> We need different politics. I agree — and a place technologists can make an impact with a little more obscurity is in the infrastructure for politics. The p

> We need different politics. I agree — and a place technologists can make an impact with a little more obscurity is in the infrastructure for politics. The problems with politics aren’t merely a technical solution, but it does seem like the advent of mass media and computers has changed some things about politics — which means that a change in the technical mechanisms can change the process and outcomes. If you think about the math, each represenative stands for about 750,000 people on average. About half to three quarters of their constituents will be working aged, so 375,000. About 1 in 100 will be motivated enough to put a few hours into helping now and then, so 3,750. You figure “now and then” really means “once a year”, but you need help once a month — 375. Maybe 1 in 10 really has something useful to say, so 38. But the point is when you’re talking about major legislation, it seems like you should be able to recruit a few dozen to a few hundred people to put eyes on the text. By hosting a public repository across districts, you can probably reliably get a few hundred to a thousand volunteers to mark up legislation (or help with ML based scanners). I’ve long thought a website which joined law markup/comments, vote tracking, and candidate writing would be largely effective — it drops the amount of effort required for a citizen to express effective oversight, and collates information back to you during elections.