Should the World Be Run by a Giant Computer?
Should the world we live in be run by a giant computer? Personally, I’d have to say no. But that’s just me. Not everybody agrees. For instance, right here on hubpages, there’s a hub that features a video dedicated to the proposition that all our economic problems would be solved if we gave up our current form of government and just let a computer decide how to allocate resources. There’s even a catchy slogan: “Every problem is a technical problem.”
- My First Hub
I’m willing to pay for dubbing of these two movies and one below into any local language which has not already been done yet! Using dubbing technique involving the re-recording of dialogue of the original…
“Every problem is a technical problem.”
Do you think that’s true? Is every problem a technical problem that has a technical solution?
I don’t think so. In fact, the biggest problems in life, while they all have a technical dimension, really hinge on preference. War and Peace? Usually about who gets to live in the same spot of land and control its resources. Can a giant computer decide that? How? By flipping a coin? How much should I spend on painting my house? Can a giant computer determine that? How about what color I should paint it?
This is not a problem a computer can solve, without heavy reliance on a random number generator. Or a program that presets the preference according to the values of the programmer. Heads I win. Tails you lose.
All those things that most of us wouldn’t let a giant computer decide are also the things that should not be a matter open for the public to vote on. Why? Because they are not a technical problem with a single technical solution. They are a matter of personal preference. There is no right answer. There is only the answer that seems right to each of the participants.
Who should own a piece of land? How is that decided? How much do you want it? How much does someone else? Whether the field of battle is a real war or an economic bid, there is no right answer. There is only how much each side is willing to sacrifice in order to gain control.
What color should I paint my house? Should a giant computer decide that? No. Should everyone on the planet be given a vote on what color my house should be? No. It should be up to me alone.
If I hire my neighbor to paint my house the color I want, how much should I pay him? Should a giant computer decide? No. Should everybody on the planet get a vote, including my neighbor and me? No. I get to decide how much I am willing to pay. My neighbor gets to decide if it’s enough for him. If it’s not enough for him, he won’t paint the house.
When I lend money to a neighbor, who should decide what interest I can charge? A giant computer? No. Everybody on the planet, including my neighbor and me? No. I should get to decide what interest I want. My neighbor should decide if he’s willing to pay that kind of interest. And nobody else gets a vote!
A Simulated Conversation with a Zeitgeist Supporter
Who should decide?
Do you think the world should be run by a giant computer?
Please answer this poll in the comments section.
While the number of people who currently believe that the world should be run by a giant computer is fairly small, the number of people who believe that every problem is a technical problem is much higher. Most discussions of issues like communitarianism versus individualism, or the price of oil, or who should wear a seatbelt, or which breed of dogs people should be allowed to own, or how fast anyone should drive a car down a lonely stretch of road at night, revolve around the notion that there is a “right” answer, if only we could all agree. But the fact is, these are NOT technical problems with technical solutions. It’s a matter of preference!
(c) 2009 Aya Katz
