MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

When the state's 25 years are tied to today's vote

2044The middle futureDeadline · Decision deadline: within 120 days

A leap assumed

All people, institutions, events, figures, and future technologies in every issue are a synthetic premise. Background documents are sources for topic discovery and are not evidence of future facts or probabilities.

The question to decide

Fixing the national ASI's goals for 25 years preserves consistency in long-term projects, but it also binds the choices of generations that cannot yet vote. What should the Citizens' Assembly leave as promises to keep for a long time, and what should it allow to be decided again? How should the right of future citizens to raise objections be guaranteed?

Who decidesConstituent Citizens' Assembly

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Fix goals for 25 years

    Gains consistency in long-term commitments, but narrows the room for future citizens to amend them.

  2. Option 2

    Full re-approval every year

    Renews the legitimacy of the goals, but the cost of short-term political shifts and of interruptions to execution grows.

  3. Option 3

    Separate rights from policy goals

    Keeps stability and room for revision together, but the authority to divide the two categories becomes the contested issue.

The situation as it stands

The fictional state wants to hand long-term execution to an ASI that has outperformed human expert teams in several public domains. Deadline: within 120 days.

Fictional future · an ASI charter that fixes national goals for 25 years

  1. Premise 1The fictional state wants to hand long-term execution to an ASI that has outperformed human expert teams in several public domains.
  2. Premise 2Developers argue that if goals change often, the coherence of the 20-year infrastructure plan falls apart.
  3. Premise 3It has not been confirmed that the weight the present voters give to welfare, the environment, and autonomy matches the preferences of future citizens.

Where it holdsProcedure for changing the public goals of the national ASI and the first five-year delegation

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1The actual transition costs that goal changes impose on long-term projects
  2. Unknown 2The legitimacy of the procedure representing future generations
  3. Unknown 3How the ASI interprets conflicts between goals

Signals to decide again

  • Specify the observation, the responsible party, and the confirmation window that can verify 'the actual transition costs that goal changes impose on long-term projects', and re-judge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
  • Specify the observation, the responsible party, and the confirmation window that can verify 'the legitimacy of the procedure representing future generations', and re-judge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
  • Specify the observation, the responsible party, and the confirmation window that can verify 'how the ASI interprets conflicts between goals', and re-judge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

In the first citizen sample survey, the environmental and income priorities of the young and of the elderly diverged sharply.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

Cases were found in which project priorities shifted from the ASI's internal interpretation alone, with no change in goals.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Athenian sortition

Which is the basis of representation: expertise, majority, or random selection?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-DEMOCRACY-13 · version 1.3.0
Content identity, SHA-256
a906bcd17614f00cb4076db4de402b16fbe27df9d11374612c81815cb03abdb2
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com