So, I signed on to the ChatGPT application to see what all the fuss is about. A government policymaker could make good use of the application by posing questions that would take the policy maker into n-dimensional space. Where overlooking a stakeholder can create bad political optics, I can see the application taking multiple stakeholder positions into account no matter how narrow or numerous those positions may be.
A policymaker usually relies on policy staff to conduct an analysis and pose a number of recommendations. Policy analysts are constrained by time and human biases. Reading multiple petitions and determining how much weight each position should receive is a huge task.
But I can see an application like ChatGPT going a long way mitigating the costs of policy analysis. Imagine identifying in minutes some common factors that would allow multiple parties to stipulate to certain issues.
And yes, budgets could be reduced by decreasing the number of staffers or a staffer could be reassigned to other tasks.
I am sure that this application will be improved where it digests and analyzes more data points. I am still in the old school, however. I rather engage the human element at a grocery store than do self-check-out.
Yes, yes. I hear the clarion calls for “innovation” and “efficiency.” A bunch of word salad. Someone needs to defend humans.
24 January 2023