Behnoud Nakhostin

When Machines Decide What’s Best For Us

Here’s the thing: we’re terrible at knowing what actually makes us happy. (I’m including myself too!)

The Problem Nobody Talks About

We live in a world where human decision-making is failing us spectacularly. Depression rates hit record highs every year. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce. The average person changes careers five times, usually after years of misery. We’re drowning in choices but starving for satisfaction.

Why? Because we make life decisions based on social pressure, outdated instincts, and whatever seems good at the moment. We chase money thinking it equals happiness, even though research shows the correlation drops off after $75,000 per year. We pick careers based on prestige rather than personality fit. We choose life partners during the hormonal hurricane of early romance.

What if there was a better way? What if an AI government, armed with data from millions of human lives, could guide us toward choices that actually lead to long-term wellbeing? I know it sounds dystopian. But hear me out.

They Know Humans Better Than Humans

We claim we want to be happy, successful, satisfied. But let’s be honest: most of us have no idea what those words actually mean. We get swept up in a society that worships money like it’s the answer to everything. Success? That’s a bigger bank account. Happiness? Also money. Yet study after study shows that once people hit about $75,000 in annual income, additional wealth barely moves the happiness needle. And look at all those depressed billionaires.

Here’s where it gets interesting: AI doesn’t fall for the same traps we do. It won’t be influenced by Instagram influencers or that voice in your head saying you need a Tesla to be somebody. AI can look at the actual data from millions of life trajectories, happiness surveys, and health outcomes to see patterns we’re too close to notice.

So yeah, an AI government might push us toward choices we don’t think we want. But what if those choices actually lead to the life satisfaction we’re all chasing?

The Long Game vs. The Sugar Rush

We’re wired for immediate gratification. It’s like we’re all toddlers in adult bodies, reaching for the candy instead of the vegetables. Our brains evolved when finding high-calorie food meant survival, not diabetes. Now? That same wiring makes us choose the job with the highest salary over the one with work-life balance, even though data shows the second option correlates with 23% higher life satisfaction scores after five years.

An AI system could optimize for your 10-year happiness score, not your 10-minute dopamine hit. Imagine getting nudged toward the career that leaves you energized at 5 PM instead of depleted. Or being guided toward the city where you’ll build deeper friendships, even if it means earning $20,000 less per year.

The Nudge Machine

Picture this: You’re 28, working 70-hour weeks at a consulting firm. You tell yourself it’s temporary, just until you make partner. Your AI assistant notices your stress markers are through the roof, your social connections are weakening, and your exercise has dropped to zero. Based on analysis of 10 million similar life paths, it knows that 78% of people in your situation burn out within three years and end up career-switching anyway, after sacrificing their health and relationships.

The AI doesn’t force anything. Instead, it might:

Is this manipulation? Maybe. But we’re already being manipulated by algorithms designed to maximize engagement and ad revenue. At least this manipulation has our wellbeing as the end goal.

Freedom vs. Flourishing: The Trade-off Nobody Wants to Talk About

Look, I get it. The idea of an AI making decisions for us feels dystopian. We value our freedom to mess up our own lives, thank you very much. But here’s a thought experiment: If you could press a button and guarantee your child would make choices leading to a fulfilling life (meaningful work, deep relationships, good health, genuine contentment), would you press it? Even if it meant they couldn’t choose to become a miserable investment banker?

(And yes, I know some investment bankers are happy. But statistically… well, you get it.)

The trade-off is real. We might lose some autonomy. But we could gain lives that actually align with what human flourishing looks like, based on massive datasets rather than the random advice of whoever happens to be around us.

The Catch (Because There’s Always a Catch)

Before we hand over the keys to our robot overlords, let’s acknowledge the elephant in the room: This assumes the AI is programmed to optimize for human wellbeing, not corporate profits or government control. That’s a massive assumption. The same system that could guide us toward fulfilling lives could just as easily optimize for compliance, consumption, or productivity.

Which brings me to the mirror article coming out shortly: “When Machines Decide What’s Worst For Us.” Because every tool this powerful cuts both ways.

What This Actually Means

An AI government that genuinely wants to improve human lives wouldn’t look like The Matrix. It would look more like:

We’re already living in a world where algorithms shape our choices. The question isn’t whether we want AI influence. That ship has sailed. The question is whether we want that influence aligned with our long-term flourishing or short-term engagement metrics.

Maybe it’s time we admitted we need help being human. After all, we’ve been trying to figure out this whole “pursuit of happiness” thing for millennia, and based on global depression statistics, we’re not exactly crushing it.

The real test? Whether we’re brave enough to build AI systems that know us better than we know ourselves, and wise enough to ensure they’re working for us, not against us.

#AI