In your opinion, should political candidates who vow to let AI do their jobs be allowed to run for office?

👍 Yes (19%) – "This might a chance to put AI to the test in a real world capacity that could have long reaching effects. So long as there are actual humans to screen any AI decisions it could be beneficial to have the voice of an AI that can process far more information than a human could."

• "Of course they should be allowed to run - it's still a human being who is running and voting. However, they obviously lack the serious, mature wisdom required to hold office, so they shouldn't be elected."

👎 No (65%) – "Predictive language models that power ai today are not intelligence, just statistical analysis. The amount of mistakes made, particularly in complex topics or topics where information might be contradictory, should concern anyone who thinks of using today’s ai for anything more than luxury features or party tricks."

• "AI is not actually unbiased like he is claiming because it absorbs whatever biases are in the data it’s trained on. Plus, generative AI is not actually capable of “making decisions” (yet). I wouldn’t mind a candidate who was open about using analytical AI to help them process data, but humans need to be making decisions about the lives of other humans."

"I don't mind a librarian pushing the boundaries of AI, but I personally wouldn't vote for him. AI is still crafted by humans and human biases and limitations, and I'd prefer a human that can be reasoned with and has empathy. To be fair, it certainly seems there's a lot of politicians without those two features, but let's at least choose actual humans with that capability. A human politician who uses AI but still makes the decision themselves is far more interesting to me."

• "Just because a chatbot can do something better than a human doesn't mean that they should be doing it. This is obvious when it comes to artwork - no matter how beautiful the AI-generated work is, human work has more inherent value. I think the same can be applied to politics. Even if a chatbot would make objectively "better" decisions, part of being human is accepting our immense capacity to make mistakes and learn from them."

"Disallowing someone from running for public office because of how they've promised to do their job is certainly a slippery slope. I do think, however, that indulging the intrusion of unchecked AI into governmental decision-making is a considerably slipperier one. Ultimately, this issue serves to highlight how incredibly behind governmental & industry regulation is in the face of the AI boom."

• "I think AI is definitely a powerful tool, but we have already heard so many situations of inaccuracies or bias that can easily make it's way into the algorithms. I think utilizing AI in general is okay if it is being utilized as an additional resource. For example, if this AI is trained on all the city codes and regulations it could be used to find the correct document for a specific need. However at that point the actual human doing the job should go to the actual code or law and read and interpret it for the situation. The AI might make finding all related files and documents faster, but should not be solely making the decisions."

🤷 Unsure/other (16%) – "Not enough information available to make a good informed choice. My main concern is how or who would decide that info fed to Vic was truly objective."

• "While technology is changing for both the better and worse, we should still attempt to maintain some semblance of humanity within politics. At least for now."