3 ms·

The question is not whether the playing field is neutral or not through the actions of others, but whether "we" (tech) should undertake to change that playing f

The question is not whether the playing field is neutral or not through the actions of others, but whether "we" (tech) should undertake to change that playing field further. What right do "we" have to interfere in other peoples' lives from afar?

dredmorbius 5y ago
Wouldn't giving the majority its fair share of political voice, in a democratic republic, be a net positive?
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  The point of a federal system is to let a minority form the majority in a particular place and live under policies they want. Why should they accept the outcome of democracy and open borders if we chase them around the map and prevent that everywhere? I am not saying I want to live under this absurd law, but I suppose people do and they are not going to just disappear.
  - krapp 5y ago
    >Why should they accept the outcome of democracy and open borders if we chase them around the map and prevent that everywhere? Because that's how the democracy works, and if they accept it when it works in their favor (as it's designed to,) they can accept when it doesn't. It isn't illegal to be a liberal and live in Texas and vote, as much as other Texans might wish it were.
rbanffy 5y ago
Since the president is not elected by direct vote, the decisions in some states carry much greater impact and influence than others. A tool like this would help make the result more reflective of the desired outcomes for the larger population. And you are not interfering from afar - people need to move in order to vote. We can only guide these people, however, and help them find the places they can make the difference they want to make.
krapp 5y ago
We have the same rights as anyone in a civil society to try to effect political change in our favor, within the bounds of the law. All that's being suggested here is that if people move from SV, or wherever, to Texas that they vote their conscience, and where they could reside so that vote could be the most effective. It isn't interference, it's participation.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  Since I’m neither a US resident nor a citizen, I already did my part with the foreign interference in elections by lifting the idea. It’s up to my American friends to run with it. If you do, keep me posted. ;-)

dredmorbius 5y ago

Wouldn't giving the majority its fair share of political voice, in a democratic republic, be a net positive?

erik_seaberg 5y ago
The point of a federal system is to let a minority form the majority in a particular place and live under policies they want. Why should they accept the outcome of democracy and open borders if we chase them around the map and prevent that everywhere? I am not saying I want to live under this absurd law, but I suppose people do and they are not going to just disappear.
- krapp 5y ago
  >Why should they accept the outcome of democracy and open borders if we chase them around the map and prevent that everywhere? Because that's how the democracy works, and if they accept it when it works in their favor (as it's designed to,) they can accept when it doesn't. It isn't illegal to be a liberal and live in Texas and vote, as much as other Texans might wish it were.

rbanffy 5y ago

Since the president is not elected by direct vote, the decisions in some states carry much greater impact and influence than others. A tool like this would help make the result more reflective of the desired outcomes for the larger population. And you are not interfering from afar - people need to move in order to vote. We can only guide these people, however, and help them find the places they can make the difference they want to make.

krapp 5y ago

We have the same rights as anyone in a civil society to try to effect political change in our favor, within the bounds of the law. All that's being suggested here is that if people move from SV, or wherever, to Texas that they vote their conscience, and where they could reside so that vote could be the most effective. It isn't interference, it's participation.

rbanffy 5y ago
Since I’m neither a US resident nor a citizen, I already did my part with the foreign interference in elections by lifting the idea. It’s up to my American friends to run with it. If you do, keep me posted. ;-)