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

31–40 of 168 posts

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

#31

Post by lazyasciiart »

movedx wrote: post #11
sapphicsnail wrote: post #8

I don't understand the utility of this. Maybe it works for things like noise ordinances, but I can't imagine finding common ground with people who want me dead or imprisoned simply for existing.

Every Body Corporate Strata in Australia basically goes through something like this at least once a year (by law.) Questions are posed about what to vote on and you either vote for, against, or abstain. Something like Polis would be good for putting forward ideas throughout the year leading up to the vote, as it would find a consensus of ideas and help shape what you eventually vote on (you decide as a body corporate…

Are you referencing a body corporate vote on trans rights or something?

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

#32

Post by lazyasciiart »

gpm wrote: post #28
sapphicsnail wrote: post #8

I don't understand the utility of this. Maybe it works for things like noise ordinances, but I can't imagine finding common ground with people who want me dead or imprisoned simply for existing.

Those people came to those views somehow. I'd hope that a less radicalizing social media platform might move them away from those views. Finding common ground isn't just about figuring out where people currently agree, it's also an act of persuasion convincing people to change views to then-mutually shared views. Wanting people dead or imprisoned simply for existing is the sort of inconsistent view that is likely eas…

Radicalized spaces are offline too. You can't cure anyone of being irrational while they still live in a cult.

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

#33

Post by lokar »

gpm wrote: post #28
sapphicsnail wrote: post #8

I don't understand the utility of this. Maybe it works for things like noise ordinances, but I can't imagine finding common ground with people who want me dead or imprisoned simply for existing.

Those people came to those views somehow. I'd hope that a less radicalizing social media platform might move them away from those views. Finding common ground isn't just about figuring out where people currently agree, it's also an act of persuasion convincing people to change views to then-mutually shared views. Wanting people dead or imprisoned simply for existing is the sort of inconsistent view that is likely eas…

And while trying to find common ground may be hard, and it may even be a long shot, it's worth it considering the eventual alternatives.

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

#34

Post by mmooss »

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.

For many purposes, we need anonymous authentication. I haven't heard about much innovation on that and similar privacy fronts in awhile.

Off the top of my head, a possible method is a proxy or two or three, each handling different components of authentication and without knowledge of the other components. They return a token with validity properties (such as duration, level of service). All the vendor (e.g., Polis) would know is the validity of the token.

I'm sure others have thought about it more ...

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

#35

Post by ninjagoo »

Society is not ready for an AI world: any platform that does not guarantee anonymity will be of limited utility for social discourse in a world lurching towards authoritarianism, and any platform that does guarantee anonymity can no longer reliably distinguish human from ai; not that that should matter when it's ideas that are being debated.

But the bigger issue is the control of money: hierarchical institutions disintermediate workers from the way the fruits of their labor are put to use. Money spent or paid in taxes is aggregated and misused by third parties against the wishes and against the providers of that money. Essentially, your labor is used against you. This is true regardless of where someone is on the political spectrum.

A platform for debate or voting isn't going to resolve this fundamental problem.

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

#36

Post by mmooss »

mentalgear wrote: post #5

These are the genre of consensus tools I would like to see used in SM. Just imagine: a system that actually helps people exchange atomic, clear arguments and come to an informed consensus. The internet could have really been a great tool to bring humanity together, if it was structured in that way for the common good. Instead we get SM where mud-battles and the resulting polarization are part of the perverse business…

> atomic ... arguments

Why is that especially valuable, according to your vision?

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

#37

Post by worldsayshi »

ninjagoo wrote: post #35

Society is not ready for an AI world: any platform that does not guarantee anonymity will be of limited utility for social discourse in a world lurching towards authoritarianism, and any platform that does guarantee anonymity can no longer reliably distinguish human from ai; not that that should matter when it's ideas that are being debated. But the bigger issue is the control of money: hierarchical institutions disi…

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?

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

#38

Post by worldsayshi »

acgourley wrote: post #21
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.

We really need proof of soul systems to exist, extended to also have a proof of citizenship. While the proof of soul systems can plausible be done in a decentralized manner, proof of citizenship is much harder, and in my opinion this is one of (the few) things the government should really do.

What about Zero-Knowledge Identity? Use zero knowledge proofs to prove that I have an eID without actually providing my identity.

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

#39

Post by thoughtpeddler »

ninjagoo wrote: post #35

Society is not ready for an AI world: any platform that does not guarantee anonymity will be of limited utility for social discourse in a world lurching towards authoritarianism, and any platform that does guarantee anonymity can no longer reliably distinguish human from ai; not that that should matter when it's ideas that are being debated. But the bigger issue is the control of money: hierarchical institutions disi…

I agree on the importance of anonymity for social discourse. But if a tool/platform like Polis is some equivalent of a local 'town hall meeting', where there is no anonymity (and you as a citizen publicly appear, state your name, make your argument, etc), then why is lack of anonymity a threat in this specific context?

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

#40

Post by worldsayshi »

mmooss wrote: post #34
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.

For many purposes, we need anonymous authentication. I haven't heard about much innovation on that and similar privacy fronts in awhile. Off the top of my head, a possible method is a proxy or two or three, each handling different components of authentication and without knowledge of the other components. They return a token with validity properties (such as duration, level of service). All the vendor (e.g., Polis) w…

I mean I can prove with a zero-knowledge-proof that have solved a Sudoku puzzle without actually giving away the solution so this seems possible?
Post reply on HN