3 ms·
I don't think we should impose loss of personal privacy.. even in this scenario a politician acting impeccably could fall to one one signalling for part of the
by darepublic 4y ago
I don't think we should impose loss of personal privacy.. even in this scenario a politician acting impeccably could fall to one one signalling for part of the public's irrational approval, like two gladiators in the colosseum. The decisions of the politician's themselves need to somehow be opened up for scrutiny as they are, artifacts independent of their origin. Like code being submitted for review, and being subjected to human + automated checks. I know people will decry this as naive / impractical to implement but I still think it has got a better shot then 'create dystopian state where politicians are monitored 24 / 7, and trust the ever rational cooler heads of the public mob to (a) properly reward the good and punish the bad, (b) advocate for the best policies'. Not to mention that if such a system were invented then politicians were just get corrupted in advance of their career, in secret.