4 ms·

Political Science & Democracy Management AFAIK there's little to no innovation in this field aside from the occasional electronic voting machine, whose securit

Political Science & Democracy Management AFAIK there's little to no innovation in this field aside from the occasional electronic voting machine, whose security may or may not be totally un-hackable. In a day & age where the internet reaches every home, & there's a web browser in nearly everyone's pocket, it shouldn't be that difficult to effectively discern the will of the people. But we're still depending on manual polling, which as the recent US election has shown, is woefully inaccurate. Why are these still done on the phone? Why do people still have to physically go to a neighborhood voting location? Why are elected officials still allowed to make empty promises while campaigning with no follow-through once they're in office? These are solvable problems which I'd imagine technology can indeed address.

Kalium 10y ago
You're absolutely right! Democracy is critically important, and discerning the will of the governed shouldn't be this hard. It boggles the mind! Yet, computer security is hard. Like, holy shit, all the problems of physical security combined with all the problems of network security. Decentralized paper balloting limits things to just the relatively-well-understood physical side while limiting the scope for the damage of a breach. It turns out there are distinct advantages to this approach that justify it over something web-based. Elected officials making empty promises is a social problem. Technology can't help us there.
- cdvonstinkpot 10y ago
  I disagree that empty promises isn't addressable with technology. Thinking of smart contracts as a potential solution here.
  - Kalium 10y ago
    You're right again! Smart contracts are abstractly a perfect fit for ensuring compliance with arbitrary promised behavior. The current state of affairs is such that smart contracts are viable for things readily machine-verified. This does not apply to all things that might be promised by a politician today. This problem could be resolved by voting, but now we've reintroduced all the problems of politics and reinvented the Sierra Club / NRA / etc. Additionally, it only matters if voter opinion is swayed by a failure to comply with the contract. At this moment in time, voters generally reserve the right to change their minds at any time and for any reason. It is possible that convincing voters to hang their votes entirely on a smart contract might prove challenging.
davidlee1435 10y ago
I wonder if there's something along the lines of a credit score for public servants out there. This score would probably need to be comprised of several stats, but one of the most important would be a score of all commitments and obligations an individual has per office and how many they've actually done. Another stat that comes to mind is NPS- are voters willing to vote again for this candidate?

Kalium 10y ago

You're absolutely right! Democracy is critically important, and discerning the will of the governed shouldn't be this hard. It boggles the mind! Yet, computer security is hard. Like, holy shit, all the problems of physical security combined with all the problems of network security. Decentralized paper balloting limits things to just the relatively-well-understood physical side while limiting the scope for the damage of a breach. It turns out there are distinct advantages to this approach that justify it over something web-based. Elected officials making empty promises is a social problem. Technology can't help us there.

cdvonstinkpot 10y ago
I disagree that empty promises isn't addressable with technology. Thinking of smart contracts as a potential solution here.
- Kalium 10y ago
  You're right again! Smart contracts are abstractly a perfect fit for ensuring compliance with arbitrary promised behavior. The current state of affairs is such that smart contracts are viable for things readily machine-verified. This does not apply to all things that might be promised by a politician today. This problem could be resolved by voting, but now we've reintroduced all the problems of politics and reinvented the Sierra Club / NRA / etc. Additionally, it only matters if voter opinion is swayed by a failure to comply with the contract. At this moment in time, voters generally reserve the right to change their minds at any time and for any reason. It is possible that convincing voters to hang their votes entirely on a smart contract might prove challenging.

davidlee1435 10y ago

I wonder if there's something along the lines of a credit score for public servants out there. This score would probably need to be comprised of several stats, but one of the most important would be a score of all commitments and obligations an individual has per office and how many they've actually done. Another stat that comes to mind is NPS- are voters willing to vote again for this candidate?