Live data from Hacker News

YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

blog.ycombinator.com

171–180 of 226 posts

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#171
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you handle the fact that much law is intentionally ambiguous?

You want to reduce ambiguity as much as possible, but not eliminate it entirely. Still want judges!

This is the typical programmer misunderstanding of law.

In countries whose legal system is based on that of England (including most of the US), ambiguity is a design goal of statutes, not something meant to be eliminated. Statutes are supposed to be specified in broad strokes and then have the details hashed out by intelligent judges to work in particular circumstances that the legislators didn't envision.

And "the law" is not just statutes. Statutes are one small part of the law. Most of the law is the tradition of judicial interpretation of those statutes.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#172
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly disagree. There are many people in jail now pre-trial because the government is worried that they won't appear for trial. As a result these people often lose their jobs and their housing -- even if it turns out they are not guilty. Better software and technology can help address this problem.

Or we can change bail laws as they exist now: https://whyy.org/articles/n-j-officials-have-finally-release... >Yet new data shows only modest increases in two of the main measurements of success since 2017. In that year, 26.9 percent of defendants released from jail before their trials were charged with a new crime — either an indictable offense or a disorderly persons charge. That number increased from 24.2 percent…

Somehow I get the feeling that building software is easier than changing laws around here

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't watch the linked video, but aren't things like education and affordable housing also problems that governments have been tackling for decades without much progress and even often making things worse? For example, economists are almost uniformly against rent control, which many cities try to implement. And the flood of government money encouraging educational loans seems to have made college costs spiral. Per…

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 literally drop dead.

The left wing "solution" to this problem is to force taxpayers to subsidize it, and perhaps impose price controls. The right wing "solution" is to puke some cookie cutter line about the "free market" and America's incredible "innovation" in drug development, exposing his skin-deep understanding of what those terms mean. (Later, he'll throw a fit about how so many millenials want socialized medicine).

So our startup idea is to create cheap small-scale insulin production hardware, except the second we try to pay back investors and become "for profit", we get regulated like any other drug manufacturer. That means we need to hire an army of lawyers, go through a multi-year multi-million dollar FDA approval process for all the production equipment etc., and open ourselves to patent lawsuits and other weapons of corporate thuggery that the big-time drug companies are so willing to wield.

If we manage to make it through that gauntlet of fuckery, god knows if we'll actually be able to sell it for any cheaper than the status quo. I'm open to being told I'm wrong about this problem, but from my understanding there's simply no way to solve this problem without massive regulatory reform.

[1] https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/11u1Lqm70xFl0kWTtrt6kAEhrSE=...

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#174
post #5

In Andrew Yang's recent panel at Monetery Tech Summit, he was making the case that most of these are problems that the free market doesn't reward solving: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhNpbPhFwRc&t=957 These are all important problems, but there have been people working on them for decades already without much progress. What we really need is for either government to tackle these problems itself, or else to put in…

I agree - it would be great for the government to tackle these problems. But looking at the current US government that doesn't look likely. I agree it feels almost impossible for a startup to actually fix some of these problems. But we fund startups who try to do the almost impossible all the time. And sometimes they succeed :)

Are the startups listed actually fixing these problems, though? You say that Promise, for example, is attacking mass incarceration — but it's basically just a dashboard for lawyers. Maybe lawyers could be more efficient, but that's a way easier problem to solve than radically changing our justice system so that fewer people get pulled into it in the first place.

What's worse, given that Promise appears to be a for-profit company and you're investing in it to make money, you now have a financially incentive against fixing the systemic issue. It's better for you if the justice system is bigger and less efficient, because you'll make more money selling us a band-aid.

So count me in with the GP and Andrew Yang: it's not that the problems seem too hard for startups to tackle, but because they are fundamentally not problems that the free market rewards solving. YC mostly funds profit-seeking companies. That's okay! But I am skeptical that there is profit to be made in e.g. dismantling the justice system.

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#175
post #94
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not denying that it might help people, it just seems like a half-assed bandaid solution given the breadth of the problem.

If you have an idea for an app that will directly tackle poverty and hopelessness, I think there are a lot of people willing to listen. This isn't an attempt to bandaid over the whole problem. It's an attempt to address a minor contributing factor that is much more tractable than hopelessness.

[deleted]

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think YC/VC's are searching for a solution to income inequality? Check @pg's twitter feed... The government is already stricken with profit-seekers extracting value from the public. SV wants its piece too. And it will, if it can make VC money out-impact the status quo of entrenched lobby money.

I'd say most VC's are probably very interested in solutions for income inequality. In the direction of getting their net worth equal to Bezos that is. In the other direction not so much perhaps. But really what is people's obsession with "income inequality"? Ya, the rich shouldn't run governments or be able to evade laws or abuse the poor (which is why we have governments who also perhaps should do more to care for t…

People don't want to be "the poor".

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#177

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 really cool--did you hear about how a bunch of hospitals are coming together to manufacture generic drugs that are marked up by PBMs--I imagine if something like that where a stakeholder with input in the buying process can come in and guarantee like a monopolistic market for an upstart..the drugs are going to be cheaper but the fact that the hospitals themselves are consumers means people can take long term bets without fear of losing money

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#178
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.

Can you send me an email at my user name at gmail dot com?

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - it would be great for the government to tackle these problems. But looking at the current US government that doesn't look likely. I agree it feels almost impossible for a startup to actually fix some of these problems. But we fund startups who try to do the almost impossible all the time. And sometimes they succeed :)

Are the startups listed actually fixing these problems, though? You say that Promise, for example, is attacking mass incarceration — but it's basically just a dashboard for lawyers. Maybe lawyers could be more efficient, but that's a way easier problem to solve than radically changing our justice system so that fewer people get pulled into it in the first place. What's worse, given that Promise appears to be a for-pr…

not sure if I agree with your point about promise--especially with the implied "moral hazard"--if they are trying to solve the inefficiency in the justice system then its better for them that the system remains inefficient-- def seems like something beyond their control that they had no role in creating, and they are trying to help as best as they can. There is a bigger problem for private prisons---not promise

Re: YC's request for startups: Government 2.0

#180

In a recent newsletter from Robin Sloan (sci-fi writer), he shares what he's heard from a few engineers that work in China: "The Chinese government is building an OS and, in the not-too-distant future, the world will be split: those nations that adopt it, and those that don’t. This OS isn’t just software – it’s also access to Chinese capital, investments in infrastructure, and more – but it is ALSO software, a very c…

most of the amazing facial recognition tech is actually israeli--and turns out the biggest buyers of military foreign tech tend to be competitors of china, so not sure how much legs this OS idea has, unless you mean small eastern european republics signing up
Post reply on HN