DemocracyOS

#1

Post by sinak » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 9:34 PM UTC

DemocracyOS
democracyos.org

Re: DemocracyOS

#2

Post by stevecode » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:13 PM UTC

FYI OS means Operating System not Voting System.

Re: DemocracyOS

#3

Post by benwilber0 » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:16 PM UTC

this trend toward naming your pseudo-company "somethingOS" is getting really annoying.

Re: DemocracyOS

#4

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:21 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: DemocracyOS

#5

Post by striking » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:29 PM UTC

What about the monitoring and modification of online communities by the GCHQ? This doesn't even look resistant to that.

Also, what about traditional ballot stuffing? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_100#Hacking anyone?

I could only trust this if there were attached a mathematical proof of its usability. Otherwise, I kind of doubt it's worth anyone's time.

Re: DemocracyOS

#6

Post by mikermcneil » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:32 PM UTC

benwilber0 wrote: post #3

this trend toward naming your pseudo-company "somethingOS" is getting really annoying.

that's true-- for these guys it actually makes sense though based on what they're doing IMO

Re: DemocracyOS

#7

Post by joneil » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:34 PM UTC

I think this is great - it's an attempted solution to an important, difficult problem, and they've got a number of interesting angles. In particular I think the branching of proposals, and hopefully being able to diff / blame, could be as important, or more important, than trusted voting.

I look forward to seeing more of the implementation. Congrats on the launch, and thanks for working on a difficult problem that we all need to see solved.

Re: DemocracyOS

#8

Post by andars » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:39 PM UTC

mikermcneil wrote: post #6

benwilber0 wrote: post #3

this trend toward naming your pseudo-company "somethingOS" is getting really annoying.

that's true-- for these guys it actually makes sense though based on what they're doing IMO

Maybe I'm just missing it, but why? I associate OS only with operating systems, and these guys don't seem to be making an OS.

Re: DemocracyOS

#9

Post by jtmurphy » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:43 PM UTC

Political systems should protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. I worry that Democracy OS's idea fails to address this issue. If the politicians always vote with the majority, what if the majority wants to violate the rights of the minority?

Re: DemocracyOS

#10

Post by broodbucket » Sat, Mar 21, 2015, 10:47 PM UTC

As with others, I am really struggling to see why this has "OS" in the name. It's not an operating system. I'm guessing it stands for "open source", which isn't really an acronym people use in favour of OSS/FOSS (probably because OS already has a very well established meaning).

Can someone share some insight on the naming decision?