Beautifully put: "Perhaps the most straightforward objection is Hayek’s original one: markets are not merely aggregators of calculation inputs but rather the medium through which the inputs are created. Preferences for different goods and services, optimal prices and optimal allocations do not simply exist in the void, waiting to be collected. Rather, they are discovered and revealed through market interactions. A planner cannot calculate without markets because replacing them also destroys the process that generates the necessary inputs."
The ability to perform trillions of calculations to optimise what the market already does pretty optimally is surely irrelevant to the central planning advocate. For such a person ‘optimal’ means how s/he thinks the economy *should* operate to serve goals such as ‘fairness’, not how resources should be allocated to maximise the utility of each individual in the economy.
So if this theoretical super computer were to become possible and it gave outcomes that the planner disagreed with on ideological grounds it would be rejected just as much as the current market arrangements are rejected.
That is a very good point. However, I’ve never seen central planning enthusiasts advocate for a change in perspective (ie maximising utility is silly, let’s do something else instead). People still argue against market mechanisms on efficiency terms, which is why we see them insist that calculation is possible through some form of sufficiently advanced technology.
The best AI software today is/will be an attempt to copy what "expert" humans can do, and can thus help the "ordinary" human if it was available to them.
Necessity breeds invention! Microsoft SQL can search a database, and has done for decades - a new relationship found is therefore rare. What can AI invent that a human cannot? The human wants something, a necessity - AI of itself does not, and is not creative tho' it can search a database (of Patents or a [Disabled People's] Supplies Brochure among thousands of others, for example) and tell if a solution may already be available, but Nothing as Creative as Humans can.
Chat GPT and Gemini already say "this is a suggestion, and you should ask Professionals for best Advice".
This Leyland Trucks placard beside an engine at the NEC on 21april2026, describes what I consider the "best" use of AI for it is practical, of immediate cost benefit, and it is unrelenting in its search for parts missing from an engine (or gearbox or axle or....), unless the electrics fails in some way!! Similarly, helping radiographers find potential tumours......
quote:
Impact of AI at Leyland Trucks - display 21apr2026 at the NEC Birmingham
The AI model can count and report the number of specific components with in seconds, instantly identifying any missing Parts, and is expected to considerably reduce the incidence of faults progressing further along Leyland's Production line.
The system has been trained to detect clips and clamps, with accuracy levels of 86 per cent and 70 per cent, respectively, further classifying them as fault or not with accuracy levels of 70 per cent and 75 per cent, respectively.
Vehicle quality is paramount in the contemporary manufacturing industry ‑ a missed fault on a production line can lead to significant rework during final testing, which can be costly and cause reputational damage if a vehicle is released with a fault. The Leyland Trucks' quality assurance team has developed a comprehensive list of checkpoints containing thousands of line items.
Factories are harsh environments, with high noise levels, making inspection difficult with dark colours and metallic reflections. Various sensing techniques have been employed in the AI system, including multiple lighting and exposure settings, and optical filters to enhance sensitivity.
In the future, the AMRC North West project team aims to use 3D laser imaging to improve clarity, so that even minute faults which may be easily missed by the human eye can be detected.
Photo by JimQ 21apr2026 (not below, but in my doc!)
Beautifully put: "Perhaps the most straightforward objection is Hayek’s original one: markets are not merely aggregators of calculation inputs but rather the medium through which the inputs are created. Preferences for different goods and services, optimal prices and optimal allocations do not simply exist in the void, waiting to be collected. Rather, they are discovered and revealed through market interactions. A planner cannot calculate without markets because replacing them also destroys the process that generates the necessary inputs."
The ability to perform trillions of calculations to optimise what the market already does pretty optimally is surely irrelevant to the central planning advocate. For such a person ‘optimal’ means how s/he thinks the economy *should* operate to serve goals such as ‘fairness’, not how resources should be allocated to maximise the utility of each individual in the economy.
So if this theoretical super computer were to become possible and it gave outcomes that the planner disagreed with on ideological grounds it would be rejected just as much as the current market arrangements are rejected.
That is a very good point. However, I’ve never seen central planning enthusiasts advocate for a change in perspective (ie maximising utility is silly, let’s do something else instead). People still argue against market mechanisms on efficiency terms, which is why we see them insist that calculation is possible through some form of sufficiently advanced technology.
The best AI software today is/will be an attempt to copy what "expert" humans can do, and can thus help the "ordinary" human if it was available to them.
Necessity breeds invention! Microsoft SQL can search a database, and has done for decades - a new relationship found is therefore rare. What can AI invent that a human cannot? The human wants something, a necessity - AI of itself does not, and is not creative tho' it can search a database (of Patents or a [Disabled People's] Supplies Brochure among thousands of others, for example) and tell if a solution may already be available, but Nothing as Creative as Humans can.
Chat GPT and Gemini already say "this is a suggestion, and you should ask Professionals for best Advice".
This Leyland Trucks placard beside an engine at the NEC on 21april2026, describes what I consider the "best" use of AI for it is practical, of immediate cost benefit, and it is unrelenting in its search for parts missing from an engine (or gearbox or axle or....), unless the electrics fails in some way!! Similarly, helping radiographers find potential tumours......
quote:
Impact of AI at Leyland Trucks - display 21apr2026 at the NEC Birmingham
The AI model can count and report the number of specific components with in seconds, instantly identifying any missing Parts, and is expected to considerably reduce the incidence of faults progressing further along Leyland's Production line.
The system has been trained to detect clips and clamps, with accuracy levels of 86 per cent and 70 per cent, respectively, further classifying them as fault or not with accuracy levels of 70 per cent and 75 per cent, respectively.
Vehicle quality is paramount in the contemporary manufacturing industry ‑ a missed fault on a production line can lead to significant rework during final testing, which can be costly and cause reputational damage if a vehicle is released with a fault. The Leyland Trucks' quality assurance team has developed a comprehensive list of checkpoints containing thousands of line items.
Factories are harsh environments, with high noise levels, making inspection difficult with dark colours and metallic reflections. Various sensing techniques have been employed in the AI system, including multiple lighting and exposure settings, and optical filters to enhance sensitivity.
In the future, the AMRC North West project team aims to use 3D laser imaging to improve clarity, so that even minute faults which may be easily missed by the human eye can be detected.
Photo by JimQ 21apr2026 (not below, but in my doc!)
OCR by CAERE/OmniPagePro90/omnipage.exe
JimQ