Economies under A.I. (Idealistic views)

(Submitted By Mikky)


The broadness of technological occupation in our lives is so deep that the influence has changed the mass psychologies more in favour of individialism than collective governance. The lethargy and cynicism couples to create a laggard in progress. When we are gifted with the times that are so advanced than other times of history, its logical we use the transitions and evolution in regard of economic development. What we need to do is to make the taxes, budget designs, public distribution systems and subsidy evaluation all under the control of Artificial Intelligence.


That ideation above is also what is happening in some developing countries, particularly China. The Chinese have been using the supercomputers for evaluating their governance mechanism. Although the extent of usage around the world has largely been limited to scientific applications, applying the same TFLOP speeds to successively implement development packages or even to calculate the turns of economies, widely, can convert the haphazard turns into predictable turns. In many ways, under-utilization of technology is still making us follow medieval methods of policy making.


Countries share of supercomputers as of June 2010
Countries share of supercomputers as of June 2010 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


Supercomputing for economic progress: Just as the gramophone is knocked down by the tape recorder which was again beaten down by PC/mp3 Players,  bad policy does seem like jargon to any young mind. Supercomputing can bring great changes in people’s lifestyles. The modern evolution of societies, in places where it seems like a distant dream can thoroughly be changed within the next few generations. E-Governance is more solidified and reaches the seeded fabrics that determine the base of the society, a child needn’t worry about his teacher’s absence. Under-staffing can be fairly dealt by introducing just a projector in the school with one operator when lessons are wired from the best of the institutions to the least advantaged.


TFLOP calculations can be used for regression models to determine any catastrophe, bound or beyond creating investor confidence. Managing economy as one unit, the extent of technical association with policy and administration is unfairly utilized  Any policy maker knows that this is too idealistic because these machines cannot take into considerations the various sociological externalities that a human mind can well determine, but the Govt. does need primary data for its policies which a unitary information gatherer can do the best. In any way, the implementation of such forces would promulgate for better than worse.


You may also like:


The Budget Line


Government Investment vs Government expenditure


Valuation of an Asset and the Travel Cost Method


Self Reliance through growing your own food


©The Idea Bucket, 2013. (Submitted by Mikky)



  1. This would open the door for a A.I. Global Dictatorship if we were to attempt something like this. The Free-Market works the best when unhindered by central planners and goverment subsidies with a strong anti-monopoly enforcement and corporate and banking accountability.


  2. restuarant says:

    Hi, thanks for sharing.


  3. David M. Green says:

    GIGO is an old saying in regard to computers which simply means garbage in (bad data) garbage out (bad results) plus the human factor can not always be quantified enough to be easily or accurately predicted over the long term even by an artificial intelligence. 🙂


  4. Unreal Atlas says:

    I felt like a lot of ideas were getting communicated over here. E Governance is good, has been implemented in various parts, is continuing to be implemented and will give good results hopefully.
    Usage of artificial intelligence to govern though, is something that’s quite intriguing, how is it being used? How do you propose it could be used better? Yes data sets could be used to drive policy quite correct on that.
    In India in fact the “Aadhar card” project is an attempt to do that itself. It’s the first step in getting the data right! I’m sure several steps in that direction will lead to quite positive steps towards the next frontier in governance.


  5. Fascinating. The role of computers is certainly central to modern economics. Derivatives, for example, are largely mathematical instruments that few people understand, and yet have caused the apparent amount of capital in the global economy to explode over the past 20 years, and have unlinked risk and investment to the point where it is almost impossible to tell a good from a bad asset. Artificial Intelligence has one key drawback: it is predicated on logical precepts and mathematical calculation, which is fine for measuring and analysing, but HOPELESS for predicting human behaviour. While regression models can take into account events and trends that have caused shocks and failures in the past, by definition they cannot predict wars, changing tastes, collapses in collective confidence or scandals in the future, or the behaviours behind them. This is especially the case where economic or financial data is hidden from information systems dur to corruption. In particular, economics are driven by consumer and investor confidence, and as such any Artificial Intelligence will need heuristics which emulate sociological and psychological behaviours, as well as financial and economic ones, into their design. I work in the financial field, and can tell you that the main thing missing from modern finance is not supercomputers, Artificial Intelligence, clever new financial instruments or PhD’s in Heuristics, but simply: common sense!


  6. Mikels Skele says:

    Hmm.. The current economic crisis in the US and elsewhere was largely the result of “geniuses” manipulating various economic algorithms. I’m not sure artificial intelligence would do any better. The problem with economies is that humans are involved.


  7. mytiturk says:

    And that does not even touch on the ruination human “progress” has perpetrated on the Planet.


  8. mytiturk says:

    An interesting blog. In Canada, many years ago the government brought leaders together from labour, top management, science, education and government to look at the future. My cousin’s husband, the Canadian president of a US multinational corporation, reported one of their conclusions was that with fewer worthwhile jobs for workers and fewer hours to work, distractions and entertainment must be developed to keep them amused and off the streets protesting their lack of full actualized potential. Technology has certainly done that. I am not sure that more misdirected, technology and less human purpose is the way to go. If all machines do for us is remove the dignity of work for its own sake (and our sense of human worth) we must ultimately ask ourselves as a species, “Why bother?”


  9. Matthew Vett says:

    I think it’s a fascinating idea. It’s certainly something to be open to, at any right, but I imagine any implementation in the US would be met with cries of “Central planning!” and “Bolshevism!” There is the possibility, though, that once multiple entities start using supercomputers to plan their economies against each other, you’d end up getting positive feedback that goes out of control, almost like the Black-Scholes Equation:


  10. Charles Lominec says:

    Interesting topic. The American government could certainly use any form of intelligence in its operations and policies.


Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.