Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 226 posts

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#21

Post by _1tan »

breck wrote: post #13
gioele wrote: post #4

If anybody is planning anything that combines laws, versioning/revision control and public access to legal resources, please get in touch with me. I have quite a bit of experience in that field that I'll be happy to share thoughts and talk shop.

I have tinkered with a human readable, mathematically minimal, strongly typed language for writing laws/governments/constitutions. I am highly confident it will work--the code and tech are there I'm just waiting for a strong project leader with good domain knowledge to lead it. Shoot me an email if interested.

I have none of the above and would be interested nevertheless!

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#22

Post by JohnFen »

I have to confess, this effort makes me very, very nervous.

I already think that business has replaced too much of what government should be doing, and has too much influence over what it hasn't replaced. Also, given the activities coming from the tech industry over the last decade or more, I'm even more nervous that this is aimed in that direction.

Increasing the amount of that doesn't seem wise to me.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#23

Post by [deleted] »

graenxa wrote: post #12

Who needs public services when you can have private for-profit start-ups? I'm sure the new startups will always prioritize serving the citizens over making money. After all, that's what private for-profit organizations have a long track record of doing. In seriousness: I'm sure the listed start ups do good work. There are ways tech can help government and people. Government 2.0 is awful branding. The idea that you ca…

[deleted]

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#24

Post by unseenbastiat »

Psychologists use the term “socialization” to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are oversocialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#25

Post by bradenb »

graenxa wrote: post #12

Who needs public services when you can have private for-profit start-ups? I'm sure the new startups will always prioritize serving the citizens over making money. After all, that's what private for-profit organizations have a long track record of doing. In seriousness: I'm sure the listed start ups do good work. There are ways tech can help government and people. Government 2.0 is awful branding. The idea that you ca…

I totally agree. My first thought was of the world of Snow Crash where there are districts owned by businesses and individuals that set their own systems of law and order. It was not a pleasant future.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#26

Post by thedogeye »

saeedjabbar wrote: post #20
mwseibel wrote: post #16

Hey folks - happy to answer questions about our new RFS.

Why the focus on only profit making for-profit companies when the bulk of what you mentioned is currently being serviced by non-profits?

When non-profits succeed they have to ask for more money. When for-profits succeed, they fund themselves. So it's far better for a for-profit to solve a given problem than a non-profit, as they are inherently more scalable.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#28

Post by nabnob »

The solution to income inequality is not going to come from venture capitalists and private companies.

I have an idea for a non-profit that tackles a systemic problem, but I can't help but look at some of the other yc grads and think that their companies seem hopelessly out of touch with the problems they're trying to tackle.

Promise is mentioned as "tackling mass incarceration", but their company seems geared more towards improving efficiency in criminal justice agencies. Do they really think that an app that sends reminders is going to help failure to appear rates? Crime, recidivism, failure to appear etc are deeply rooted in poverty and hopelessness.

How does a reminders app fight any of those problems? People fail to show up to court because they don't see the point, because they think the system is stacked against them, because they can't afford to take the time off of work, because they can't find child care, or because they don't have transportation. It's ridiculous to suggest that an app that sends reminders of court dates will make an impact on any of these problems.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#29

Post by scarejunba »

dymk wrote: post #17
scarejunba wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bit of an old joke, no? I think the "descent to the absurd" style here doesn't make sense because there is a concrete reason for what he's saying: lowering the barrier to suggesting changes in laws in a more structured form. You could point to the diff and talk about it. Worthwhile, I think.

Absurd? I'm just as serious about what I'm proposing, as I am about a "Github-like UI" for the foundations of our country.

You're just being silly now. No one's saying "merge the PR to change abortion laws". They're talking about tooling to look at proposed differences clearly.

It doesn't seem absurd to me to have a diff, watch that evolve as new versions are proposed by people, and then finally watch what goes in. Obviously ground truth is still in the books, with laws debated in parliament or congress or whatever, but this acts as a shadow tracking that movement. Even if the act of passing were to end with a merge in of whatever law is debated, that's still hardly troublesome. It only increases transparency and doesn't remove any checks or balances.

Bit hysterical of a reaction for a rather minor request, in my opinion.

Post reply on HN