I'm again not sure what the win is with the government running sites like this, versus, you know, making sure the Internet keeps running so that private citizens can set up their own sites.
Participatory democracry perhaps? What if sites like these became the democracry? What if your vote on sites like these actually decided policy rather than simply informing your representatives about how you think? Then the government itself becomes an unnecessary middle man and the algorithm becomes the government.
"It may not sound like a revolution if government officials simply listen more to members of the public, but it’s not really that revolutionary if the opinions are then ignored by the bureaucrats. Ms. Noveck is clear that none of her efforts is meant to create a sort of direct democracy.
There is a reason you want people with expertise working in the jobs we have, she said. But she said that the new online tools will nonetheless put pressure on officials to take public opinion into account."
I don't see why we should stop short of direct democracy? If the technology allows it, why not?
direct democracy = mob rule. if we had direct democracy in the united states, sept 12th: we would have nuked someone. if iraq had direct democracy after the american invasion, surely, a good part of the population would have been killed.
Because of the digital divide, people with easy access to the internet and the proper education to use it are also unequally represented in an e-democracy.
There's a hundred threads that have made me think this - but may I take a post to thank both PG and all the members of this site for successfully creating the environment we have here at HN. We very rarely have arguments that are not handled rationally and maturely. As that article states - that is a very difficult feat, and one of great value.
A voting system is extremely effective in preventing trolling here but only because PG put time into instilling the principles he wanted in the community through constant repetition, like training a dog. That required a lot of time on his part initially. Now imagine multiplying that by, say, 30 small sites that you are administering. So, I think it's not that the problem has been solved. PG may need to step in from time to time if the community 'forgets' the principles he started it with - such as when there is a big influx of new users.
