Comment by lucasyvas
2 days ago
Even if you were to argue AI systems would eventually have a place in government, which they almost certainly would have anyway long term, the sheer carelessness and lack of oversight of its implementation by a private citizen and group of individuals of proven, questionable ethics is enough reason in itself to have to burn the forest down.
Thinking of it objectively, almost nobody here can say they would stand for this at any company they worked at or ran. This is not an acceptable IT practice no matter which side of the fence you are currently sitting on - allowing an unvetted entity to modify your internal systems without audit or oversight is completely absurd.
> nobody here can say they would stand for this at any company they worked at or ran
This is what leaves me incredulous about so many people here defending this. I've been on this site daily for how many years I don't know but the one thing that has been consistent is the security idea that an outside entity gaining physical access to your server means that it is irreparably compromised, and that it should be treated as a liability and re-built from the ground up. But somehow it's fine if it's public data in a federal database?
Thank you for citing that because it is really the basis of my point. It is meant to be apolitical and to demonstrate that we are not OK with this otherwise so shouldn’t be now.
You are correct. And the nonchalant way in which the leaders who are supposed to oversee this thing are treating it is appalling. It will have consequences during mid-terms and beyond. It is clear that some people believe elected office to mean that they are then given authority and rights with which to increase in...being voyeurs rather than visionaries???
[flagged]
> They need to move fast in order to replace the old system.
Why?
Pretty sure they’re doing this blitzkrieg because what they’re doing is illegal and if they don’t get it done quickly, they’ll get stopped by the courts and probably arrested.
1 reply →
replace the old system with what exactly? and why does it have to be done quickly?
Upgrades should be sustainable, incremental, gradual, and reviewed. Especially for governance systems. If there's no existential risk requiring moving fast, then it's a bad idea to move fast on these things. Governments are not companies.
15 replies →
The Curtis Yarvin utopian fantasy is no government coupled with mythical "network states". An uncontrolled experiment that's cynically really to defang the government to lower all barriers for the rich making more money.
1 reply →
Before the courts can catch up, they lose power in the Senate or those affected can organise. There's also something to be said for disorienting your opponents. Plus it gets things done faster without dragging it out. It's wins all round.
GP: They absolutely will make something good out of it, but for their benefit not the average American.
2 replies →
It has to be done quickly because the administrative state is large and there is a lot to do. Institutions grow old with time and need drastic reform or replacement. I don’t know what they will replace everything with, ideally they have a bunch of smart people thinking about that. Look at how FDR used the Bureau of the Budget to similar effect.
5 replies →
Big Balls, man? Really? This dude is vetted to make this change? Come on.
The kid wouldn’t be an unpaid intern at most companies. He wouldn’t pass the HR screen.
Regardless of politics, they don’t have the credentials.
[flagged]
12 replies →