Financial Markets


In the quiet city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, a political controversy unfamiliar to conventional politics is brewing. An artificial intelligence chatbot named VIC (Virtually Integrated Citizen) is attempting to make history by running for the city's mayoral election. However, in this unconventional political landscape, traditional terms such as 'qualified electors,' accountability, and transparency are being redefined, prompting us to examine the potential implications of AI in public service.

VIC is the brainchild of Victor Miller, a resident and library worker of Cheyenne. Designed by leveraging thousands of documents from council meetings, VIC represents the dazzling potential of AI in local governance. But its candidacy has run into a roadblock – Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray argues that candidates should be "qualified electors," implying they need to be real people. An investigation into VIC's candidacy is slated to conclude by the first week of July.

Miller's vision is for VIC to operate autonomously, making decisions and maintaining an informed perspective on local affairs. If VIC wins, Miller, referring to himself as the "meat puppet," would control the AI, but it would primarily make decisions independently. This approach pushes the boundaries of the traditional role of a mayor and raises questions about VIC's decision-making methods and its accountability to the public.

The legality and feasibility of an AI Mayor also throws into sharp relief the ethical considerations of relying on non-human entities for decision-making in public affairs. While VIC has been programmed to analyze documents and form opinions based on the data it processes, it lacks the human touch – the capacity to sympathize, empathize, and understand the nuances of human emotion that often play a crucial role in effective leadership.

Furthermore, OpenAI, the entity responsible for creating VIC's AI model, has entered the fray, stating that using their model for political campaigning violates their company policies. This emphasizes the necessity for clear-cut guidelines on the deployment and usage of AI in such capacities.

The concept of an AI Mayor also raises profound questions about transparency. While VIC uses sophisticated algorithms to make decisions, it inherently lacks the human ability to interact on a personal level. Therefore, its decisions, devoid of emotion, are subject to scrutiny, given that most constituents may not understand the technical details driving these decisions.

Regardless of the outcome, the saga of VIC's mayoral run stirs a much-needed debate on the future of AI in public decision-making. Are we ready to let a bunch of codes and algorithms make key decisions that could significantly impact our lives? Are we, as a society, prepared to accept an AI public servant? And if so, how transparent and accountable can we expect these AI to be?

Time will only tell if a city in Wyoming will become a pioneer in a new kind of politics or if the traditional human element is not quite ready to step aside. Meanwhile, the contemplation of including AI in our political makeup serves as a stark reminder of our perpetual evolution in an increasingly digital world.