monolith
ID: HQKN03WG
Member 1012
4 entries
1923 views
Vaso Radic (M, 31)
Temerin, RS
Immortal since Dec 18, 2007
Uplinks: 0, Generation 2
admiral Monolith
Flash AS programmer from Serbia.
  • Affiliated
    •  /  
  • Invited
    •  /  
  • Descended
    • Recommended links
    liquid journey
    monolith’s favorites
    From Andy Gilmore
    ∫∫∫∫∫∫∫∫
    From WarpedREVolution
    what did Nikola Tesla know?
    From ben10
    Multi-Touch Table Display:...
    Recently commented on
    From Andy Gilmore
    ∫∫∫∫∫∫∫∫
    From 3LSZVJA9
    Click here!
    From peinao
    Elements of Flow
    From WarpedREVolution
    what did Nikola Tesla know?
    From openartist
    A Flag for Planet Earth
    Now playing SpaceCollective
    Where forward thinking terrestrials share ideas and information about the state of the species, their planet and the universe, living the lives of science fiction. Introduction
    Featuring Powers of Ten by Charles and Ray Eames, based on an idea by Kees Boeke.
    From monolith's personal cargo

    Virtual Democracy
    Yes, I do believe that true democracy is possible, but only now: trough internet, it's finally possible to include all opinions in a ruling process, and to gather all the votes from general public almost instantly.
    Today's democracy is a mockery: U vote for people based on their's election video and some rumors you hear (probably created by their opponents) and those people represent your opinion in a parliament.
    I want to vote for LAWS, not PEOPLE! I want to say: "I agree, I think that's a good Idea", instead of "Oh, I trust you - you can make my decisions". I trust no one to make my decisions!
    But here lies a trap: If I got to vote, every Tom, Dick and Harry would and we would probably end up in a war in a matter of seconds!
    One of our modern poets, Rambo Amadeus, once said something like: "a voter's ticket shouldn't be something any fool can properly fill". I agree on that, meaning that I also wouldn't like to trust some fool with important decisions.
    But how then to do this? Do we fill an IQ test before voting? Or do we trust the true ideology behind democracy and let everyone vote, hoping for good outcome? It would all end up again in lies: we would go door to door explaining to our neighbors why they should vote our law just to find some richer schmuck smooth-talked them into his way.

    Sun, Dec 30, 2007  Permanent link
    9 comments
      Promote (3)
      
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (2)
     
    Comments:


    Michael Garrett     Mon, Dec 31, 2007  Permanent link
    Plato: "May I do to others as I would that they should do unto me."
    Socrates: "Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you."
    monolith     Mon, Dec 31, 2007  Permanent link
    Plato: "May I do to others as I would that they should do unto me."
    Socrates: "Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you."


    Truly the foundation of every human worth knowing. But there aren't many people worth knowing in politics.
    A friend of mine said: "Todays democracy isn't about hearing what others think, but to persuade them to think like you."
    Sadly enough, I think he's right.
    rene     Mon, Dec 31, 2007  Permanent link
    It would be great to further explore the possibilities of Voting on Issues, eliminating the need for political representation wherever possible. Instead the issues could be framed in online forums and instantly voted on, even if these votes would not be officially acknowledged by the current political system. Someone told me that there are many Second Life-like Utopian communities springing up around the world, including one in Iceland that is supposedly experimenting with new forms of democracy. Any links will be much appreciated.
    monolith     Mon, Dec 31, 2007  Permanent link
    Rene, you must be talking about Einar Thorsteinn's Oasis. Here's the link on his official site. But I see no details about running this utopia, just an architectural ones.

    Also, their's a few sites that gather information via voting, but the main question is how to "run" the ruling process, eg: come up with ideas to vote on, follow and develop certain ideas, shift society's attention on some urgent process? Clearly, this would be all roles of the new government in this "internet democracy".
    Michael Garrett     Tue, Jan 1, 2008  Permanent link
    Truly the foundation of every human worth knowing.

    and I would argue the foundation of all things pertaining to human interaction, whether between two people, a group, a business, or indeed a government. There can be no fair and just relationship unless it is founded on this principle. It is not a concept exclusive to Plato or Socrates. The basic principle is found throughout cultures and religions world wide. It is not complicated and in my view, we should expect and tolerate nothing less from ourselves and from others. This is fundamental and essential to the progress and survival of our species on this planet.

    That is my humble and considered opinion.
    TheJehosephat     Tue, Jan 1, 2008  Permanent link
    I like the idea of the internet being a tool capable of supporting true democracy. Nonetheless, can we really view it as a viable tool, when there are still people living in such poverty that access to daily food is a challenge much less access to a broadband connection?
    In the end, isn't it just a quicker tool relative to the speed of today's life. And with instant access, doesn't that just put us more at the fickle whims of "any fool" who can log-on?
    monolith     Tue, Jan 1, 2008  Permanent link
    Well, as first - process should be made widely accessible as possible. Theres no need for a broadband, and really - is it so unthinkable in an age where everybody owns a mobile phone? I guess the obstacles are more of the "internet illiteracy" nature then in technical possibilities. And in this field: with actions such as OLPC and public access to computers hooked on internet, in near future it's going to be tough to find a person younger then N years thats not online.
    lapisdecor     Tue, Jan 1, 2008  Permanent link
    We trust our money to the internet banking, and I wont argue online voting is a less important matter, it isn't. Anyway, it would be nice to distribute voting watches which could receive basic information on the laws by wifi, and we could press one button for yes, another for no.

    The Wii console has currently such a channel working on national and international levels. We can vote for a Mii, or we can answer a question with one of two possible choices.

    Email could be used to grant our permition to vote, since we can sign an email, or encrypt one.

    Security would be a major concern, but we have independent agencies to deal with security issues on current voting systems, so it would be their problem, a new problem maybe.

    The main problem of online democracy to me, is not security, but voting as anonymous.
    This has to be granted, or we wont have true democracy. Another problem, is who will decide what to be voted, and when, because even if anyone could suggest a law, there has to be an hierarchy of importance on what is voted. Its easy to see the number of people affected by a law would be proportional to the importance of the law but this may also be relative to the subject itself. Everyone is affected by the size of apples, but there is no doubt many people would skip this kind of voting issues.

    Another thing is global democracy. The same law may not be important one one place and extremely important on another. And we should not create a discrimination system based on Geography, we already have too much of that.
    monolith     Thu, Jan 10, 2008  Permanent link
    @lapsidecor: again, all questions for a new government, I guess, (love the wifi watch) but this is a tricker:
    even if anyone could suggest a law

    HA! A great idea, and truly politics is (1)laws; (2)mainly today bunch of politics talking with each other making compromises, so what if we could monitor the talks (meetings) itself and add our opinions during talk? We can vote which opinions would be talked about during meetings, but this is too complicated...
    And I guess GLOBAL voting must be prioritized by government but a lot of local laws (issues) can be voted in small communities, towns, and then copied on other towns (trough global voting) based on success, so really most of the issues can be voted localy.
     
          Cancel