The traditional dynamics of markets, social norms, architectural design (biotope), and legal frameworks have long governed social behavior. However, the advent of AI is fundamentally altering these dynamics and influencing human behavior. It’s conceivable that in the near future, algorithms could replace traditional governance mechanisms.
Algorithms operate most effectively within homogeneous systems, and current algorithms often aim to homogenize behavior, thereby limiting diversity of thought and action. They shape our choices by presenting us with options based on our past selections, effectively acting as arbiters in realms such as commerce, trade, and politics.
Unfortunately, these algorithms are typically crafted by self-interested individuals or corporations, resulting in decision-making that is myopic and based solely on their utility functions. This myopia can lead to a simplification of the world into binary terms that favor the interests of those controlling the algorithms. Consequently, there’s a concerning trend towards governance transitioning into the rule of a select few corporations.
Presently, corporations are essentially conducting a global social experiment without our fully informed consent. This lack of active solicitation for consent raises ethical concerns regarding governance and autonomy.
True governance entails ensuring sustainable public goods and societal well-being. However, the current dominance of algorithms tends to prioritize corporate interests over broader societal welfare. To address these issues, it’s imperative to involve people in the design of algorithms from the outset, rather than as an afterthought.
In democratic countries, citizens have the right to demand their rights. However, even within democratic frameworks, polarization often leads to government favoritism towards certain groups, typically the wealthy. Consequently, corporations wield significant influence over governments, resulting in governance structures that primarily benefit the privileged few while marginalizing vulnerable communities. This imbalance in power can lead to a situation where a select few individuals or entities can manipulate the system to their advantage.
We require algorithmic governance (algorithms) that not only prioritize specific utility functions but also consider the well-being of all stakeholders, including vulnerable communities. By adopting a more inclusive approach to algorithmic governance, we can aspire towards a future characterized by sustainability, equality, and social cohesion. Social contracts should align with constitutional principles to ensure accountability and fairness.
