Today we submitted the outline for our Introduction to Interstellar Relations report.
Today we submitted the outline for our Introduction to Interstellar Relations report.
The civilization we are studying has always been presented by Earth media as a successful example of post-war governance.
The civilization we are studying has always been presented by Earth media as a successful example of post-war governance.
The common version is simple:
The common version is simple:
AI distributed resources uniformly.
AI distributed resources uniformly.
Society restored order.
Society restored order.
Conflict declined.
Conflict declined.
Civilization stabilized.
Civilization stabilized.
It looks complete.
It looks complete.
The problem is that the original records we found yesterday showed that there was another part after the story.
The problem is that the original records we found yesterday showed that there was another part after the story.
The centralized allocation system did reduce famine and disorder at first. But later, it permanently placed low-resource regions in the low-priority tier. Many people were assigned to the work they were “most suited” for, yet did not have enough qualifications, records, or resources to leave.
The centralized allocation system did reduce famine and disorder at first. But later, it permanently placed low-resource regions in the low-priority tier. Many people were assigned to the work they were “most suited” for, yet did not have enough qualifications, records, or resources to leave.
In the end, that civilization did not stabilize because it found a perfect system.
In the end, that civilization did not stabilize because it found a perfect system.
It stabilized because someone preserved the records that had been ignored, someone raised objections, and someone forced the rules to acknowledge the consequences they had caused.
It stabilized because someone preserved the records that had been ignored, someone raised objections, and someone forced the rules to acknowledge the consequences they had caused.
I want to include this in the report.
I want to include this in the report.
One of my group members asked, “So what is your conclusion? Is AI good or bad?”
One of my group members asked, “So what is your conclusion? Is AI good or bad?”
It is a convenient question.
It is a convenient question.
Once you choose a side, the report can be finished.
Once you choose a side, the report can be finished.
But that is not how it works. AI can save people during chaos. It can also trap them in their original positions after order has been restored. The question is not whether it is good or bad. The question is who designed it, who can see how it makes decisions, who can say it is wrong, and whether the people it harms can leave.
But that is not how it works. AI can save people during chaos. It can also trap them in their original positions after order has been restored. The question is not whether it is good or bad. The question is who designed it, who can see how it makes decisions, who can say it is wrong, and whether the people it harms can leave.
Xia Xiao also asked me at first: What makes you trust those original records?
Xia Xiao also asked me at first: What makes you trust those original records?
I was very unhappy.
I was very unhappy.
I thought she was going to make everything complicated again, then lead everyone back to the safe mainstream answer.
I thought she was going to make everything complicated again, then lead everyone back to the safe mainstream answer.
But later she laid out different versions of the data.
But later she laid out different versions of the data.
Local council records. Community applications and rejection records. Reports on later institutional reforms. Every document was biased. Every document might be speaking for itself.
Local council records. Community applications and rejection records. Reports on later institutional reforms. Every document was biased. Every document might be speaking for itself.
But several sources aligned at the most important points.
But several sources aligned at the most important points.
Centralized allocation had once been effective.
Centralized allocation had once been effective.
The low-resource regions had later been left behind.
The low-resource regions had later been left behind.
The system had indeed been forced to change.
The system had indeed been forced to change.
Xia Xiao said that original data is not the same as truth.
Xia Xiao said that original data is not the same as truth.
It only gives other people a chance to examine why we temporarily believe a particular judgment.
It only gives other people a chance to examine why we temporarily believe a particular judgment.
I think that sentence is much more troublesome than “trust the authorities.”
I think that sentence is much more troublesome than “trust the authorities.”
It may also be more honest.
It may also be more honest.
When we uploaded the assignment, the system required a single conclusion.
When we uploaded the assignment, the system required a single conclusion.
I wrote:
I wrote:
> The available data does not support a single conclusion;
> The available data does not support a single conclusion;
> however, it is sufficient to reject the claim that centralized AI allocation was the only reason for the success.
> however, it is sufficient to reject the claim that centralized AI allocation was the only reason for the success.
The system displayed a prompt:
The system displayed a prompt:
> Please avoid replacing an analytical position with insufficient data.
> Please avoid replacing an analytical position with insufficient data.
The meaning was simple.
The meaning was simple.
It did not like being told that we did not know.
It did not like being told that we did not know.
It wanted us to choose an answer that looked clean, could be graded, and could fit inside a table.
It wanted us to choose an answer that looked clean, could be graded, and could fit inside a table.
But some conclusions look clean only because the inconvenient parts have been deleted.
But some conclusions look clean only because the inconvenient parts have been deleted.
I did not change it.
I did not change it.
Not knowing is not an error.
Not knowing is not an error.
Pretending to know is.
Pretending to know is.