Re: [P2P-F] Fwd: Ancient Athens didn't have politicians. Is there a lesson for us?
A few of recent (ish) web resources I have found interesting and I think would feed nicely into this discussion posted recently on this list by Dante https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HHhGKgYUGY&list=UU7DXwgSFOgXkKQwEKY2GTnQ&in... The future of democracy (written by a mathematician) http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/speroni20120427 extensive criticisms of representative and direct democracy systems as they are currently understood (think this may have been previously blogged on P2PFoundation) https://georgiebc.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/the-problems-with-democracy-2/
......continued from my last post below I was doing a lot of thinking about edemocracy systems a few years back and, to overcome problems with the amount of time/attention that anyone can give to governance, came up with the idea of having your representative being the individuals who had voted the most similar to you in the past (identified through an encrypted computer facilitated open source voting system ?). I now see that this could also avoid the problem of charismatic/well presented people with bad ideas becoming the representatives of others (a problem identified in all the links I posted in my previous mail). I also envisages notifications about how your votes were being cast (also encrypted) with some time period to choose different before they were fixed, I wonder if such a system would see scary results?? (mob mentality) The system whereby people get informed would also need attention. I'm thinking of large media controller/owner led agendas. On 14/01/2013 23:54, Darren wrote:
A few of recent (ish) web resources I have found interesting and I think would feed nicely into this discussion
posted recently on this list by Dante
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HHhGKgYUGY&list=UU7DXwgSFOgXkKQwEKY2GTnQ&in...
The future of democracy (written by a mathematician) http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/speroni20120427
extensive criticisms of representative and direct democracy systems as they are currently understood (think this may have been previously blogged on P2PFoundation) https://georgiebc.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/the-problems-with-democracy-2/
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
El 15/01/13 01:12, Darren dijo:
......continued from my last post below [...] I wonder if such a system would see scary results?? (mob mentality)
The system whereby people get informed would also need attention. I'm thinking of large media controller/owner led agendas.
"freedom is an endless meeting" from francesca polletta is a good analysis of direct/consensus-based/participatory democracies that tries not to fall on the "participatory democracies just don't work/scale/etc." thesis. at pirate party argentina we defined consensus as lack of dissent, meaning you don't have to be involved in everything for the whole to progress, and assuming you can't take part on every aspect of the party (or will simply be indifferent). -- :{
The solution I want to implement for the centralized media problem is this: Having each person being a transmitter of information. Till now, the transmission only happens to our friends(facebook) or followers(twitter). Each person would put a weight on the trustwortiness and abilities of a friend. Each person would then receive a piece of information and a rating of its usefullness. That person would compute the weighted average (many sources) and then transmit automatically that information to those that trust him. This way, people could filter and rank information. One could also filter videos(from youtube or any other source). Then one could very easily watch the filtered stream of videos he trusts. One more thing that you could do is search those trusted pieces of information. Computing the weighted average is a linear equation and that way we can reduce database seeks, so that it can be technically possible. Watching a stream of videos (without stopping) will require some javascript knowledge. 2013/1/15 Nicolás Reynolds <[email protected]>
El 15/01/13 01:12, Darren dijo:
......continued from my last post below [...] I wonder if such a system would see scary results?? (mob mentality)
The system whereby people get informed would also need attention. I'm thinking of large media controller/owner led agendas.
"freedom is an endless meeting" from francesca polletta is a good analysis of direct/consensus-based/participatory democracies that tries not to fall on the "participatory democracies just don't work/scale/etc." thesis.
at pirate party argentina we defined consensus as lack of dissent, meaning you don't have to be involved in everything for the whole to progress, and assuming you can't take part on every aspect of the party (or will simply be indifferent).
-- :{
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sincerely yours, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
El 15/01/13 09:40, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis dijo:
The solution I want to implement for the centralized media problem is this:
Having each person being a transmitter of information. Till now, the transmission only happens to our friends(facebook) or followers(twitter).
Each person would put a weight on the trustwortiness and abilities of a friend. Each person would then receive a piece of information and a rating
checkout how the web of trust from openpgp works? -- :{
I am not very familiar with it. One of the requirements of news is that it is current, thus we need to transmit the news at least as fast as the competitor media. Thus, from a technical point, it requires a centralized graph processing system. But I would certainly use pgp technologies so that each persons electronic identity is his own (no passwords) and so that he could very easily switch to another server to process his information if he wants. 2013/1/15 Nicolás Reynolds <[email protected]>
El 15/01/13 09:40, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis dijo:
The solution I want to implement for the centralized media problem is this:
Having each person being a transmitter of information. Till now, the transmission only happens to our friends(facebook) or followers(twitter).
Each person would put a weight on the trustwortiness and abilities of a friend. Each person would then receive a piece of information and a rating
checkout how the web of trust from openpgp works?
-- :{
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sincerely yours, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
Michael, for some reason, your third email was sent to spam. I am aware of the "reductionism" problem,due to my political engagement. To solve some problems, we might do that without knowing. We ll need to keep references to anthropological studies. And please, feel free to correct us/me when we/I do. 2013/1/15 Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <[email protected]>
I am not very familiar with it.
One of the requirements of news is that it is current, thus we need to transmit the news at least as fast as the competitor media. Thus, from a technical point, it requires a centralized graph processing system.
But I would certainly use pgp technologies so that each persons electronic identity is his own (no passwords) and so that he could very easily switch to another server to process his information if he wants.
2013/1/15 Nicolás Reynolds <[email protected]>
El 15/01/13 09:40, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis dijo:
The solution I want to implement for the centralized media problem is this:
Having each person being a transmitter of information. Till now, the transmission only happens to our friends(facebook) or followers(twitter).
Each person would put a weight on the trustwortiness and abilities of a friend. Each person would then receive a piece of information and a rating
checkout how the web of trust from openpgp works?
-- :{
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
--
Sincerely yours,
Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
-- Sincerely yours, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
......continued from my last post below I was doing a lot of thinking about edemocracy systems a few years back and, to overcome problems with the amount of time/attention that anyone can give to governance, came up with the idea of having your representative being the individuals who had voted the most similar to you in the past (identified through an encrypted computer facilitated open source voting system ?). I now see that this could also avoid the problem of charismatic/well presented people with bad ideas becoming the representatives of others (a problem identified in all the links I posted in my previous mail). I also envisages notifications about how your votes were being cast (also encrypted) with some time period to choose different before they were fixed, I wonder if such a system would see scary results?? (mob mentality) I guess the system whereby people get informed would also need attention. I'm thinking of powerful main stream media controller/owner led agendas.
participants (5)
-
Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis -
Darren -
mail＠vegburner.co.uk
-
Nicolás Reynolds -
Nicolás Reynolds