I am on the shitter instead of the shower. So, sorry if I babble crap. But imagine something like GitHub but for the purpose of restructuring society.
Owned by microsoft 🤔
That’s what it is now. To much bloat, a stupid subscription model. It runs very slow while the machine runs way to hot.
Applecracy would at least be aesthetically pleasing. Imagine the dope uniforms that everybody would have to wear.
Hugo Boss maybe!
Just replace the skull with the apple and voila.
Did you just invent wikihow?
No. But I invented the “eternal Tarantino of a spotless toe”
Its mescal served in a nice worn lady shoe with a marachino cherry on top.
I think wiki how was invented by disney.
I often thought it’d be cool to have founding legal documents available in a source control system that was available to everyone.
I’ve got some bad news for you. There is going to he no communist revolution. This isn’t early 20th century Russia
backward thinking detected…
it does not have to be violent or aligned a with a clown daddy worship ideology ;)
unless you consider denying the parasite profit and engagement “violence”
Bad news? We don’t want the revolution of 20th century Russia, we live on 21st century earth! Better yet, lets do away with the christian calendar and do 1st century post capitalism.
I honestly think people will keep trying to sell capitalism to make themselves rich in the same way time shares still get sold when everybody knows they’re scams.
You seem to forget we live in a planet that follows the laws of physics. Capitalism pretends it can bend those laws. But it will not happen
Not with that aditude no.
I’ve always considered open government to be registered opinions in real time. People log an opinion, and if it’s a majority opinion for that jurisdiction or electorate then the government must consider it as a bill to be reviewed.
I’ve been thinking about this concept for quite a long time now.
4 years election cicles had sense in the XVIII century when the fastest way of communicating was letter delivered by horse.
But with internet it makes no sense that old fashioned system.
Forget about elections every 4 years, forget about having an official month of political campaigns that decide the fate of the country for 4 years, and the 4 years of the president doing whatever they want without consequences.
We have the technology to make a direct democracy. Every citizen should be able to vote on any issue or who is their representative at any point of time.
Voting on opinions is a very bad idea, because opinions doesn’t have to be backed by facts or reality. I can have the opinion that it should be law that all people should wear green socks on Tuesdays. Should there really be a vote about a opinion like that? If yes, then then floodgates will be open and the system gets overwhelmed with input to vote on. If not, who decides what kind of opinion is valid to vote one, and how can a misuse of that power be prevented.
Why not. A good system should be one that it’s easy and cheap to put a vote out. If the voting you put on its ridiculous, people simply wont vote it and that’s it
It’s not like that doesn’t existe now. I don’t know in the US, but in most european countries and in the european union itself people can try to raise a vote on anything, they just have to be backed up by X number of people.
Just make that easier, 100% online, and instead of sparking a debate of representatives, if the thing had enough support an online referendum is held and if people vote hes it automatically become law.
I don’t really see an issue.
We don’t have this already only for one reason. The people that would need to allow this (the representatives) would be the ones that would be jobless and powerless if direct democracy where to be implemented, so they won’t.
There are more reasons, for example that all systems that use online or digital voting can be easily manipulated and lack the possibility to be monitored or validated by independent 3rd parties. I really wish it would be different.
I am a huge fan of direct democracy, but I don’t see a good way to implement it.
To do a informed vote on something you should have at least some basic idea what the topic means and a understanding of the implications, benefits and risks of that.
So let’s say 0.001 percent of the people in a country with for example 40 million people in the valide age group have some great ideas that they want to get voted about every year. That would be 400 votes, so more then a votes every day. That means that you either vote blind on lots/most of the topics or do nothing else then to keep up on the needed data to do a informed decision. Even with only 40 votes, so about one vote every ten days, you would be forced to invest a huge part of your time to keep yourself up to date on all topics.
Oh and such a voting system would be extremely easy to manipulate by influencers, celebrities or other people with a high parasocial or charismatic power.
The elections we have nowadays are already manipulated that way, so there is not a change on that regard.
People should not need to vote on every issue, you should be able to still delegate on a representative. But if on some things you don’t agree with your representative you should be able to vote it by your own way.
I remember a proposal someone made a long time ago. About a voting system where every delegate have a “power of vote” and by default is 100% percent. But whenever a voting is made in a representative chamber the vote is also open online. And people’s vote would rest value from the representatives votes. So if it’s a matter where a lot of people cares and vote directly the people’s vote would decide. If people don’t care and don’t vote the representatives vote would have more power and they would decide.
I thought it was very interesting.
Honestly? I don’t think that’d work. We already have a problem with not enough people voting once a year as it is.
People dont vote because they dont feel like their views are properly represented. If each individual issue was open to referendum or voting, the only people who would take part in that specific vote are likely people who are well informed and passionate about the issue. I think this would end up being a far better system than having to vote based on nebulous campaign promises that are hardly ever fulfilled, or when they are, your issue is tacked on or bundled with a whole bunch of irrelevant and even harmful legislation.
Think we need a new channel.
!c/shitterthoughts
I made a !shittyasklemmy@lemmy.uhhoh.com a while ago !
I have been thinking about a social network that would match you with other people who want to engage in activism (protests, writing to reps, starting petitions). I imagine that what often stops people is that they feel like the only ones.
I told a friend today. “Stop think about a solarpunk utopia, start think about a solarpunk revolution”
You should read Walkaway by Cory Doctorow. I think you’ll like it.
There’s also “A Half-Built Garden” novel where the whole “git as means of direct democracy” is central to the plot. Is gitpunk a genre?
I’ve just made it to that scene and I feel like I owe you a very hardy fuck you for recommending this gloriously weird book. Guess i’ll update when I’ve finished a chapter or two.
also known as philosophy
I think it would not work, people covertly sabotage any drift toward a utopia because they do not want it, it is numbingly dull. Beyond wealth or ease of life or sexual freedom what people really want at a deep and profound level is to have something to complain about. The whole of Reddit is just a mechanism for that, as is all social media, as is the internet, the purpose of language and life. People want to gaze over at one section of society and say look at those fucking idiots I am so much better than them. Then they want to tell people how much better they are and have other people agree, and that sort of thing is banned in utopia.
Easy fix: A very violent sport, to ease the peoples hunger for discord. On a volontary basis of course. Preferably something with roller skates and swords.
Also introduce Kevin into the system. People can complain about him. A common enemy brings people together and Kevin is a really big asshohle.
Now everybody’s happy. Except for Kevin of course. But that’s the price you have to pay for utopia.
We could call that sport the Games for Hunger or something like that and the men could all be running. Also we would need populations of Kevins, perhaps decanted for the purpose because what people really miss in a utopia is the bullying. Not full-on to the death school type bullying, we are all too refined now for that and understand everyone is a sensitive frozen water crystal and any slightly offended sensibility is mortal injury to us all, and just very disappointing. No, what we crave is the no chinned, anonymous and slightly sarcastic bullying of a fully mature mind. Laughing at the opinions of others from our hide shacks and downvoting them in wank-gangs until they yield and go outside, in the air - the true defeat of the internetian. I have forgot the point I was trying to make so I’ll stop, but I think the key idea is to reply ‘sorry lady but’ to any post you know is written by a boy adult.
No just one Kevin. If you have more than one to hate on its antikevinism and that’s just racism without the extra steps.
The utopia would spread across the entire globe filling every space humanity chose to live, like pouring proprietary cake mix into a fun shaped cake tin made with universal uniqueness to show your love, so a single Kevin would be overworked. He would need to be scaled up as the revolution proceeded. Even Lenin understood this, its why he had that kid with Yoko.
A Kevin just needs to exist as a funnel for our negative emotions. Just knowing that Kevin exists makes my skin boil. Two Kevin’s would be a reason for war and we don’t do that anymore.
Kevin can sit in chair at an undisclosed location. He gets a VHS of the Buffy the Vampire slayer episode were her mom dies and two bags of dates per day.
I once read on the internet that a dates only diet might be sufficient to nurture you.
Two Kevin’s or even more would be morally complicated.
Love the brainstorm energy and solution oriented mindset. Few suggestions:
Lets make the game mandatory and nonviolent, except the loser becomes the new kevin and the winner gets blown up with giant lasers.
The kevin system will push people not to be the last one and the laser will discourage people from being at the top.
It would create much more homogenous, and equal society with no class wars because everyone would want to be the part of the “middle class”
I’ve thought of this as well.
Git is a great version control and distributed collaboration system.
Just need to use it to manage a constitution, a bill of rights, and a legal framework. Legal code instead of computer code.
Technologically super easy. Convincing a government to switch to a new constitution is hard. We just need an amendment that amends the amendment process into a pull request approval.
We don’t need to convince the government. We just ignore it until it goes away. If it does not dissolve on its own, we just put it in a submarine.
Can you elaborate your thoughts? What does “A GitHub for restructuring society” look like?
Billions of completely unrelated developments of niche topics in languages most people don’t understand and then also hundreds of competing solutions to the same problems.
The revolution? What revolution? Against ze Germans? WTF are you on about?
The scenario you describe is actually represented in a great free book from Cory Doctorow: https://boingboing.net/2009/10/28/makers-my-new-novel.html
Today is the launch of my new novel, Makers, a book about people who hack hardware, business-models, and living arrangements to discover ways of staying alive and happy even when the economy is falling down the toilet.