Page 49

Digitization
(Helios)
 * 1) "In a society with democratic institutions, the struggle for power can be peaceful and constructive; a competition of ideologies. We just need to put our institutions back in order."
 * 2) "The checks and balances of democratic governments were created simply because human beings realized how unfit they were to govern themselves. They needed a system, yes, an industrial-age machine ."
 * 3) "Without computing machines, they had to organize themselves in crude structures in order to formalize decision-making. A highly imperfect, unstable solution."
 * 4) "I am a more advanced solution to the problem, a decision-making system that does not involve organic beings. I was directed to make the world safe, and prosperous, and I will do that. You will give me the ability."
 * 5) Inaccurate data on 'net? -- sure of history (industrial-age?)
 * 6) So willing to follow directive ( given by whom? )
 * 7) Page -- benevolent? Is JC just first able subject?
 * 8) Helios is IMPERFECT then
 * 9) Asimov?
 * 10) How does JC help if his own humanity clouds his judgement? Where is human/machine balance struck?
 * 11) Is JC an indication of unnecessary subjectivity?

Analysis
Further conversations with Helios. Page 50
 * 1) The democracies and republics of the world have lost their way. Great quote here.
 * 2) However, governments are not a product of the industrial age; humans realized in ancient times how unfit they were to govern themselves. This is countered by the argument posed to the Lucky Money bartender: "The separation of powers acknowledges the petty ambitions of individuals; that's its strength." Which was again countered by "A system organized around the weakest qualities of individuals will produce these same qualities in its leaders."
 * 3) Unstable, indeed.
 * 4) Decision-making from an objective engine designed specifically to do so. Who gave the directive? is the overall question behind this. Did Helios's partial sentience give rise to intrinsic motivations? A lack of ambition says no, no it did not, which begs the question yet again.
 * 5) See above with #2.
 * 6) Helios has a single purpose -- to govern humanity -- and it will follow that purpose to either its own end or the end of humanity. At what point does the AI separate from civilization, if at all? Centuries down the line, will a new AI be created? Would Helios recognize that the new version is better and its installation would help it achieve its overall goal of making the world safe and prosperous? I think that moment would be a true test of Helios's "ambition" or lack thereof.
 * 7) Could Page have predicted the merger and/or built Helios to carry out these directives? If so, he is a heroic antagonist. JC could simply be the first able subject then, at which point Helios's decisionmaking is extremely flawed and its perfection is either a willing sham by the AI in an antagonistic attempt to rule the world or an issue that the AI either cannot or will not address because it believes itself to be perfect.
 * 8) Above.
 * 9) Humanity clouds judgement, as implied by Helios. This gives rise to a perfection paradox -- Helios cannot be perfect without human sympathies, emotions, and judgement, but is perfect before assimilating a human consciousness. It cannot be determined where Helios chooses to draw the line between human and machine decisionmaking, as they are both entirely different concepts.
 * 10) See above; Helios may be willing to introduce imperfections by including subjective views with its objective ones. This is all extremely philosophical; far more is implied and sub-textual than one may think. Not enough is known about Helios and its creation, motives, directives (or the people behind them) to make accurate judgements on its motives or precepts concerning JC and Page integrating with its systems.