4 ms·

Blockchain Based Tendering Framework – A Step Towards Open Governance

36 points by febin 8y ago

bytematic 8y ago
I would love to see more systems of government/law use a github style system where you can plainly read, comment, and propose changes to documents. Maybe a combination of the two.
- simias 8y ago
  In theory that sounds good, in practice how do you avoid it becoming an unusable mess? This would basically be a repo with millions of potential contributors.
  - 0x006A 8y ago
    same way you do it with code. using a platform that allows others to see changes does not mean its open posting, nor does it mean every proposed changes gets merged.
    - xchaotic 8y ago
      except people have vested interest in not keeping it very open and potential contributors also have vested interests. I don't think 'blockchain' adds value here
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - mrobot 8y ago
    You could have it work like our current republic, where only elected officials can submit pull requests to the central legislation repo. If you really wanted you could have your elected official look over a pull request from you to them, but this would be rarer. Do you think this would be manageable?
  - mrobot 8y ago
    I think we should at least attempt it instead of throwing our hands up. One good thing would be to get rid of giant bills like omnibus bills and make all legislative changes more atomic.
- supermdguy 8y ago
  It sounds nice, but it'd probably end up with large corporations using their legal teams to make laws that favor them. Also, it'd exclude anyone who doesn't have time to review new legislation written in convoluted legalese.
  - mrobot 8y ago
    Can you imagine any way to restrict corporations from doing this?
    - supermdguy 8y ago
      Potentially, but there'd probably be loopholes, like paying individuals to promote a corporation's viewpoint. Even if, hypothetically, there were a way to 100% stop corporations from influencing legislation, wealthy individuals could still probably profit from using lawyers to create complicated laws that end up making them even wealthier.
  - crdoconnor 8y ago
    >it'd probably end up with large corporations using their legal teams to make laws that favor them In public, where they can be called on their bullshit - instead of in private meetings as happens now. >Also, it'd exclude anyone who doesn't have time to review new legislation written It'd mean that a dedicated and conscientious reader with time on their hands could submit the really egregious diffs to hacker news and get them shot down with prejudice that much quicker.
0x006A 8y ago
What part of the Tender process gets more open with this proposal? From a quick glance the paper, I fail to see why one would use a blockchain and smart contracts here.
- spookthesunset 8y ago
  It enables the creators to Get Rich Quick selling worthless internet tokens to rubes who buy into the hype. Once you realize that every one of these blockchain projects is driven by greed and the desire to Get Rich Quick, it all kinda makes sense.
  - d0lph 8y ago
    Isn't that pretty much all business though.
    - paulddraper 8y ago
      Yes. However, few businesses rely as much on the ignorance of their customer base as much as blockchain. Basically, someone figured out the internet/tech MLM.
    - tomtimtall 8y ago
      Some business relies on identifying opotubities tgat creat value, and then naturally converting some of that value into money for the creators. Other business like this, relies on identifying dumb money, extracting that to the creators and then running off before the explosion. It feels like there are honest blue eyed blockchain companies, but 95%+ seem to be the latter.
supermdguy 8y ago
Reminds me of this article: https://medium.com/civic-tech-thoughts-from-joshdata/so-you-want-to-reform-democracy-7f3b1ef10597 https://medium.com/civic-tech-thoughts-from-joshdata/so-you-...
heisenbit 8y ago
The problem with public contracts imho. is the mechanical decision making leading to selection of a bid that is not economical. The shortfall is then made up by the selected contractor via delays, changes and substandard delivery. An alternative scenario is collusion by contractors increasing the lowest bid. Unless transparency across the whole lifecycle of projects is increased and with it accountability for in-time and up-to-standards delivery not much will change.
josu 8y ago
democracy.earth has already implemented most of the things mentioned on the paper.

36 points by febin 8y ago

I would love to see more systems of government/law use a github style system where you can plainly read, comment, and propose changes to documents. Maybe a combination of the two.

simias 8y ago
In theory that sounds good, in practice how do you avoid it becoming an unusable mess? This would basically be a repo with millions of potential contributors.
- 0x006A 8y ago
  same way you do it with code. using a platform that allows others to see changes does not mean its open posting, nor does it mean every proposed changes gets merged.
  - xchaotic 8y ago
    except people have vested interest in not keeping it very open and potential contributors also have vested interests. I don't think 'blockchain' adds value here
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mrobot 8y ago
  You could have it work like our current republic, where only elected officials can submit pull requests to the central legislation repo. If you really wanted you could have your elected official look over a pull request from you to them, but this would be rarer. Do you think this would be manageable?
- mrobot 8y ago
  I think we should at least attempt it instead of throwing our hands up. One good thing would be to get rid of giant bills like omnibus bills and make all legislative changes more atomic.
supermdguy 8y ago
It sounds nice, but it'd probably end up with large corporations using their legal teams to make laws that favor them. Also, it'd exclude anyone who doesn't have time to review new legislation written in convoluted legalese.
- mrobot 8y ago
  Can you imagine any way to restrict corporations from doing this?
  - supermdguy 8y ago
    Potentially, but there'd probably be loopholes, like paying individuals to promote a corporation's viewpoint. Even if, hypothetically, there were a way to 100% stop corporations from influencing legislation, wealthy individuals could still probably profit from using lawyers to create complicated laws that end up making them even wealthier.
- crdoconnor 8y ago
  >it'd probably end up with large corporations using their legal teams to make laws that favor them In public, where they can be called on their bullshit - instead of in private meetings as happens now. >Also, it'd exclude anyone who doesn't have time to review new legislation written It'd mean that a dedicated and conscientious reader with time on their hands could submit the really egregious diffs to hacker news and get them shot down with prejudice that much quicker.

0x006A 8y ago

What part of the Tender process gets more open with this proposal? From a quick glance the paper, I fail to see why one would use a blockchain and smart contracts here.

spookthesunset 8y ago
It enables the creators to Get Rich Quick selling worthless internet tokens to rubes who buy into the hype. Once you realize that every one of these blockchain projects is driven by greed and the desire to Get Rich Quick, it all kinda makes sense.
- d0lph 8y ago
  Isn't that pretty much all business though.
  - paulddraper 8y ago
    Yes. However, few businesses rely as much on the ignorance of their customer base as much as blockchain. Basically, someone figured out the internet/tech MLM.
  - tomtimtall 8y ago
    Some business relies on identifying opotubities tgat creat value, and then naturally converting some of that value into money for the creators. Other business like this, relies on identifying dumb money, extracting that to the creators and then running off before the explosion. It feels like there are honest blue eyed blockchain companies, but 95%+ seem to be the latter.

supermdguy 8y ago

Reminds me of this article: https://medium.com/civic-tech-thoughts-from-joshdata/so-you-want-to-reform-democracy-7f3b1ef10597 https://medium.com/civic-tech-thoughts-from-joshdata/so-you-...

heisenbit 8y ago

The problem with public contracts imho. is the mechanical decision making leading to selection of a bid that is not economical. The shortfall is then made up by the selected contractor via delays, changes and substandard delivery. An alternative scenario is collusion by contractors increasing the lowest bid. Unless transparency across the whole lifecycle of projects is increased and with it accountability for in-time and up-to-standards delivery not much will change.

josu 8y ago

democracy.earth has already implemented most of the things mentioned on the paper.