#vtaiwan
2025-12-02
關於 OpenAI Democratic Inputs to AI 如何迴避民主本質的好文章：
> *The OpenAI solicitation wants representativeness.* The most popular approach to ensuring this in debates these days is ‘sortition’ - *picking a representative sample of the population so as to create a ‘minipublic’* that notionally resembles the public as a whole (the same rough percentages of liberals and conservatives etc). *The solicitation wants these representative people to engage in “deliberative discussions,” where they politely exchange views with each other, and update their own perspectives when they hear good counter-arguments.* These discussions would center on questions that AI labs have tended to see as a massive pain in the arse, while avoiding topics that are central to their profit models (who decides on the release of new versions? who gets the money?) And all this is to be non-binding, unless OpenAI decides to the contrary at its own discretion, at some indefinite point in the future.
>
> *Such proposals don’t have much to do with real life democracy. […] T*he kind of democracy that deliberation-sortition points toward is one that is likely to be particularly congenial _both_ to sincerely motivated engineers and to those who are more directly self-interested.
> *The OpenAI solicitation wants representativeness.* The most popular approach to ensuring this in debates these days is ‘sortition’ - *picking a representative sample of the population so as to create a ‘minipublic’* that notionally resembles the public as a whole (the same rough percentages of liberals and conservatives etc). *The solicitation wants these representative people to engage in “deliberative discussions,” where they politely exchange views with each other, and update their own perspectives when they hear good counter-arguments.* These discussions would center on questions that AI labs have tended to see as a massive pain in the arse, while avoiding topics that are central to their profit models (who decides on the release of new versions? who gets the money?) And all this is to be non-binding, unless OpenAI decides to the contrary at its own discretion, at some indefinite point in the future.
>
> *Such proposals don’t have much to do with real life democracy. […] T*he kind of democracy that deliberation-sortition points toward is one that is likely to be particularly congenial _both_ to sincerely motivated engineers and to those who are more directly self-interested.
programmablemutter.com
There are plausible reasons for how it ended up that way
關於 OpenAI Democratic Inputs to AI 如何迴避民主本質的好文章：
> *The OpenAI solicitation wants representativeness.* The most popular approach to ensuring this in debates these days is ‘sortition’ - *picking a representative sample of the population so as to create a ‘minipublic’* that notionally resembles the public as a whole (the same rough percentages of liberals and conservatives etc). *The solicitation wants these representative people to engage in “deliberative discussions,” where they politely exchange views with each other, and update their own perspectives when they hear good counter-arguments.* These discussions would center on questions that AI labs have tended to see as a massive pain in the arse, while avoiding topics that are central to their profit models (who decides on the release of new versions? who gets the money?) And all this is to be non-binding, unless OpenAI decides to the contrary at its own discretion, at some indefinite point in the future.
>
> *Such proposals don’t have much to do with real life democracy. […] T*he kind of democracy that deliberation-sortition points toward is one that is likely to be particularly congenial _both_ to sincerely motivated engineers and to those who are more directly self-interested.
> *The OpenAI solicitation wants representativeness.* The most popular approach to ensuring this in debates these days is ‘sortition’ - *picking a representative sample of the population so as to create a ‘minipublic’* that notionally resembles the public as a whole (the same rough percentages of liberals and conservatives etc). *The solicitation wants these representative people to engage in “deliberative discussions,” where they politely exchange views with each other, and update their own perspectives when they hear good counter-arguments.* These discussions would center on questions that AI labs have tended to see as a massive pain in the arse, while avoiding topics that are central to their profit models (who decides on the release of new versions? who gets the money?) And all this is to be non-binding, unless OpenAI decides to the contrary at its own discretion, at some indefinite point in the future.
>
> *Such proposals don’t have much to do with real life democracy. […] T*he kind of democracy that deliberation-sortition points toward is one that is likely to be particularly congenial _both_ to sincerely motivated engineers and to those who are more directly self-interested.
