3 ms·

You are absolutely right. However, covering the entire population of the planet is required not for making democratic decisions at a global scale, but for guara

You are absolutely right. However, covering the entire population of the planet is required not for making democratic decisions at a global scale, but for guaranteeing the absolute uniqueness of every single human being within the network.It is designed to allow anyone to enter and leave the system from any device as a unique, anonymous identity while seamlessly returning to the exact same session. Socially significant decisions themselves can still be confined to any local community, even one consisting of just 1,000 people

ndriscoll 2mo ago
Why do all individuals need to be in one network? There are literally zero decisions about my life that I want to allow people in China or Iran to vote on. I should hope they feel the same. There are almost no decisions (as someone in the US) that I want someone in California to have a vote on, and I'd be okay with zero. In fact I think California itself should really split into smaller, independent states (but that's of course their decision). The voting network partitions already into sovereign entities. Those entities negotiate with each other at a higher layer. A global political voting system can only be used for evil, so why would you want it?
- viraptor 2mo ago
  Save your time - this is not real. The requirements are impossible and there are many other issues with the post.
  - ndriscoll 2mo ago
    That's why the nerd technical stuff isn't all that interesting to me; it's likely useless. But the idea that more democracy = better is an insidious one that I see often. Democracy is a means that applies in specific conditions. Self-determination is the good we're seeking. This should be obvious but somehow is not.
conartist6 2mo ago
Such a "universal human ID" is so explosive that having it implanted subdermally would be no less invasive than what you are already suggesting. What would even be the point of democracy once privacy is gone and with it free speech? I think the closest real world model would be China, where the government gives you a "happy shiny society member" score for how little you ever dissent and how well you can recite propaganda. ...and of course if you ask the CCP they will tell you that the will of the people is absolutely being done, and the ID-powered surveillance is just helping ; ) What's your ID by the way? Will you tell me? Would you?
- conartist6 2mo ago
  If your goal is not to create communism or fascism, I just can't even imagine what this would be for. It would be a solution in search of a problem, unless the problem were a lack of authoritarian government

ndriscoll 2mo ago

Why do all individuals need to be in one network? There are literally zero decisions about my life that I want to allow people in China or Iran to vote on. I should hope they feel the same. There are almost no decisions (as someone in the US) that I want someone in California to have a vote on, and I'd be okay with zero. In fact I think California itself should really split into smaller, independent states (but that's of course their decision). The voting network partitions already into sovereign entities. Those entities negotiate with each other at a higher layer. A global political voting system can only be used for evil, so why would you want it?

viraptor 2mo ago
Save your time - this is not real. The requirements are impossible and there are many other issues with the post.
- ndriscoll 2mo ago
  That's why the nerd technical stuff isn't all that interesting to me; it's likely useless. But the idea that more democracy = better is an insidious one that I see often. Democracy is a means that applies in specific conditions. Self-determination is the good we're seeking. This should be obvious but somehow is not.

conartist6 2mo ago

Such a "universal human ID" is so explosive that having it implanted subdermally would be no less invasive than what you are already suggesting. What would even be the point of democracy once privacy is gone and with it free speech? I think the closest real world model would be China, where the government gives you a "happy shiny society member" score for how little you ever dissent and how well you can recite propaganda. ...and of course if you ask the CCP they will tell you that the will of the people is absolutely being done, and the ID-powered surveillance is just helping ; ) What's your ID by the way? Will you tell me? Would you?

conartist6 2mo ago
If your goal is not to create communism or fascism, I just can't even imagine what this would be for. It would be a solution in search of a problem, unless the problem were a lack of authoritarian government