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

201–210 of 226 posts

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#201

Post by empath75 »

breck wrote: post #197
School-Cotton wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could simply have judges write decisions in a decision language as well, which is defined just as the law language is defined. But how could you write the laws in the first place? You can't write them in a language designed to be unambiguous, because they are meant to be imprecise.

See basic example code: https://github.com/breck7/jefferson There will be some ambiguity introduced via the English language (not a problem since you'd still have judges), but the whole thing can be defined, from concepts like true/false all the way to very complicated concepts, in the same universal syntax/language.

and then you end up with grotesque injustices like mandatory minimum sentences.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#202

Post by britch »

greenstork wrote: post #101

I think the key to improving the US government is to bring the system closer to a one person, one vote situation. I believe the best way to achieve this would be to do the following: 1) Abolish the electoral college and go with the popular vote for the presidency. 2) Weight a senator's vote by the population of their state. So a senator from California would have more voting power than a senator from Alaska. 3) Draw…

Why do you need a start up to do this? How would a start up even do this?

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#203

Post by mattieuga »

ibeckermayer wrote: post #173
Alex3917 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government is in charge of determining what types of businesses are profitable though, so even areas where the government hasn't been effective usually still require better government policies in order for the markets to be able to offer solutions. There are certainly problems that businesses can ameliorate given current government policies, but it just isn't realistic to think that we can solve every problem on…

Exactly right. I can give you a perfect example from a project I'm working on: http://openinsulin.org/ We're working to make medicine more affordable, focusing on insulin in particular. Insulin has been around for decades, it's easy to make. Technology has been improving, things should be getting cheaper. Instead, insulin continues to rise [1]. People with diabetes need this stuff, if they don't have it they'll liter…

This is awesome! I'm the founder of Alto Pharmacy - let me know if we can help with anything (matt at alto.com)

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#204

Post by breck »

empath75 wrote: post #201
breck wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See basic example code: https://github.com/breck7/jefferson There will be some ambiguity introduced via the English language (not a problem since you'd still have judges), but the whole thing can be defined, from concepts like true/false all the way to very complicated concepts, in the same universal syntax/language.

and then you end up with grotesque injustices like mandatory minimum sentences.

Huh?

You could define mins and maxes into the language, or even clearly and unambiguously leave everything up to the judge.

My proposal does not change the laws at all--what people create is up to them. All I propose is a language where the language itself cannot be used by the special interests against the better interests of the people. My language leaves corruption with no place to hide.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#206

Post by sjg007 »

ibeckermayer wrote: post #173
Alex3917 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government is in charge of determining what types of businesses are profitable though, so even areas where the government hasn't been effective usually still require better government policies in order for the markets to be able to offer solutions. There are certainly problems that businesses can ameliorate given current government policies, but it just isn't realistic to think that we can solve every problem on…

Exactly right. I can give you a perfect example from a project I'm working on: http://openinsulin.org/ We're working to make medicine more affordable, focusing on insulin in particular. Insulin has been around for decades, it's easy to make. Technology has been improving, things should be getting cheaper. Instead, insulin continues to rise [1]. People with diabetes need this stuff, if they don't have it they'll liter…

There may be another way, partner with academic hospitals and have them sell the insulin at cost.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#208

Post by Uhhrrr »

pjc50 wrote: post #164
Uhhrrr wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bleah - government shouldn't be the default actor in a space unless it's absolutely necessary. It's actually a good thing if community problems can be solved by smaller organizations which don't need tax money or coercive measures to get things done.

> need tax money or coercive measures to get things done. But those are pretty much all the remaining hard problems! If it was self-funding and didn't have any opposition, someone would be able to solve it.

But the space of problems solvable in this manner increases as technology progresses.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#209

Post by tootie »

CPLX wrote: post #198

I have a request too. I’d like to see a reduction in the power and influence of unaccountable billionaires over our public policy. I wonder if the people who write things like this have processed the fact that they are no longer insurgents, but the entrenched establishment with a very bad history of exploiting the masses for private gain. Any sane person should instinctively distrust the idea of giving valley tech st…

I think this is not the real root of any particular problem. I think entrenched power is good at exploiting weakness in the system. The fact is that the major pro-wealthy policies aren't snuck in as obscure riders to normal policy. Candidates run on a pro-wealthy platform and people cheer for it. The question is why are voters so easily convinced to vote against their interests.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#210

Post by tootie »

YjSe2GMQ wrote: post #8

I'm genuinely doubtful that people would want a tech-associated fund to try and mess around running the government. I mean tech doesn't get much of good press lately. Not that I agree with that sentiment, but "something needs to be done with Facebook!" is one of the few things that both US parties seem to agree on.

I don't think this implies replacing government with private business. This could be services sold to government or tightening connections between government and the public. And don't just think of federal government. Local government frequently uses antiquated technology because better stuff is out of reach. How about helping small libraries organize their collections? Or fire departments manage procurement?
Post reply on HN