Thursday, March 13, 2014

Running bears


The Keystone Garter said...

You'll be able to screen powerful personnel and select-WMD rapid responders for mental illnesses, moods, and use of rational thought processes. Also CVs, education, readings, experiences, (all means) maybe with a good lie detector. Whether or not to use a lie detector to screen for one's ends is tricky. It is a slippery slope as Caanda expressed over a decade ago to the USA in not permitting a suspect's DNA to be used to screen for outstanding rapes in the USA (he might not have committed the crimes if he knew he would be caught and the USA laws are in the lower 1/2 of the world's in terms of socio-economic justice). The lie detector might not be wise.
The above is mostly cosmetic improvements. Rapid response is tricky, whether it is worthwhile to attempt detailed forensics in sight of bioterror or AI components found. A difficult scenario I'm dealing with is a single-prpose sensor network finds a nearly complete select-WMD, and the immediate investigation can't find the perp. You implement some draconian surveillence, for how long?! The Omega Episode of Voyager would say destroying the technology is key (don't attempt forensics and risk hijacking), MI4 would say focus on getting the perp.
You'll be able to use text AI to evaluate how ethical a written work is. Law isn't as important as de facto law is often unwritten, but for religious works this will be interesting. I figure if you take the Jesus parts of the Jefferson Bible you have one of the 25 best works written.
You don't divulge the select-WMD precursor list (for example, would keep track of PCR equipment) until after the sensor network is functioning.
Checks on power are tricky. I'd want an inferior gvmt such as the CPC in power for at least a minority term, just to avoid a Liberal tyranny...
A tricky scenario is a nation part of the sensor network, denying RR forces the ability to investigate or destroy an instance of a select-WMD being tentatively found. AI could be an agent of tyranny so you are almost forced to escalate to war. So for foreign policy, decades from now you might want to assassinate someone like Zhirenevsky or McCarthy as soon as they are in office the same way this is done now to Egypt and Qaddafi.
More leeway is irresponsible uses of sensor network, perhaps from technology diffused from the select-WMD network. Someone could enforce Sharia Law, could even improve upon the existing network, could do the CPC/GOP thing of enforcing immoral Christian Laws...I sliding scale of responses is required but generally you want to disable the netowrk or remove their renegade leadership. I Figure you deal with select-WMDs, then you work out the geopolitics needed to improve upon MAD, then you worry about enforcing the worst crimes and a safety net once you know what is good. In the meantime, geopolitics can function to avoid tyranny and enable rational-utilitarian leaders; checks on power are physical threats but also psychological threats to render a world unpalatable to a tyrant.

The Keystone Garter said...

...For the intractable tyrnnay you could (in all cases you increase surveillence of implements used such as robotic terrorists):
1) Maintain single-purpose sensors. Hope you get the perp and his next attack or hope your vaccines work or cruise missiles hit AI.
2) Subsequently escalate the surveillence to people tracking et al.
3) Record a database of invasive surveillence in a vault but only access it if a select-WMD event or near event happens. After 1/2 a day, your mosquito finds a near complete WMD, then you access the vault and look at the camare footage of who dropped if off there. It seems it must be administered by very few people to avoid teaching people select-WMD engineering....checks are hard.
4) Try to stop the incident is real time or near real time. This is a surveillence world and is dangerous. I think it would be best to nuke the USA when merket fundies get into power.
If the world makes fewer market forces select-WMDs (and other goods that come with this), there will be less tyranny risk as less surveillence needed. If the world threatens fewer tyrants and less major war, more surveillence can be safely used.