Thai opinion: Why politics and technology are such bitter enemies

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME
Why politics and technology are such bitter enemies
Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- Ever wonder why we never use science and technology to solve political problems?

After all, we can now transplant the human heart from one body to another, land on the moon with pinpoint accuracy, peer further and further back into the past (not our planet's past, but the universe's), split atoms, build a skyscraper in weeks, and have robots write the news with astonishing precision. So why can't we anticipate, pre-empt or swiftly expose crooked governments, or stop coups in their tracks?

It's mind-boggling if you pause to think about it. Science and technology have done wonders in virtually every other field. Medicine. Archaeology. Astronomy. History. Education. Engineering. Art. Mass communications. Agriculture. We know what the dinosaurs did. We can see a box of matches from outer space. We can see in the dark. We can see through walls. We know precisely how long it would take for a passenger jet to circle the biggest star known to man. Yet for all our knowledge, capability and technological advances, we can't make the world a better place politically.

The Internet will be a hundred times faster in the next few years. Machines are already "talking" to one another in order to furnish humans with the best comfort, safety and security. The much-vaunted Internet of Things is not just about snap-of-the-fingers movie or music downloads; it's a God-like network revolutionising daily life. A radio host the other day gave the following example: A man collapses in a public place. A close-circuit camera catches his face. The image is flashed to other "machines" and one recognises his history of heart disease. Another machine calls an ambulance. He's taken to the nearest hospital where yet another machine provides the doctors with all the necessary information about his illness.

So, why can't we detect murky transactions or suspicious military contacts as they happen? Can't we design anti-corruption software or applications and use them on those who matter? How hard would that be? Thailand is wasting its time trying to write a "new" Constitution, when it should be working on software instead.

The Thai charter should have just one or two articles, simply stating that politicians will be subject to strict monitoring by anti-corruption software that will scrutinise all transactions, assets and privileges in the greatest detail. To deal with the military, we can have "anti-coup" software that beeps every time a tank's engine is fired up unnecessarily or when an unusually large number of automatic weapons are grabbed without proper reason.

The idea might seem farfetched, but the alternative is to lapse into despair over the machinations of our so-called political reformers.

Astronomers are probing the universe with increasingly powerful lenses. Students are utilising technology to expand their minds. Scientists are planning how to mobilise billions of "nanobots" in a human body so as to prevent or cure cancer. Automakers are fine-tuning driverless vehicles. Media firms are having robots write their financial summaries. Yet when it comes to politics, Thailand and many other parts of the world are stuck debating which is worse: government by appointees or by elected representatives. Why is politics afforded such privilege?

Public officials cry foul every time they are threatened with stricter controls. They miss the point that if you spend public money you must be subject to public scrutiny. Generals cite the imperative of national security against demands for transparency. Again, they miss the point: their reasons for wanting submarines might be a matter of "national security", but how much they pay for the military hardware and to whom is anything but.

So, why is it that the people most prone to corruption are given the best immunity against scrutiny? In Thailand, fear of disruptive mudslinging is always invoked to protect members of Parliament and the government whereas the blanket "national security" claim has prevented curious minds from snooping around military contracts.

We have spent too much time debating the "form" while avoiding the "substance". The truth is that how an election is held is not as important as how elected representatives can be kept in line. And technology can help us here. Granted, technology won't remedy an individual's faulty morality, but the fear of getting caught can be the most effective pill.

You may argue that the crooks will figure out a way to beat the tech. I doubt that. Who can calculate faster than even a basic calculator bought at a flea market? There. I rest my case.

The question is how we can make technology an acceptable clean-up tool in politics. That technology has reached into almost every realm except politics is partly because it's the powers-that-be who decide how it should be utilised. They use it to track everybody except themselves, and expose everything except what they do.

Come to think of it, that's the real "freedom" issue, folks. Who gets to use technology and how, is perhaps the biggest question for a democracy. The rest, as they say, is just a smokescreen.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Why-politics-and-technology-are-such-bitter-enemie-30274127.html

-- The Nation 2015-12-02

[Seastallion]

A bit naive.

However, technology certainly is a tool that can help tackle corruption....keeping in mind that it is still a human that controls the technology.

The main area is information gathering, storing, analysing and sharing. Install those systems on multiple levels and over multiple agencies.

[Bellacissa]

Start with immigration. Get rid of the triplicate copies of handwritten forms (and the "pay me a little extra baht to overlook those pesky requirements") and move into the 21st century. Install kiosks to "stamp" your extension of stay (after verifying your identity by fingerprint) and make that stamp a barcode that can be scanned by immigration officers and police to instantly verify the validity.

Leaving the country? No need to see an immigration official. Scan the barcode, if valid and not on overstay, gate opens. If not, supervisor hauls you off for a manual evaluation.

I just made all of this up as I typed it. Surely, if I can come up with something on the fly, someone with actual programming knowledge could write something that would work in the real world.

Can we get a programmer over here, please?

[digibum]

There are lots of potential ways technology can be used to catch corruption but one has to keep in mind that catching corruption will be like catching fraudulent eCommerce transactions in that some things will get red flagged that are not corruption and some corruption will still happen despite technology.

For instance, you would have a program that simply monitors procurement costs. It would look for abnormally high prices being paid for goods and services used by the government.

Some government purchases might set off a red flag but be explainable and others might go beneath the level of detection.

@Seastallion calls it a bit naive but it's better than what currently exists which is nothing.

[Bellacissa]

There are lots of potential ways technology can be used to catch corruption but one has to keep in mind that catching corruption will be like catching fraudulent eCommerce transactions in that some things will get red flagged that are not corruption and some corruption will still happen despite technology.

For instance, you would have a program that simply monitors procurement costs. It would look for abnormally high prices being paid for goods and services used by the government.

Some government purchases might set off a red flag but be explainable and others might go beneath the level of detection.

@Seastallion calls it a bit naive but it's better than what currently exists which is nothing.

Catching any corruption is better than encouraging it. The "systems" in place now seem designed to enhance corruption instead of eliminating it.

[digibum]

Start with immigration. Get rid of the triplicate copies of handwritten forms (and the "pay me a little extra baht to overlook those pesky requirements") and move into the 21st century. Install kiosks to "stamp" your extension of stay (after verifying your identity by fingerprint) and make that stamp a barcode that can be scanned by immigration officers and police to instantly verify the validity.

Leaving the country? No need to see an immigration official. Scan the barcode, if valid and not on overstay, gate opens. If not, supervisor hauls you off for a manual evaluation.

I just made all of this up as I typed it. Surely, if I can come up with something on the fly, someone with actual programming knowledge could write something that would work in the real world.

Can we get a programmer over here, please?

Actually, immigration and customs are not places where I would want too much automation. While lines at the airport are a pain in the butt and certainly some processes can be streamlined via technology, I would still want eyes on a passenger. So many people are caught doing illegal stuff due to the fact that they get nervous while being asked routine questions. Turn that over to a computer and a valuable tool goes away.

Like I said though, there are uses for technology pertaining to immigration. In the US they have a Global Traveler program where frequent international travelers pay a fee for a 5 year fast pass through immigration and customs (also includes TSA PreCheck). Even then, you still end up going down to an immigration office in person before being approved.

UK has something similar. I'm sure it's available in other countries as well.

[selftaopath]

Oh please..... Thailand could (but won't) achieve a marvelous level of competence in all areas of society. What stops this from happening is the oligarchy that owns the Kingdom.

Until the people DEMAND change and are willing to also do something to initiate it, individuals/groups can cry and cry, suggest etc. NOTHING will change (for the betterment of the average citizen) until it is DEMANDED. This however seems contrary to the Thai culture. Oh well.... keep crying Thailand, but know you have the ultimate power of change. Implement it or not, it's your choice. The status quo benefits the 1%.

[digibum]

There are lots of potential ways technology can be used to catch corruption but one has to keep in mind that catching corruption will be like catching fraudulent eCommerce transactions in that some things will get red flagged that are not corruption and some corruption will still happen despite technology.

For instance, you would have a program that simply monitors procurement costs. It would look for abnormally high prices being paid for goods and services used by the government.

Some government purchases might set off a red flag but be explainable and others might go beneath the level of detection.

@Seastallion calls it a bit naive but it's better than what currently exists which is nothing.

Catching any corruption is better than encouraging it. The "systems" in place now seem designed to enhance corruption instead of eliminating it.

Oh, I very much agree. I've designed systems for detecting credit card fraud so given a day or two I could probably list 100 or 200 different types of corruption that could be monitored if you have the right data to sift through.

None of these systems pose a significant technological challenge. But the big question is would any government want to be monitored? :-)

[Bellacissa]

Start with immigration. Get rid of the triplicate copies of handwritten forms (and the "pay me a little extra baht to overlook those pesky requirements") and move into the 21st century. Install kiosks to "stamp" your extension of stay (after verifying your identity by fingerprint) and make that stamp a barcode that can be scanned by immigration officers and police to instantly verify the validity.

Leaving the country? No need to see an immigration official. Scan the barcode, if valid and not on overstay, gate opens. If not, supervisor hauls you off for a manual evaluation.

I just made all of this up as I typed it. Surely, if I can come up with something on the fly, someone with actual programming knowledge could write something that would work in the real world.

Can we get a programmer over here, please?

Actually, immigration and customs are not places where I would want too much automation. While lines at the airport are a pain in the butt and certainly some processes can be streamlined via technology, I would still want eyes on a passenger. So many people are caught doing illegal stuff due to the fact that they get nervous while being asked routine questions. Turn that over to a computer and a valuable tool goes away.

Like I said though, there are uses for technology pertaining to immigration. In the US they have a Global Traveler program where frequent international travelers pay a fee for a 5 year fast pass through immigration and customs (also includes TSA PreCheck). Even then, you still end up going down to an immigration office in person before being approved.

UK has something similar. I'm sure it's available in other countries as well.

Oh, I agree that it can't be fully automated. But anything is better than the system of paperwork overload in place right now. And, you'd still have to see an immigration official on arrival into the Kingdom. I'm mostly talking about the extensions of stay. There's really no reason to provide the exact same stack of paperwork every ninety days. Provide it once and automate it after that.

It would eliminate the under the table payment system for a stamp that you're not entitled to. Also, some system for the land crossings needs to be implemented. That seems to be where people can pay to get in no matter who they are.

[Bellacissa]

There are lots of potential ways technology can be used to catch corruption but one has to keep in mind that catching corruption will be like catching fraudulent eCommerce transactions in that some things will get red flagged that are not corruption and some corruption will still happen despite technology.

For instance, you would have a program that simply monitors procurement costs. It would look for abnormally high prices being paid for goods and services used by the government.

Some government purchases might set off a red flag but be explainable and others might go beneath the level of detection.

@Seastallion calls it a bit naive but it's better than what currently exists which is nothing.

Catching any corruption is better than encouraging it. The "systems" in place now seem designed to enhance corruption instead of eliminating it.

Oh, I very much agree. I've designed systems for detecting credit card fraud so given a day or two I could probably list 100 or 200 different types of corruption that could be monitored if you have the right data to sift through.

None of these systems pose a significant technological challenge. But the big question is would any government want to be monitored? :-)

And eliminate the cash cow? Absolutely not!

Incidentally, I had to laugh yesterday. My US debit card works all over Thailand, no problem. Yesterday, it declined at the US Embassy when I was adding pages to my passport. The one place where you would think a US card would work and it sent a fraud alert. Bahaha!

[digibum]

Oh please..... Thailand could (but won't) achieve a marvelous level of competence in all areas of society. What stops this from happening is the oligarchy that owns the Kingdom.

Until the people DEMAND change and are willing to also do something to initiate it, individuals/groups can cry and cry, suggest etc. NOTHING will change (for the betterment of the average citizen) until it is DEMANDED. This however seems contrary to the Thai culture. Oh well.... keep crying Thailand, but know you have the ultimate power of change. Implement it or not, it's your choice. The status quo benefits the 1%.

It's not even in the Thai mindset.

The Thai mindset is not to fix the problem but to blame the person who points it out. You're far more likely to have Thais DEMANDING that you don't talk about the problem than DEMANDING that someone fix the problem.

[Seastallion]

There are lots of potential ways technology can be used to catch corruption but one has to keep in mind that catching corruption will be like catching fraudulent eCommerce transactions in that some things will get red flagged that are not corruption and some corruption will still happen despite technology.

For instance, you would have a program that simply monitors procurement costs. It would look for abnormally high prices being paid for goods and services used by the government.

Some government purchases might set off a red flag but be explainable and others might go beneath the level of detection.

@Seastallion calls it a bit naive but it's better than what currently exists which is nothing.

The "bit naive" was at the author's simplistic approach, eg "we get a beep when a tank starts up unauthorised".

[MaxLee]

Best solution: shut down the entire network communication network,... would those goons in the government dare, for the sake of saving face???

[selftaopath]

OK, I'll ask? Who's going to make any/all technological tools to diminish corruption? Thailand? lol The article mentions several tech wonders accomplished. But by whom? So from that standpoint alone it "ain't" gonna happen here. And certainly not if/when another country makes it. lol had to laugh. Thailand and advanced technology in the same article.

[Bellacissa]

OK, I'll ask? Who's going to make any/all technological tools to diminish corruption? Thailand? lol The article mentions several tech wonders accomplished. But by whom? So from that standpoint alone it "ain't" gonna happen here. And certainly not if/when another country makes it. lol had to laugh. Thailand and advanced technology in the same article.

I'd offer to help (I'm a tech project manager by trade) but I'd need a work permit. And to get that, I'd need a company here in Thailand with four Thais working for me. Oh, and 2 million baht. And tech might be on the list of companies reserved for Thais.

So, ummm, no. Thailand, the hub of hoop jumping.

[phoenixdoglover]

I usually don't like the articles by Khun Tulsathit. They are wordy and self-indulgent. This one is no exception. Unfortunately for my biases, he also makes some decent observations.

But let's take it a step further. The ideas he starts to develop have little to do with politics, and much to do with public administration. It is in this area that technology can be an enabler of reforms.

It starts with the concept of transparency. In Thailand, many people use the word, yet most of the large public spending projects are anything but transparent. The current kerfuffle over corruption in construction of the new Rajabhakti Park is an example. Transparency is claimed when a committee investigates secretly and declares everything OK.

The Charter could be used to set standards for government transparency, and those standards would drive Thai government agencies to adopt technology faster, and to create more integrated systems. Two laws could be stipulated in the Charter to start the ball rolling: 1) An Electronic Records Retention Act, which sets standards for retaining government documents, and establishes penalties for destroying documents, and 2) A Public Freedom of Information Act, which declares that the public has a right to reasonably unfettered access to government records.

I realize these types of initiatives go against longstanding Thai preferences.

Perchance, to dream.

[BlindMagician]

hhhmm ... seems to totally misunderstand what science and technology, or software, is or what it could be or used for.

They/it is/are tools.

Politics is more to do with a way of finding a consensus for decisions that might be classified as differences of opinion.

Sure, technology can be used more and more for some purposes, but not for the final consensus building and decision making processes, unless you want AI to do that, and then we enter terminator territory, with totally redundant human beings.

Assuming we are not talking about AI, you have to understand that software can only achieve what it is designed to do. This means embedding specific models, algorithms,etc. You cannot create software to evaluate the relative pros/cons of, for example, capitalism versus communism, or socialism. It could only calculate relative performance using previously well defined criteria. But the choice of what those criteria should be, is the political domain.

[Krataiboy]

Once they've got us all chipped, getting us chopped will be a breeze. You've been warned.

[elgordo38]

Start with immigration. Get rid of the triplicate copies of handwritten forms (and the "pay me a little extra baht to overlook those pesky requirements") and move into the 21st century. Install kiosks to "stamp" your extension of stay (after verifying your identity by fingerprint) and make that stamp a barcode that can be scanned by immigration officers and police to instantly verify the validity.

Leaving the country? No need to see an immigration official. Scan the barcode, if valid and not on overstay, gate opens. If not, supervisor hauls you off for a manual evaluation.

I just made all of this up as I typed it. Surely, if I can come up with something on the fly, someone with actual programming knowledge could write something that would work in the real world.

Can we get a programmer over here, please?

Politicians want to create jobs for actual "voting" bodies. Machines do not vote and they are fast replacing their human counterparts and when that happens the voting bodies will change their vote. When AI comes to be reality maybe machines will have a program to "cull" the human race and our positions will be reversed. The slave will be the master. Yes as the above poster states immigration could easily make our lives much easier its a simple process but in the process human voting bodies would loose out.

[digibum]

hhhmm ... seems to totally misunderstand what science and technology, or software, is or what it could be or used for.

They/it is/are tools.

Politics is more to do with a way of finding a consensus for decisions that might be classified as differences of opinion.

Sure, technology can be used more and more for some purposes, but not for the final consensus building and decision making processes, unless you want AI to do that, and then we enter terminator territory, with totally redundant human beings.

Assuming we are not talking about AI, you have to understand that software can only achieve what it is designed to do. This means embedding specific models, algorithms,etc. You cannot create software to evaluate the relative pros/cons of, for example, capitalism versus communism, or socialism. It could only calculate relative performance using previously well defined criteria. But the choice of what those criteria should be, is the political domain.

Well, there is room in what you said for both.

Most people think technology is rather binary, ones or zeros, but it does have a lot of flexibility when combined with human intervention.

Nobody is asking for a computer to make a decision on capitalism vs. communism. What one might ask it to do is to flag all government procurements where costs are greater than 10% of commonly quoted prices for the same item.

Of course, a human is going to have to review the results of these searches and determine which ones to investigate further and which ones look legitimate but technology cuts through the clutter of data to help you pinpoint where to search.

Or, let's say you have an open bid on a government construction project. You could develop a weighted scoring system that automatically ranks bids based on the criteria that the selection committee has designated.

For example, and this is a grossly oversimplified example, let's say that the selection committee decides that the three main selection criteria are:

Price

Reputation of the bidder

Length of time to complete

Price is easy.

Reputation of the bidder can be a more complex sub-algorithm based on performance on previous government contracts, length of time the bidder has been in business, how many similar projects they bidder has performed, etc, etc.

And length of time to complete can either be a simple ranking or it can be a trick question used to eliminate unrealistic bids. For instance, I've both bid on technology contracts as well as hired people for technology contracts. I have a pretty good idea what the cost should be as well as how long and how many man-hours will be required.

If it's going to take six months and someone tells me that they can have it turned around in 1 month, I know that they either don't understand the scope of the project or they're lying.

So length of time to complete might be an algorithm that ranks based on variance from your own projections in order to give you an indication of which firm best understands the project.

Additionally, you can decide how to weight each factor. Maybe reputation of the builder is of paramount performance. Like they used to say in IT, nobody ever got fired hiring IBM. Even if a project fails, having a highly reputable vendor can politically insulate the hiring committee so for many projects this may be 80% of the weighting.

However, perhaps they want to give a new vendor a shot so they can give it less weighting.

Now, you take all of that, feed in the bids that come in and you can derive a score for each bid. Each bid now has an empirical ranking based on criteria that can be made transparent in the bidding process so if the integrity of the selection is ever called into question the selection committee can simply refer back to the rankings.

Humans still make the final decision but technology can do a lot of the heavy lifting and quantify portions of the decision making process such that those human-made decisions can be justified based on the inputs.

[Thai at Heart]

Is this a whole article bemoaning Thainess?

Is this idiot really a Thai, sitting in Thailand and even he asks "why, why, why?"

After I had worked in Thailand for about 5 years, I reconciled this very simple problem by realising that when, all else fails, and something utterly inexplicably stupid or detrimental to Thailand occurs, the answer is very simple.

Money.

Why don't they fix the road. Money. Why does the doctor always give me 100 pills I don't need? Money. Why are the police so useless? Money.

Why does Tulsathit continue to write such useless articles....................

He's a dumbass