AI
by lazyasciiart on Friday March 17, 2023 @04:39AM
(#35194653)
A lot of problems with calculating that expected lifetime though: which variables can you include out of race, income, gender, job, recent purchase of a motorcycle, being diagnosed with cancer, etc?