In defense of a computerized government

I am a scientist,but to be a technocrat would put me out of business as a man. Yet I was eighteen months ago, intent on creating a scientific way of governing. And here today, proud of the tools we have made. Why? Because I believe that cybernetics can do the job better than bureaucracy - and more humanely too.

Stafford Beer, 1926 - 2002

http://ada.evergreen.edu/~arunc/texts/cybernetics/beer/book.pdf

Hmm ... beer

www.arthurmag.com/2010/03/26/synco/

>>1
Technocracy implies communism. Jews wont allow that, because it will break their cronyism.

>>4
Jews did communism, FYI.

>>5
It was their error. And then they gave power to Stalin, who was a vivid antisemite and had personal hatred for jews - Stalin's father was a jewish capitalist, who refused to recognize Stalin as a son and forced his armenian mother to marry a drunkard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin_Purges

>>4,5,6
GET OUT, go spam about jews somewhere else, PLEASE.

Now, on topic, Stafford Beer seemed like a good old chap. A little extremist on his views, but, i guess you have to go to the extreme to have extreme changes.

I like the idea of changing politicians by programs (as long as they are open source), and, in fact, if you think about it, programs are the most effective laws. They are always applied, and can't be corrupted (inb4 hax my anus). In sum, a law written in a computer is much more effective that one written by lawywers on congress.

>>6
Anyway, Communism has failed because after Stalin they abandoned the policy of purges and allowed zionists into party, instead of workers, engineers and scientists.

>>7
They are always applied, and can't be corrupted
why not? how do you know, CPU doesn't have a backdoor or somebody with access to CPU or sensors wont compromise the system?

>>9
anyone can re-run the program with known inputs and should obtain the same outputs

>>10
Exactly. Scientific method applied for true accountability :)

Lets say that the government developed a software to determine the budget for health. The variables would be life expectancy, cancer cases per year, etc etc... Anyone can calculate the budget for health. And being that the code is open source, anyone can fork the program and develop a better calculation algorithm. We are, in fact, removing great part of the 'ideology' from the important decisions.

>>10
re-run the program with known inputs
That would require to keep everything open, including every monetary transaction, death and birth of every citizen, and their location in space and time.

>>11
The variables would be life expectancy, cancer cases per year, etc etc...
What guarantees accuracy of these variables? What if some malicious agent falsifies these input or breaks sensors?

Nothing is guaranteed besides the algorithm. No program can discriminate between real and fake inputs. Unless, of course, the program gets it's feed from various sources. Even then they can be faked (http://www.tgdaily.com/security-features/54714-anonymous-details-operation-metal-gear). Even then, i'm sure is possible to develop countermeasures for false inputs. Banks do that now in financial transactions.

>>14
Sorry, i was distracted. I contradicted my self in the same sentence, hurr :S

>>14
i'm sure is possible to develop countermeasures for false inputs.
What mekes you sure?

Banks do that now in financial transactions.
Banks know their clients and they hire human agents to do profiling. Before transaction, they make sure, they can get their money back.

>>16
quantum teleportation + encryption

>>17
quantum teleportation
fad detected
encryption is king

>>1
great book op. thx 4 the link