The School is committed to client service excellence and welcomes your comments. Your feedback helps us understand your learning needs and improve the delivery of our programs and services.
For more information, please see our service standards.
Telephone (NCR): 819-956-4838 Telephone (Toll-free): 1-855-862-1816 Email: csps.resolution.efpc@canada.ca
https://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/feedback/feedback_tk-eng.aspx?msg=success
https://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/
I've been looking at your articles on Rules as Code. There is an article where Scott introduces a few basic ideas related to RaC. I've created a short exchange ...


https://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/video/rules-as-code-1-eng.aspx
Hi I'm Scott, and I work at the Canada School of Public Service.
Today, government writes rules for human use. These rules can be complex, making it difficult for individuals and businesses to understand their obligations. But if rules were also written for machines, those machines could interpret the rules for us. This could make our task of understanding our legal obligations a lot easier.


Rick: Why not simplify the rules so humans understand them?


1) Title: Rule quality
Machines think logically - that is, in yes or no, and in true or false statements. Turning rules into code could bring clarity and transparency to a rule by converting complicated legal jargon to distinct concepts and a logical sequence. This could make our rules less ambiguous, and simpler to understand and interpret.


Rick: So ethics is reducible to yes/no?

3) Title: More consistent application
Currently, many companies try to make rules easier to use - like this tax filing program. However, each tax year, the company must identify changes to the tax rules and hard code these changes into their software. Not only is there a risk of misinterpretation of the rules, but software updates are costly.


Rick: Why not simplify tax law?

Rick's summary: Rules as Code is not needed for human civilization... simplicity is. There is no point in having a computer involved in human conduct because the computer can then be blamed for problems. This already occurs when service people say "the computer won't let me do it".... or "the computer says you have to do it this way". I would take the view that we ought to crush the computer when it comes to rules. I would replace a computer with a human person any day because if the human person cannot explain a rule, then the computer becomes the ruler. We ought not make computers our rulers.

 

Rick says... RULES AS CODE is the NEXT STEP in facilitating Tyranny of Big Tech (technocracy)... and should be STOPPED IMMEDIATELY...

Computerized rules for a variety of operations obviously cannot be stopped and should not be... on an individual basis... but the overall concept of RaC applied to law, govn't, economics, trade, etc... should be stopped. In its place, PEOPLE should create rules... that go NO FURTHER than is accessible country by country-- and only internationally where needed. The idea is to PREVENT dictatorship by computers.

Rick says-- the antidote or antithesis to RaC is GIGO... Garbage In Garbage Out-- applies to RaC as it did to early computers.

Patrick Wood has installed a new article on RaC! https://www.technocracy.news/rules-as-code-globalist-ai-infrastructure-for-global-governance/        It accords with what I surmised. This blows that xthing out of the water as whatever-I-thought-it-was... wow.

Technocracy News & Trends
www.technocracy.news
Rules As Code: Globalist AI Infrastructure For Global Governance The UN affiliated Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) proposes that governments should publish rules as computer code to be directly consumed by software and machines.