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

Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

sovereign.software

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#51

Post by sebastianconcpt »

rabbyte wrote: post #22
vinceguidry wrote: post #15

The main problem to solve here is legitimacy . It does no good to have a government if nobody thinks it's legitimate. This is why democracy is so hard to implement and protect. At the heart of it, democracy should be simple. You get people to vote on rules, and then whatever gets the most votes, everybody agrees to follow the group decision. But that all gets turned on its head once somebody doesn't want to play ball…

I agree with everything except that first point because legitimacy isn't the problem worth solving. Striking the right balance in governing tools and keeping interdependent systems interoperable as they mature are problems worth solving which this works toward. Arguing on grounds of legitimacy would have failed to see Wikipedia as a citable source or Facebook as an election debate host 15 years ago. So the time from…

True and if there is a multigenerational cultural war that has this in mind, then you have a case for a slow preparation for revolution. The cold war never ended.

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#52

Post by EthanHeilman »

inimino wrote: post #31
EthanHeilman wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To be fair, the manifesto was written in 1996. Too soon to judge as we are in a moment of backlash against these trends, lets see how 2196 views the manifesto.

> we are in a moment of backlash against these trends What makes you think so? As far as I can tell, it's over and the idealists lost.

>As far as I can tell, it's over and the idealists lost.

Could be true, could not be, I don't know. The present often seems like the end of history because it is very difficult to see beyond it.

Some lost cause today will be a dominate ideology tomorrow, with the "nutty-idealists" reframed as visionaries ahead of the curve.

Fun game: if history remembers RMS, what role will he be cast into, what future trends will try to claim or denounce him?

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#53

Post by EthanHeilman »

inimino wrote: post #35
dlss wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the perspective of those who aren't irrationally optimistic, I think sometimes. Self-defeating example: betting on red in roulette is a bad idea. Having your friend bet on red is a better but still bad idea. Having a stranger bet on red, and buy you a drink if he wins... It's free money. Applied example: starting an electric car company (at least looked like) a bad idea.... trying 1,000 different approaches to a…

People chasing long shots under a delusion can sometimes be profitable for someone else, but if a movement is built on irrational exuberance surely there's a cost to be paid sooner or later.

>if a movement is built on irrational exuberance surely there's a cost to be paid sooner or later.

I worry about a Blockchain winter, then again AI has made fantastic progress despite the AI winters[0].

Would fusion as a power generating technology be further along or further behind if it had followed the AI model (progress -> hype -> winter -> progress)?

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#54

Post by rabbyte »

edblarney wrote: post #27
csuwldcat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll describe democracy, and you tell me how comical it sounds: "A group of people, within a geographic region marked by invisible lines drawn by human aggression, all gather once every 2nd rotation of the Earth around the Sun to put papers in a magic box. The people believe once an arbitrarily large number of papers are put into the box, it grants the owners of those papers the right to force their will and ideas on…

Your definition of democracy is ridiculous and none of it is relevant. Whoever wrote this manifesto is both naive and arrogant: he doesn't speak for anyone but himself, ergo, it's just a 'youtube comment rant'. It's funny unless you take it seriously, in which case it's maddening. Most people in the world actually work for 'governments and semi-large to large corporations' and are fine with it. In the real world thos…

ahh, yes, hacker news. so full of curiosity and inviting critique. I'm with you on giving yourselves an island but ya'll would never stay there, the visibility invites the validation you crave.

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#55

Post by dandare »

vinceguidry wrote: post #44
dandare wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You get people to vote on rules, and then whatever gets the most votes, everybody agrees to follow the group decision. Nope, that is not how it works :D. Yes, people vote, but then whatever gets the most votes is enforce with violence on everyone regardless of whether they agree or not. Slavery was legal, criminalisation of homosexuality was (is) legal, sending people to jail for soft drugs is legal. Democracy is a…

That's literally what I spent my entire post explaining.

Oh, sorry but you didn't do very good job :)

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#56

Post by edblarney »

kybernetikos wrote: post #46
edblarney wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

">> I declare the planetary social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear." That guy is going to have a great 40th Birthday party as his buddies whip that one out, and make him chug a beer for every time someone laughs out loud.

'That guy' is John Perry Barlow who is currently 69. He wrote it 20 years ago when he was 49. Regardless of how naive (or even misguided) it seems, it's part of the culture of the internet and it's a bit sad that more people on hackernews aren't aware of it.

I'm aware of the culture, and I'm fine with it.

Surely, we benefit from having some people here and there 'rail against big corporations'.

There are granules of truth in it.

But it's the hyperbolic and crazy statements that are funny and spooky.

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#57

Post by inimino »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #52
inimino wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we are in a moment of backlash against these trends What makes you think so? As far as I can tell, it's over and the idealists lost.

>As far as I can tell, it's over and the idealists lost. Could be true, could not be, I don't know. The present often seems like the end of history because it is very difficult to see beyond it. Some lost cause today will be a dominate ideology tomorrow, with the "nutty-idealists" reframed as visionaries ahead of the curve. Fun game: if history remembers RMS, what role will he be cast into, what future trends will tr…

When the Internet was new, there was a perception in some quarters that it was New and old orders were about to be overturned. That's the sentiment reflected in the manifesto.

Now we can see that it was just another medium that would in (short) time come to be dominated by the same forces at play everywhere else. Those particular dreams are dead and they aren't going to be revived now that we know how the Internet is actually used. The Internet revolution has played out. It is now part of the background, just like the printing press.

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#58

Post by EthanHeilman »

inimino wrote: post #57
EthanHeilman wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As far as I can tell, it's over and the idealists lost. Could be true, could not be, I don't know. The present often seems like the end of history because it is very difficult to see beyond it. Some lost cause today will be a dominate ideology tomorrow, with the "nutty-idealists" reframed as visionaries ahead of the curve. Fun game: if history remembers RMS, what role will he be cast into, what future trends will tr…

When the Internet was new, there was a perception in some quarters that it was New and old orders were about to be overturned. That's the sentiment reflected in the manifesto. Now we can see that it was just another medium that would in (short) time come to be dominated by the same forces at play everywhere else. Those particular dreams are dead and they aren't going to be revived now that we know how the Internet is…

>When the Internet was new, there was a perception in some quarters that it was New and old orders were about to be overturned.

And they still might be overturned, it is much too early to call it in either direction.

>The Internet revolution has played out. It is now part of the background, just like the printing press.

The Gutenberg printing press was invented in 1440, the protestant reformation didn't start until 1517 (77 years later). The growing impact of the printing press was still being felt 200 years later. Imagine someone writing in 1480 about the printing press being played out.

"People always overestimate the impact of a technology in the short term and underestimate the impact of a technology in the long term."

Re: Sovereign Software: peer to peer democracy

#59

Post by inimino »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #58
inimino wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the Internet was new, there was a perception in some quarters that it was New and old orders were about to be overturned. That's the sentiment reflected in the manifesto. Now we can see that it was just another medium that would in (short) time come to be dominated by the same forces at play everywhere else. Those particular dreams are dead and they aren't going to be revived now that we know how the Internet is…

>When the Internet was new, there was a perception in some quarters that it was New and old orders were about to be overturned. And they still might be overturned, it is much too early to call it in either direction. >The Internet revolution has played out. It is now part of the background, just like the printing press. The Gutenberg printing press was invented in 1440, the protestant reformation didn't start until 1…

Perhaps I am overly pessimistic.

Having seen the promise of the early Internet turn into a vehicle of control, surveillance, consumerism, and whatever you want to call Facebook, there is little room left for optimism.

Has it made life easier and more convenient? Yes. Will it empower the oppressed and create a more equitable, a more enlightened world? It sure isn't looking that way.

Post reply on HN