Only if it controlled all of reality and I thought I was voting for a human.
I guess I might also be convinced if a steel probe was stuck in my brain which allowed another computer to control me. Which could also possibly be done over a wireless network.
So, the answer is yes, unless you would like to say that I wouldn't be myself if I was controlled by a computer.
In which case, I can't vote for anyone anyways because I can't prove that I am not controlled by a computer.
Unless, I could do something a computer would never do, which I can't do because computers could mimic anything.
Isaac Asimov writes stories about these types of issues, I recommend reading them. We would have to find a way to put a numeric value on human life for computers to be able to make political decisions, otherwise they would be monstrous.
Unfortunately, humans get real pissed when you put a numeric value on their life, especially if it was a machine that did it.
2006-10-03 10:38:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jeremy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Im a developer & a pc tech...
I probably wouldnt for at least another 20-50 years.
Maybe after then technology will be such that it might be a interesting idea.
Currently though I would support serious changes in gov.
1. Fairtax.
2. Changing the executive branch to a 2president setup
Ie; One president, other Prime Minister or similar.
Or: change the presidency so that the president is 100%
foreign policy or war. and the VP is in fact the domestic president.
3. Electronic voting for real ..or even direct democracy.
with computers we could litterally do it now...
2006-10-03 10:32:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by pcreamer2000 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
No... for three reasons... first, I have yet to meet a computer that has never crashed... second, I believe the abilities of imagination and speculation are important in a leader and computers don't have those abilities... third, I find the answers to most problems lie somewhere between zero and one.
That said, I'm pretty sure W is really a robot with a corroded grammar chip who's been programmed to kill.... but I didn't vote for him either.
2006-10-03 10:38:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by sueflower 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The primary role of the leader is to understand the feelings and values of the people, and to uphold and further those values. Unless the computer has a great sense of humanity it cannot make the right decisions for the people. Also, who will be the "frontman" when dealing face-to-face with other world leaders? Would you have a holographic avatar that represents the computer?
2006-10-03 10:33:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by martin h 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Interesting thought! But no I wouldn't, because a computer doesn't decide alone, there are always people behind it so it's actually stupid.
But you're right, the state of economics would be great but what about social security?
Would the computer be a Democrat or a Republican?
2006-10-03 10:38:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course not. A computer program is only capable of following its programming.
We'd have to hope John Connor would send a 'bot back from the future to kill the programmer to keep armageddon from happening too.
2006-10-03 10:30:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by kingstubborn 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't we usually have mindless drones running this country? What's the difference? It's not like the human president would have any more empathy than the computer.
2006-10-03 10:31:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The problem with government is not just the executive branch. Throw them all out and replace them with koala bears. But no computers, ok?
2006-10-03 10:37:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Nani 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is a great question! No, only because computers are based on logic and sometimes you have to use that biological element known as heart...
2006-10-03 10:31:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by redheadedcyclone 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No i'd vote for a pig to run the country though oink oink
2006-10-03 10:30:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋