Maybe I'm just simplifying the purpose of representative democracy, but I always thought it arose out of necessity in some regard. Like back in the day it took days to get from NY to Philly. You couldn't send everyone there so you needed someone to represent people in the process (obviously not us #neverforget).

With the technology we have today, probably 90% of the interested citizens could be voting on every thing that congress and the senate debate. I'm probably giving too much with that 10% cause with the rise of mobile i think those with limited access are probably much fewer than it used to be. And naturally interested parties wouldn't be huge numbers for every issue. But if democratic participation was open I think it might encourage more civic duty across the board.

Shit imagine if you could actually put a bill on the docket, you'd need a threshold of supporters before it went for a vote. Open voting over a limited period. Political representatives would basically be moderators or educational resources to help citizens understand the issues/complexities/etc.

Obviously we aren't ready for that today because... well have you been to a .gov site lately. But if security was boosted to the tenth and the process was rolled out over like ten years... shouldn't that be a reasonable goal. Would you want that? What are the foreseeable problems (sans hackers because that's obviously going to happen)?

(Incidentally, there's a book Infomacracy by Malika Older (sp) coming out this month I can't wait to read, I don't think it's this per se but maybe it touches on it).

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

people say it would cause politicians to ignore smaller states but shit, how many states are ignored right now due to being solid Dem or GOP.

We are a republic tho...

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

this is not something I can sum up in a quick sentence, but we're very close.

Details here:

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/



~ ~ ~
All meetings end in separation
All acquisition ends in dispersion
All life ends in death
- The Buddha

|\_/|
='_'=

Every hundred years, all new people

In that setup (direct democracy), important issues in small populations will be ignored. A dam in Idaho? FOH.

With representatives, small voices can be heard through negotiation and bargaining

_______________________________________

seriously tho, i think for presidential elections it should be q person, 1 vote.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

It may be a challenge but thee should be a number if ways to account for it.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

to build a damn in FL.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Is a dam federal or state? Lemme google that:
https://www.fema.gov/dam-ownership-united-states

Well dam!!

For arguments sake lets say this florida dam is federal, which would mean a portion of the Idaho taxes could end up paying for it. but of course that depends on how you look at it. If you do a straight percentage of the cost verses taxes paid then sure $0.01 of the Idaho citizens fed taxes paid for the dam.

But technology is actually smarter than that. It could probably calculate whether the dam has any direct impact on every citizen in Idaho. So the one that never leaves the state, and hates florida oranges ain't gotta pay shit. But the one that gets all their vitamin C off them orangesand takes a couple golf trips down to florida every year, may need to cough up $0.03 of their fed taxes for that dam. But they could also review the proposal and have a say on whether it should be built, their vote weighted against those who it affects even more directly.

Of course having a machine know how many oranges you eat may sound big brother-ish (though for the record its already happening), but one it's really just calculations, and tech like this is only scary when its a closed system in the hands of a select few.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

second, how about one senator per state + 50 "at large" senators who could represent groups of people not aligned by geography but by issues (for example, an at large senator elected by a minority group that doesn't have sufficient votes in any one state to elect a senator from a specific state, but which has sufficient votes on a national basis that the group deserves representation).

But dams? Man, we need to be blowing them up, not building them.


~ ~ ~
All meetings end in separation
All acquisition ends in dispersion
All life ends in death
- The Buddha

|\_/|
='_'=

Every hundred years, all new people

Founding fathers didn't. I am pretty sure I don't either.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>Founding fathers didn't. I am pretty sure I don't either.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

women and non-married non-property-owning White men.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

for so many representation was because of the perception or legal reality of ownership. The roots of these choices for our political system are so antiquated and yet two hundred plus years later people still treat them like the bible.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Hence the motto: "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Otherwise, they would have just stayed in Europe.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

So you think we should have a technically supported direct democracy?

Either way direct democracy would have Rambo or Kris Kardashian as president... I dunno if we want that

Double 0
DJ/Producer/Artist
Producer in Kidz In The Hall
-------------------------------------------
twitter: @godouble0
IG: @godouble0
www.thinklikearapper.com

First you talk about Rambo and Kard like Trump ain't just become a real candidate in a representative democracy.

Even more though you're using a broad definition of direct democracy and attributing it to something I'm saying would be quite nuanced. It's wild how propaganistic the 'direct democracy doesn't work' thing is. At least with socialism/communism you can site fall of russia and shit. Can you even site specifics about the failure of direct democracies. I couldn't. Only thing close to a direct democracy I know about is Switzerland and I don't know shit about it except it seems to keep their people out of wars and get a lot of rich folk to trust their banking system or something like that. Shit's been direct democracy since before the US too if I'm not mistaken... go figure. I'm sure there's a shit ton of bad things you can tell me about the Swiss too but that's not the point (far as I know Federer isn't president though).

The point here is what is the purpose of the representative democracy? Is it like I said, more rooted in the logistics of governing in the pre-industrial era in which it was born? Or perhaps it was trickle down elitism (ie down from previous governing systems)? Is the vilification of direct democracy merely a tool to prop up the elite?

But to the point, is it inconceivable with the technology available to us now into the next decade, to develop a system of governence which gives citizens more direct involvement in the process, and could not such a system render the need for representation obsolete.

Here's a bad analogy. To be a cab driver in New York for the past 100 years (guessing) you needed to be represented by a company woul had the shielded cars for you to use. These companies worked with the TLC etc in setting up the terms and policies etc. Gave you hours to work, said where you could work, blah blah blah. Then came along technology and now all you need is your phone and your car. Of course you still have to be tested and connected to the network, but you have more direct control over your ability to offer rides to citizens.



█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Not parotting anything brosephine baker

Large groups of people can be swayed easily and are extremely stupid.. Rather groupthink makes stupid decsions..

See nazi germany, rwanda, bosnia, american slavery..

Double 0
DJ/Producer/Artist
Producer in Kidz In The Hall
-------------------------------------------
twitter: @godouble0
IG: @godouble0
www.thinklikearapper.com

>See nazi germany, rwanda, bosnia, american slavery..

>Not parotting anything brosephine baker

Fam you are right here:

>Large groups of people can be swayed easily and are extremely
>stupid.. Rather groupthink makes stupid decsions..

You literally just said nothing original and more importantly used it to deflect and avoid discussing anything I said. You don't want to talk about it, don't feel knowledgeable to really go in on the topic at hand, that's fine. But don't try to pass off bullshit like that as deep conversation ending points.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

it pretty much doesn't matter how we do it.

I think you are spot on and I always felt like the EC was an outdated model for electing a President.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

they are proof of their own opinions

they have no faith in Americans (neither do i) and are critical of groupthink but fall right in line with their group of choice without an ounce of pause

i'm wary of direct democracy and i think your points are valid but why don't folks address the points instead of just spouting random seemingly related opininos

yes, Americans are by and large idiots...hell, people are in general imho...

if i were to tackle your at least some of your points though...

1.) it took us a long time to get to a Trump and it's mostly reactionary to the current system...if the current system were more transparent, trustworthy, effecient...I personally don't think we'd ever have been this close to complete WTF Land.

2.) the devil is in the details and the implementation...unfortunately the current power structure would be in charge of implementation...it's akin to letting a previous regime setup the next one...pitfalls abound

3.) will any new system change the fact that no matter what face we put on the system change the fact that it's largely operating as an oligarchy?

4.) I'd need to really study Swiss government to comment more on that but it'd be hard to emulate without widespread cultural changes imho

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

>critical of groupthink but fall right in line with their group
>of choice without an ounce of pause

Don't even see it for what it is.

>i'm wary of direct democracy and i think your points are valid
>but why don't folks address the points instead of just
>spouting random seemingly related opininos

Conditioning.

>1.) it took us a long time to get to a Trump and it's mostly
>reactionary to the current system...if the current system were
>more transparent, trustworthy, effecient...I personally don't
>think we'd ever have been this close to complete WTF Land.

In some regard yes, but then again... Reagan.

>2.) the devil is in the details and the
>implementation...

Indeed and I think it would take a fully flushed out plan which I obviously didn't have when I posted, for people to think outside of what already exists. Even then though, the conditioning is so strong.

>unfortunately the current power structure
>would be in charge of implementation...it's akin to letting a
>previous regime setup the next one...pitfalls abound

Yeah, kinda, it doesn't have to be though. I'm not sure how that would work but I can imagine it being more of a direct process than representatives presenting the change.

>3.) will any new system change the fact that no matter what
>face we put on the system change the fact that it's largely
>operating as an oligarchy?

I think of it as such a radical paradigm shift that it wouldn't have to be tied to the current political legacy.

>4.) I'd need to really study Swiss government to comment more
>on that but it'd be hard to emulate without widespread
>cultural changes imho

And I think the seeds of those cultural changes are being ushered in by the rise of technology. We are a vastly different culture than we were in the reagan era let alone when our democracy was founded.

I definitely don't think it would be easy, but fundamentally I see this as the direction things are headed in this technological age. The question is whether we the people demand our say in its implementation or if we allow the political/economic elites to dictate the new paradigm on terms that benefit them.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

They just voted against a universal basic income. The referendum made it to a vote because it only takes 100,000 supporters to take something to vote. It wasn't expected to pass, but why shouldn't it go to the people for a vote?

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Or Venezuela.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

You think black people would ever have rights in this country if it was left up to Majority rules? That goes for any minority group.

Direct Democracy scares the shit out of me. I've never felt the democratic nature of our government was it's best feature but rather the built in protection for minority rights, that and checks and balances. All features designed to restrain the mercurial will of the people.

Heck California Prop system is a good reason to be scared of direct democracy.

Similarly, representative democracy makes sense not only because we couldn't practically vote on all matters that come to the government for decision making but because we aren't educated or versed enough on the topics to make best decisions on each issue to make the best choice. I'd rather hire someone to make those decisions for me full time and if they aren't doing a good job at it fire them and hire someone else.



>First you talk about Rambo and Kard like Trump ain't just
>become a real candidate in a representative democracy.
>
>Even more though you're using a broad definition of direct
>democracy and attributing it to something I'm saying would be
>quite nuanced. It's wild how propaganistic the 'direct
>democracy doesn't work' thing is. At least with
>socialism/communism you can site fall of russia and shit. Can
>you even site specifics about the failure of direct
>democracies. I couldn't. Only thing close to a direct
>democracy I know about is Switzerland and I don't know shit
>about it except it seems to keep their people out of wars and
>get a lot of rich folk to trust their banking system or
>something like that. Shit's been direct democracy since before
>the US too if I'm not mistaken... go figure. I'm sure there's
>a shit ton of bad things you can tell me about the Swiss too
>but that's not the point (far as I know Federer isn't
>president though).
>
>The point here is what is the purpose of the representative
>democracy? Is it like I said, more rooted in the logistics of
>governing in the pre-industrial era in which it was born? Or
>perhaps it was trickle down elitism (ie down from previous
>governing systems)? Is the vilification of direct democracy
>merely a tool to prop up the elite?
>
>But to the point, is it inconceivable with the technology
>available to us now into the next decade, to develop a system
>of governence which gives citizens more direct involvement in
>the process, and could not such a system render the need for
>representation obsolete.
>
>Here's a bad analogy. To be a cab driver in New York for the
>past 100 years (guessing) you needed to be represented by a
>company woul had the shielded cars for you to use. These
>companies worked with the TLC etc in setting up the terms and
>policies etc. Gave you hours to work, said where you could
>work, blah blah blah. Then came along technology and now all
>you need is your phone and your car. Of course you still have
>to be tested and connected to the network, but you have more
>direct control over your ability to offer rides to citizens.
>
>
>
>█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
>Big PEMFin H & z's
>"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1
>thing, a musician." � Miles
>
>"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

50 slaves on a plantation ruled by 4 white people and a few of us doing their dirty work to keep us in line. Sure woulda been nice to vote on who picked the cotton.

Fuck that. Gimme 1 man, 1 vote. I will take my chances vs having a chosen few who can easily be bought and paid for once in office and give 2 shits about our condition because they got universal everything for life.

I actually have faith in this country and dont think there are more racist than level headed people in it. The problem is a ton of people choose not to,vote becauae they feel the system is rigged and their vote doesnt count.

If I live in Alabama or Mississippi whats the point of voting Dem in the GE?

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

>I actually have faith in this country and dont think there are
>more racist than level headed people in it.

Its like is slavery bad? YES. Have my son go out and fight a war to free them though? NOPE. So im voting to keep it going, lol.

Like according to most of America the way the police force rolls is perfectly fine...

There's hella flaws to the way our pseudo democracy is now...but I have less faith in direct democracy because I don't think American's are inherently good.

>50 slaves on a plantation ruled by 4 white people and a few
>of us doing their dirty work to keep us in line. Sure woulda
>been nice to vote on who picked the cotton.
>
>Fuck that. Gimme 1 man, 1 vote. I will take my chances vs
>having a chosen few who can easily be bought and paid for once
>in office and give 2 shits about our condition because they
>got universal everything for life.
>
>I actually have faith in this country and dont think there are
>more racist than level headed people in it. The problem is a
>ton of people choose not to,vote becauae they feel the system
>is rigged and their vote doesnt count.

But there are a lot more "level-headed" people that will let racist shit slide because they're not being targeted, they're not close to anyone being targeted and therefore, they're not going to stick their neck out for what's right. They're "level-headed" so they're going to protect their neck until they're properly motivated to do something.

I don't think having them vote directly for national laws is any more advantageous on racial issues. We're 12% of the population and some other studies have shown the majority of white people have very few minority friends. If something is up for vote that has disproportionate racial impact, a vast majority of the country is going to be clueless.

The good thing about a representative republic is that it can amplify the interests of minority groups. Direct democracy drowns out the minority.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

So while I understand why theOP makes it easy to jump to a direct democracy conclusion that's not where I think it has to go.

You gotta understand I'm coming from this from a machine learning perspective. I know what they can do now, am projecting what they can do moving forward and applying it to politics. Fundamentally we humans will have to catch up. Our backward ass systems of governance will become obsolete.

For the record I don't think artificial intelligence is coming anytime soon to conquor us so I'm not afraid of this shift. I'm more afraid of the people at the helm who can in turn use that to tighten their control. I'd much rather see it put into the public hands to benefit their political self determination.

Real talk machines are much better at checks and balances than human beings. Our whole political system revolves around checks and balances and breeds corruption because humans gon human those checks to tip the balance in their favor.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

________________________________________________________________
whenever you did these things to the least of my brothers you did them to me

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

________________________________________________________________
whenever you did these things to the least of my brothers you did them to me

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

________________________________________________________________
whenever you did these things to the least of my brothers you did them to me

i know that is a problem. i don't think its an impossible one to account for though, it really depends on the nature of the system. what exists currently, hell yeah, but to be done right you'd have to shift to a different paradigm of digital security.

in other words i don't have an answer for that right now but that doesn't mean there isn't one and it shouldn't keep us from thinking about the issue at hand.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

________________________________________________________________
whenever you did these things to the least of my brothers you did them to me

Not exactly my premise but an interesting starting premise:

But before we head into the future, I think it's important to reflect upon where we've been. Four hundred and eighty-one years ago, a young priest tacked 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany and created a cultural upheaval called the Reformation that sent shock waves across the Old World. His ideas, put to paper with pen and ink, divided families and brought down kings. The world would never be the same all because a single man posted a powerful idea in a public place.

In Martin Luther's time, however, communicating an idea was much more difficult. In fact, nearly impossible, and so political conversations were, for the most part, the purview of the elite. Luther's ideas were powerful, but political conversation was almost entirely dependent on oral communications that only time could facilitate.

Now, let's fast forward two centuries to 1776. This time a fiery young printer wrote a pamphlet that called for revolution and freedom from an oppressive king. 100,000 copies of Common Sense were printed on a cumbersome hand press. Still a very slow way to disseminate information but light years faster than the pen and ink of Luther's time. Political conversation now reached a mass audience despite obstacles of illiteracy, geography, and government opposition. Out of that political conversation and the power of ideas, democracy was born.

Now, fast forward again... this time to the present. Today, we have the most fantastic means of communications in the history of the world literally at our fingertips, and more people are literate than ever before. Yet, we have a system of democracy where political conversation has become 10 second sound bites; where we hear media monologues instead of political dialogue; where politics has become the cult of personality instead of the power of ideas.

Then end result? People are rejecting current political conversation by simply saying, "This is not an important part of my world", returning politics more and more to the elite and that is dangerous to the future of democracy.

http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/papers/winston.html

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

or read the bills, and that is all they are in office for


often they dont even read the bills they are submitting
the oil lobby writes the fracking bill and gives it to their bought congressman to put it up for a vote

then somebody from left field adds a rider that has nothing to do with the original topic




meanwhile america as a whole just spent 2 weeks discussing a gorilla

)))--####---###--(((

bunda
<-.-> ^_^ \^0^/
get busy living, or get busy dying.

the work i do involves machine learning, nothing too deep but, in the field no less.

so as it improves you'll be able to apply it to those war and peace length bills and it will be able to personalize it so that you can understand its relevance to you, in a language you understand. all of teh complexities that make it work as law would still be there but each person will be able to digest the meaning of the laws and how they apply to them in simple terms. it will aleviate the need for human proxies who tell you to just trust them because its so complex but they promise they have your interests in heart even though they never read the bills themselves. the machine will be working for you.

That's powerful. It becoms a way to educate the public on their civic duties therby getting them involved in the political process, which would encourage direct participation. now the thing is that if these machines don't start out being an open public empowering tool, they will be kept by those elites and configured for their advantage. they won't tell you they have a bot reading their bills for them they'll just pretend to still be the experts that you yourself could be.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

vile negro-hating islamophobic conservatives will be the most active on this direct digital platform. baring witness to their new found digital might and their ability to shout down reason, i shudder at the prospect of giving them direct power. their educated elite is barely keeping them in check

you're using a (semi)anonymous example for something which would not allow for annonymity. which isn't to say your vote would be public record, but you couldn't participate anonymously. of course that's not going to end racism, but it will make them have to do more than just shout loud and troll to be heard.

active participation in the political process would encourage civic education which i think could serve to shift a lot more positions than your typical online debate.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

It sounds like ya'll are really talking about getting rid of the electoral college since people keep bringing up Trump.

A direct democracy impacts who makes the laws... our Constitution, however, says the President has relatively limited power over that (influence as the head of his party and veto power). His/her job is primarily to enforce the laws.

Anyway, a direct democracy would have more of an impact on how laws are created by Congress. It wouldn't necessarily change the structure of Congress but it would change their power.

Think of some of those referendums and propositions that appear regularly on county, city and state ballots like Proposition 1 in Houston that would allow transgendered people to use the bathroom of the their chosen gender. That's direct democracy at work... the people of that city decided what their law would be on this by simple majority.

If our federal government changed to that model, we could either figure out a way for certain referendums to bubble up to the national ballot, or we could let Congress continue to make laws and just have the right to veto those laws (which is currently the President's power).

I don't know if it really fixes any of our problems in the country. Companies can "buy" citizens even more easily than Congress people, who at least have some oversight. More populous states would have even more say on how the country is run (shit, the midwest would probably secede because the population centers are mostly on the coasts).

In general, minority positions would be fucked and we'd probably be even more beholden to corporate influence. You want the to give the EPA the power to impose restrictions on offshore oil drilling anywhere in the country?

Good luck winning when ExxonMobil is running nation wide ads against your referendum saying is going to raise fas 50c/gallon and the rest of the country could care less about a coast line they will likely never see.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

I think you're assuming that the system would allow everyone to vote on anything. I'm not seeing it that way. I think I illustrated by example somewhere above, but ultimately I think vested interest in any issue could be weighed pretty well by a machine learning system.

>I don't know if it really fixes any of our problems in the
>country. Companies can "buy" citizens even more easily than
>Congress people, who at least have some oversight.

A handful sure but they would have to in effect buy 50% (or using the Musk model above 60%) of the interested parties. That's a lot of payout and a hard sell for people who are voting toward their own self interests.

>More
>populous states would have even more say on how the country is
>run (shit, the midwest would probably secede because the
>population centers are mostly on the coasts).

Fundamentally I think what machine learning would reveal is that most issues don't reach as broadly as one would think. Also on a federal level it wouldn't be about states it would be about the issue. No winning states but rather voting on the issues at hand. In order to make this work you'd need an educated public that goes beyond talking points to truly understanding their issues. The direct here is not just about voting but actual civic involvement.

>In general, minority positions would be fucked and we'd
>probably be even more beholden to corporate influence. You
>want the to give the EPA the power to impose restrictions on
>offshore oil drilling anywhere in the country?

I'd rather those communities directly affected by the drilling have a weighted vote on the matter.

>Good luck winning when ExxonMobil is running nation wide ads
>against your referendum saying is going to raise fas
>50c/gallon and the rest of the country could care less about a
>coast line they will likely never see.

But how effective would that be on an educated public that understands that their cheaper gas comes at a health cost to a community that has a more weighted vote on the matter. It's only if Exxon controls the machine that it weights the economics of gas sale over the health impact of a community.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

"Most likely the form of government on Mars would be a direct democracy, not representative," said Musk. "So it would be people voting directly on issues. And I think that's probably better, because the potential for corruption is substantially diminished in a direct versus a representative democracy."

"I think I would recommend some adjustment for the inertia of laws would be wise. It should probably be easier to remove a law than create one," said Musk. "I think that's probably good, because laws have infinite life unless they're taken away."

As an example, Musk envisioned a scenario in which a bill would need 60 percent of the vote to become a law, but it could be removed at any time with more than 40 percent of the vote. He also argued that all laws should have a built-in sunset provision — a clause that basically establishes an expiration date for the law unless it's approved again. "If it's not good enough to be voted back in, maybe it shouldn't be there," said Musk.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/2/11837590/elon-musk-mars-government-direct-democracy-law-code-conference

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

when the more immediate issue is that in the past decade "direct" democracy and technological reforms have been plagued by corruption.

we'd probably have bigger issues with money and influence (and privacy and glitches and short-cuts) before we could even tell whether people are gonna actually go online click through candidates and propositions.

>when the more immediate issue is that in the past decade
>"direct" democracy and technological reforms have been
>plagued by corruption.

^^^^

>we'd probably have bigger issues with money and influence (and
>privacy and glitches and short-cuts) before we could even tell
>whether people are gonna actually go online click through
>candidates and propositions.

There will always be hackers, but most hacks are the results of human errors. The more machine learning takes over the more secure things will become. Never 100% but I think it's a managable risk.

As an example I just read an article about Waze and how people in secluded areas were getting pissed at all the drivers that were crowding their streets. They started filing false accident reports and organizing around it to prevent the traffic, but the system which is based on machine learning would always find them out and self correct. It wasn't until actual infrastructural changes were put n place that they had any effect. It's a small time hack for sure but it shows the direction things are headed when machine learning systems are in control.



█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

right now there are issues with only a few companies producing voting technology (diebold still corrupt as shit right?), and with government being reluctant to invest in the needed equipment.

there are also huge issues with how direct-ish democracy has developed. look at what's happened with the relatively low tech direct democracy movements in the west coast. there hasn't been an outpouring of new ideas and it hasn't improved participation rates. in fact, it's led to people who have never even been elected to office having an even more disproportionate effect on the laws. i've only voted in washington, and ballot initiatives and referenda been a pretty picture at the state level there. i am under the impression it's even worse (though perhaps not as dominated by a few individuals) in california.

we also have to get better at imagining how information will be shared as we build the infrastructure for direct democracy. i think the kinds of direct democracy that we can imagine post-social media are very different from the kinds of direct democracy someone would have imagined 15 years ago. and i think those visions of direct democracy were very different from what people imagined before the internet. i don't think we have a great picture of what the landscape might be like in the 2030s.

there's been a lot of research with big data and trends and social psychology, but almost all of it is marketing research. it's easy to see that being exploited. the thing that worries me most is that our political theory won't be able to keep up with the technology. especially because those consumers models are built on aggregating and targeting individuals, but democracy is a system of government that was invented to make decisions as a community.

sorry i've been fielding from a direct democracy angle this whole thread because that's what it became but i don't think it was really what i was shooting for from the original post, but you gotta meet where people are at so...

>right now there are issues with only a few companies
>producing voting technology (diebold still corrupt as shit
>right?), and with government being reluctant to invest in the
>needed equipment.

Honestly I'm not sure how the infrastructure is arrived at from the systems in place, but I wouldn't count on the existing parties to put it on the table either. That said I think the technology is there, and with it the possibilities. While it may take more legwork to implement, actually creating it isn't out of the people's hands.

>there are also huge issues with how direct-ish democracy has
>developed. look at what's happened with the relatively low
>tech direct democracy movements in the west coast. there
>hasn't been an outpouring of new ideas and it hasn't improved
>participation rates.

I think the education around the tech would necessarily have to be the first step. Think about it like this. How many shitty uninformed meme's get spread around the internet every day as fact. Imagine if those were informed positions around civic engagement. I actually worked a tech civic engagement initiative in the 2004 election targetting youth and the younger generation are primed for this type of thing. A public armed with machine learning is a powerful thing, you just have to give them the tools. Even in 2004 we were able to increase engagement through tech, by 2020 they could be primed easily considering what's coming.

>in fact, it's led to people who have
>never even been elected to office having an even more
>disproportionate effect on the laws. i've only voted in
>washington, and ballot initiatives and referenda been a pretty
>picture at the state level there. i am under the impression
>it's even worse (though perhaps not as dominated by a few
>individuals) in california.

Those educated in it utlize it. Those who aren't will be left out. So educate everyone to balance the tables.

>we also have to get better at imagining how information will
>be shared as we build the infrastructure for direct democracy.
>i think the kinds of direct democracy that we can imagine
>post-social media are very different from the kinds of direct
>democracy someone would have imagined 15 years ago. and i
>think those visions of direct democracy were very different
>from what people imagined before the internet. i don't think
>we have a great picture of what the landscape might be like in
>the 2030s.

It's pretty wild how far we'll be by then, and I won't even pretend to know, but I guess the point of this post is couldn't the momentum be headed in that direction. In a perfect world wouldn't technology make the need for representative democracy obsolete? If the answer to that is yes, or even possibly, shouldn't we be working toward that. Because in an imperfect world those in control recognize that power and do everything they can to contain it to prevent it from happening.

>there's been a lot of research with big data and trends and
>social psychology, but almost all of it is marketing research.

Like it or not it is the frontline. Mainly because of the $$.

>it's easy to see that being exploited.

It already is and will continue to be.

>the thing that worries
>me most is that our political theory won't be able to keep up
>with the technology.

And this is a parallel to my point. If we aren't active about it at this moment when we're already behind but it's still just burgeoning, by 2020 we've lost.

>especially because those consumers models
>are built on aggregating and targeting individuals, but
>democracy is a system of government that was invented to make
>decisions as a community.

This is a bit of a misnomer. Marketing is almost always done using heuristic approaches to machine learning. Similar to case studies you set the parameters in a way that helps you get the results you want. What's needed is for rnn (recurrent neural networks) to be utilized as these don't start with an objective but rather start learning from square one and arrive at the conclusions the data presents. One is subjective, the other objective. You take that rnn machine and *then* employ heuristic analysis that represents individual preferences or communal values etc, and what you get back is an honest picture of the issues as they are relevant to you and or your community.

Incredibly simplified but hopefully you see what I'm getting at.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

my opinion hasn't really changed but figure people would use it as a good argument against.

What I think it illustrated is that the presumption of one side was that they had a majority . In fact they may have had a majority. But they didn't have a majority of folk actively involved in their civic duty. There's a piece floating around which basically says as much. That the real take away is that the UK's diverse and young need to stop taking their beliefs for granted and start standing up for them or shit like this will happen.

The other side is that you should know you are surrounded by a bunch of xenophobes and not fool yourself into believeing in a false sense of progressiveness. When you look at the maps what you see isn't a united kingdom but one in which people are divided about this and probably many other issues. In fact those maps could almost be a heat map of political leanings which may be a better way of thinking about governance than we do at present.

The big counter though is I think anti-intellectualism was hard at work in this one and that's counter the use of technology I'm suggesting would be behind the shift. That said I will concede the liklihood that those who wanted to remain likely didn't turn out as they should of because of a sense of lack of need their digital presence gave them. In other words they didn't think it pass because technology had convinced them how obviously it shouldn't.

Growing pains but still..

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

When you've got people Googling "What is the EU?" AFTER a vote on whether to leave or stay in it, the issue isn't the lack of information or access to it.... it's about human nature.

Some folks just don't have the time to inform themselves... others just aren't that interested... many already have their hearts and minds made up... even the few that fully understand the implications probably couldn't answer, unequivocally, yes or no.

The more people that you involve in a big issue like this, the harder it is to make a well-informed decision. This really should've just been a non-binding referendum to get a good pulse check on how the people currently feel.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

they sound populist, but they're easily controlled by monied interests and misinformation.

the scary thing is that mature representative democracies might actually be becoming obsolete, and this seems much more likely to be what we would get instead of some kind of utopian consensus-based technocracy.

votes like brexit have happened at the state level in the u.s., and the funding/messaging/nomination strategies of almost EVERYONE involved in this presidential election are beyond fucked.

i mean, i finally caved to hillary's email list because i wanted hamilton tickets, and she's the best model for a good campaign. i like bernie a lot but he couldn't put together a complete platform, and i like the greens a lot but i get frustrated every time i try to navigate their website. and somehow millions of tech-savvy people seem to be gravitating towards an actual joke of a party.

i am stunned it came to that. all b/c Cameron wanted to win an election, i guess?

wtf?

fuck you.

>i mean, i finally caved to hillary's email list because i
>wanted hamilton tickets,

>and
>somehow millions of tech-savvy people seem to be gravitating
>towards an actual joke of a party.
>


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

>When you've got people Googling "What is the EU?" AFTER a
>vote on whether to leave or stay in it,

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/stop-using-google-trends

I think at this stage I'm saying these represent real votes by people. These people exist and we should learn from it not say they shouldn't have a vote.



█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

its not technologies fault for Brexit.

Its refusing to get a finger on the pulse of the country. Samw thing happened in the GOP and almost happened with Bernie.

People are mad at the government, mad at immigration, mad at stagnant wages and rising taxes. Put that shit to a vote and more times than not the voting results will shock us.

Here is the problem tho... the more we say "well, we have to protect the people from themselves by ugnoring their frustration, fear, bigotry, etc.." the angrier the mob gets.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

especially in the english and french traditions, people have been worrying about the voters fucking up democracy since the beginning. so i think it's relevant to the discussion.

and, fair or not, the reason why we see the failure in Britain is because the technology has outstripped that mediation. mass communication/mass media have fanned the flames and made people less patient with new developments. (the technology behind financial markets, transportation, and probably even weapons technology with terrorism fears probably don't help either.)

short term it may look like a mistake because most didn't think it would happen but what if the UK is winning a few years from now?

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

which is close enough to a mistake to me. they'll probably come out okay in the long term, but there will be people affected negatively that didn't have to be along the way.

notice that nobody on the brexit side can actually articulate the mechanisms by which it will lead to a better future.

Similar demographics in terms of the pro and against camp. The against one something like 75% in that one, but it was noted as a statement for the pro side to have gotten 25%.

Which side was mis-informed?


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

i wish we could put the Internet back in Pandora's box and act like this entire thing never happened. i would happily return to a life w/o the Internet or any of the bullshit ass tech toys fucking geeks created and then we let them convince us are 'cool' or worth owning b/c they shave precious seconds off relatively minor life events (like starting a car or turning on a light switch or changing a tv channel).

so the very idea that we can use fucking tech toys and the sharing economy model as our governance is goddamned insane. just absolutely crazy. laughable. abhorrent.

die, geeks.

fuck you.

I'll be back to shit on your thoughts later.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

it takes me too long to wipe my ass. and using my hand is so inefficient. and using tp is wasteful - how many trees have died so my ass doesn't leave stains in my drawers?

surely my smartphone can handle the job for me. plus w/tech wiping my ass i can share pix w/my friends - b/c how do i know i actually wiped my ass unless i post about it via social media? it didn't actually happen unless i tell the whole world and post a pic.

fuck you.

http://www.lixil.co.th/satis-integrated-toilet

b/c i need the thing to take pix and post them to IG. plus i need to be able to operate it using my phone. so like if i'm on my way home w/a turtlehead poking out i want to use my phone to raise the lid and seat and have the seat set to my preferred temp and i also want a fresh bowl so i want it to flush just before i sit down. and i need my phone to post updates on FB about all of this in real time, of course. b/c if the whole world doesn't know i just took a shit then it didn't happen.

fuck you.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

having to use my own fingers to pick boogers is SOO 20th century. this is a problem for tech! i'm wasting time doing this job when my phone can do it for me! or the machine that runs the lights in my house that's also connected to my phone - that thing should be cleaning my nose for me. and then it can send alerts to all my (not really) friends and followers on various social media outlets to let them know about the snotty boogers the machine pulled out of me. b/c if the world doesn't know then it didn't happen. plus i want to get as many likes and comments as i can b/c that's what life is about now - comments from anonymous freaks about mundane happenings.

fuck you.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

For National Politics at least. It updates you about when your Reps are scheduled to vote, and tells you the results. But first you vote yourself, it lists issues based on topics you previously identified as of interest to you. There is a concise pro/con explanation of each topic to help you decide a position as well. The step further, is that an email is generated on your behalf, based on your own vote, which is automatically sent to your appropriate representative.

I didn't initially make the connection when I first started to use it, when my Congress people began sending me generic emails thanking me for my input.

Locally something like this would be great.

>For National Politics at least. It updates you about when
>your Reps are scheduled to vote, and tells you the results.
>But first you vote yourself, it lists issues based on topics
>you previously identified as of interest to you. There is a
>concise pro/con explanation of each topic to help you decide a
>position as well. The step further, is that an email is
>generated on your behalf, based on your own vote, which is
>automatically sent to your appropriate representative.
>
>I didn't initially make the connection when I first started to
>use it, when my Congress people began sending me generic
>emails thanking me for my input.
>
>Locally something like this would be great.


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

i want a fried bologna sandwich and some potato chips. now. surely someone somewhere w/in walking distance has some bologna and a frying pan and a bag of chips in their kitchen. i should be able to use my phone to find a friendly neighbor who i've never met but who must be a good/decent person b/c they can afford a smart gadget and Internet service and since we're all shiny happy ppl holding hands via tech it's perfectly fine for me to just walk into their kitchen and find a sandwich and chips waiting for me. there's nothing wrong w/this - w/tech none of us are strangers. i can check the sandwich maker's profile and see pix of their daily shits so i know what to expect when i walk into this kitchen. plus i've seen this person's vacay photos w/pix of their feet at the beach and so i know this is totally okay. when i go into McDonald's i don't know where those cooks vacay. i don't know how often they shit everyday. how can i trust them? just b/c the government does inspections? i can't trust the government - i don't see vacay photos of governments or departments or inspectors. i don't know how many likes they have on their pix. i can't trust them! i only trust tech. b/c tech is pure and shiny and happy and ppl. holding hands.

fuck you.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

http://tinyurl.com/zkszny7

I think you would love it. Obviously, pick and choose your reading -- no need to read it front to back -- but he has several rational proposals that you would really agree with.


~ ~ ~
All meetings end in separation
All acquisition ends in dispersion
All life ends in death
- The Buddha

|\_/|
='_'=

Every hundred years, all new people

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/democracy-by-app

The idea of a political representative evolved out of necessity. Townspeople couldn’t afford to take a day off and ride a horse to the capital. They needed to agree upon one guy who would more or less say what they were thinking, and they voted to pick the right guy for the job.

Horses became model T’s became jets flying politicians from their constituencies to the District of Columbia, ostensibly to have an ear to the ground in their home state and a hand to the buzzers on the Senate floor. But travel—and voter awareness—requires cash that drives up the price of running for office.

In the era of the iPhone, sending a man or woman to Washington to “represent” a district back home can feel about as forward-thinking as sending an intern to Amazon headquarters to pick up the new DeLillo. Why do congressional offices read bills in hard-copy, in private, while their constituents draft their work in Google Docs? Why does a senator have to stand on the Senate floor to hear arguments or to vote, when her constituents watch proceedings on C-Span and vote for which Game of Thrones heroine her hair most resembles on BuzzFeed?

So why do we still send politicians to Washington to read bills and press buzzers? For the in-person schmoozing politicians call “compromise,” but which their constituents see as ripe ground for a sherry-drinking, old-boy oligarchy? (For the “swamp” Trump vows to his voters that he will “drain”?) Nowadays, American voters appear to be unhappy with the very premise that would require a politician to be a living, breathing human being.

What if your city council member was an empty vessel whose every decision you voted for on your smartphone?



█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Who dey?

fuck you.

Then they can't get away with being sneaky

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/with-no-warning-house-republicans-vote-to-hobble-independent-ethics-office.html

.
*****
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5P6zdlPJ34&feature=related
^^^ever walked the streets of...

Let me email you that email I promised.

Seriously, what is the purpose of these people besides protecting their own interests?

The need for an ethics committee is indicative a fundamental flaw in the system. Technology is more than adequately equipped to manage this without ethical violations at a fraction of the costs.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Bc as that idiot said 'the cyber is something no one understands and I know about hacking'.

fuck you.

When officials go to Washington it's too easy to get manipulated...

Cast that vote at your state capital while the public waited outside with pitchforks.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Lol

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/411/964/9b5.jpg

fuck you.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/5lrdy9/could_technology_remove_the_politicians_from/?st=IXHXDJTP&sh=13bbb835

___________________________
He has the confidence of Vernon Maxwell on a yayo binge.

http://www.2amDonuts.bandcamp.com