After considering Mr. Higashi’s livestream, I will try to articulate my thoughts on Mr. Yasuno’s stance. (Currently, the issue is that it is unclear what values/ethics/norms Mr. Yasuno adheres to when making decisions under trade-offs as a leader.
- In the Narita model of digital democracy, politicians are like cats and do not need to make decisions, but in the Yasuno model, individual politicians are expected to make decisions.
- Deciding who should become a leader based on what prioritization they make under trade-offs is one of the purposes of the democratic process.
- However, for example, it is unclear whether to prioritize elderly medical care or child-rearing support when allocating budgets.
- Even in the rough budget proposal, it is stated that “it can be achieved with 1% of the annual budget”, but there is no clear stance on prioritizing the remaining 99%.
Traditional politicians have always found it impossible to provide concrete stances on all trade-offs in the world in advance, so instead, they have disclosed clues such as “personality,” “personal experiences,” “empathized vision,” and “party affiliation.”
- By generalizing these clues, citizens construct a “politician’s decision-making model” in their minds. (This is a hypothesis, at least for oneself)
- For example, if someone had a childhood experience of suffering from poverty, they might prioritize child-rearing support or poverty measures, or if they belong to a certain party, they may seem more likely to favor our generation.
If Mr. Yasuno has “no particular personal experiences” and “does not understand traditional ‘political’ matters,” then it is difficult to see how he makes decisions under trade-offs.
- He is conducting a branding that makes him colorless, and it is understood that he is leaning towards being colorless personally.
- An example of something that seems to be visible is “not cutting his hair to optimize the number of votes” or something like that…? (Setting aside whether cutting his hair would increase the number of votes)
===
Traditional politicians have always found it impossible to provide concrete stances on all trade-offs in the world in advance.
- I felt that this was the kind of approach that Team Yasuno would take to solve this structurally/technically, so I will write a rough idea
- Have Mr. Yasuno solve a million specific problems related to the trolley problem, and based on that, build a “Yasuno’s decision-making ML model.”
- During the election period, enable citizens to ask questions to AI Anno, and based on that ML model, clearly express political stances.
- However, there seems to be a problem that being too clear about stances may be electorally disadvantageous. (People may not be inclined to vote for someone who clearly says, “I also make decisions that disadvantage your attributes.“)
- Could this be overcome by devising how AI Anno communicates?