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

Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

pol.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 168 posts

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#131

Post by thinkingtoilet »

tracker1 wrote: post #124
goda90 wrote: post #12

What are some strategies a platform like this can take against spam or influence bots? Tying real life identities to users would certainly limit that(though identity theft and account selling could still happen), but that adds friction to joining, poses security risks, and many people might feel less comfortable putting their opinions openly online where backlash could impact real life.

I'm also somewhat curious about how "hateful content" is defined... I mean having a serious discussion on policies around children in schools and sport regarding trans issues has been labelled in some circles as hateful content if it doesn't blindly support the most progressive views. I'm just using this as a specific example. Not saying that there aren't hateful sentiments or people behind comments or positions... o…

Sigh... you know there's single digits number of trans athletes in the entire NCAA. The fact that this is even discussed at all is absurd given what else is going on in the country. Yes, intelligent people can have a conversation about it but even if you think it's a problem it's problem #43,948 on the list. Let's solve the other 43,947 problems first. It's really hard to believe people when they say it's not about bigotry. And it in every instance I've encountered people talking about it I would easily, and correctly, classify it has "hateful".

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#133

Post by econ »

INTPenis wrote: post #63
goda90 wrote: post #12

What are some strategies a platform like this can take against spam or influence bots? Tying real life identities to users would certainly limit that(though identity theft and account selling could still happen), but that adds friction to joining, poses security risks, and many people might feel less comfortable putting their opinions openly online where backlash could impact real life.

eID is the obvious answer here in Europe. Right now it's kinda scattered with different providers, but I believe EU is working on a more universal protocol. Unfortnately there are rumors it will require official Google/Apple play stores, unrooted devices, and all that it does today already. But it should be treated as a relatively safe ID, it's even used for voting. If you feel uncomfortable, just have one device for…

I really want this to be as simple as forwarding the user through a gov website and receiving a hash on a webhook. All I really want to know is that it is a citizen and the same hash as last time

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#135

Post by econ »

nathan_compton wrote: post #123
theroncross wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true of methods that don't require you to leave the house as well. Internet forums of all types are dominated by frequent users (by definition). People who are doing other things (working, raising families, living with disabilities that make participation difficult) are under-represented. Most of us just want someone with culturally normal values and competency to take care business. Many democratic systems d…

"Culturally normal values" is such a crazily loaded phrase. I personally don't have a strong desire to see people with culturally normal values be in charge, since, as far as I can tell, the "normal" person is neither very smart nor very thoughtful.

The lack of ambition is terrifying.

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#136

Post by martin-t »

clcaev wrote: post #116

Thirty years ago I was enthusiastic about what we now call liquid democracy . Elders, to whom I spoke that lived through WWII, saw dynamic+direct democracy as extremely dangerous. I now share their opinion. To have a healthy world, we need to start with democratic engagement on every block, of every district in every city, in all counties of every province, in all nations across every continent of our shared planet.…

What is the underlying problem and what are the potential solutions?

> saw dynamic+direct democracy as extremely dangerous

Are you saying that humans, on average, are bad/harmful/evil? Or that they commit to decisions without thinking them through and act on emotions instead of reason?

Because if the first, then making democracy indirect or otherwise limited should not help.

So I believe it is the second. Then the question becomes either how to get people to vote more rationally or how to weight votes by rationality. The second options is not well explored.

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#137

Post by econ »

mejutoco wrote: post #104
nottorp wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Automatically downvoting posts with grammatical or low-effort errors. So allow only LLM generated posts?

People are capable of writing correctly. Source: your post. If someone cannot be bothered, why should we bother to read what they have to say? I think it is a good signal. EDIT: plus it is not an allow or not allow. The more errors the more downvoted, so it is a small adjustment.

You shouldn't care about presentation but others will.

I think an llm approach could be good. You make suggestions in however insane language and it converts the format to something boring and mundane accepted by all clients.

Some people are to brief, some elaborate more than necessary.

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#138

Post by econ »

warkdarrior wrote: post #48
worldsayshi wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe we can solve both anonymity + proof-of-humanity using zero-knowledge proofs that act as intermediary between a trusted identity provider and the service provider. I.e. you get a digital id but you use it to generate proofs rather than handing out your identity. Right?

And who is going to be a trusted identity provider in authoritarian regimes?

AIs in bunkers rigged to explode.

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#139

Post by econ »

pixl97 wrote: post #117
tamimio wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I am more interested in seeing, hopefully, in the future is the ability to cast citizens' votes directly on any matter, act, bill, etc., and get rid of the representatives in parliament/congress/etc. It is more transparent that way, and end lobbying with all the corruption it has. No more traditional voting for a "person" anymore and relying on trust; rather, you trust no one and vote directly. We have the prope…

> and get rid of the representatives >and end lobbying with all the corruption it has. You never get rid of these people, you just move who they are. Now Mr Beast and whoever is slipping him cash is your political representative because of the power of their parasocial relationships. >"because a lot of people are ignorant!" then you put effort into educating them. This won't work, not because people are ignorant, but…

You can do diplomas for different parts of government and assign ranks to voters based on their familiarity with the topic. Then you can share the voting results by how informed people are. If I don't know much about the topic buy those who do say we should go to war with the martians it might change my opinion.

You can also use it as a trigger to create media attempting to objectively inform the oblivious if they drift to far away. These should be large expensive efforts with not-propaganda at the top of the agenda. Show the giant weapon the martians are building in earth orbit.

You can also keep the representatives as the default vote. That way, if their financial backers or those blackmailing them try to sneak in their usual bullshit you can log in and change the vote.

If the representatives picks their own representative anyone can be your representative. You can at any time change your vote to your mum and ignore politics

I also envision each law requiring a minimum number of yes votes to be activated and a minimum number of no to deactivate.

If there are few enough yes votes and enough no's the law is deleted. You can change your vote at any time.

Have some algorithm to implement the changes over time so that Mr beast has to make many months of effort.

Government employees are to work on new law proposals to replace the least popular ones. If they fail to read the room hard enough first their salary is reduced and eventually they get fired algorithmically. If they get it right often enough we increase their salary endlessly but they still get fired if they get it wrong repeatedly. If they don't know anymore new courses and new diplomas are created.

I also want to give the voter a monthly payment for each diploma they got. Asking people to do important work for free makes no sense. How much is up to the voters.

Re: Polis: Open-source platform for large-scale civic deliberation

#140

Post by worldsayshi »

chickensong wrote: post #81
warkdarrior wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who is going to be a trusted identity provider in authoritarian regimes?

It needs to be globally distributed and not tied to any one government. Worldcoin but not Worldcoin.

Either that or a protocol that is as reusable as email that can facilitate a variety of identity proof and trust mechanisms.
Post reply on HN