News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Cicada: A Distributed Direct Democracy and Decentralized ... by manigandham on Friday July 28, 2017 @01:20PM (#14875863)
That makes no sense.

What's the correct decision? All the people voting completely against their interests now think they're making the correct decision. Not all decisions or votes are equal and the outcome of an election can change what can even be voted on and by whom for the next round.

Re:Cicada: A Distributed Direct Democracy and Decentralized ... by Spivak on Friday July 28, 2017 @02:17PM (#14876319)
I'm responding to the point that voters need to be rational and educated for a direct democracy to function. It only requires that voters have a bias, however slight, to making the 'right' decision.

Don't think too much about how to define 'right' because you'll drive yourself mad. All that matters is the belief that in the long run people tend to make 'right' choices slightly more often than wrong ones.

Re:Cicada: A Distributed Direct Democracy and Decentralized ... by ZenoArrow on Friday July 28, 2017 @06:40PM (#14878153)
> "All that matters is the belief that in the long run people tend to make 'right' choices slightly more often than wrong ones."

Do they though? I see people making the "wrong" choices very often when the "right" choice is inconvenient for them. I would include myself in that description too.

Re:Cicada: A Distributed Direct Democracy and Decentralized ... by manigandham on Friday July 28, 2017 @03:15PM (#14876739)
That wasn't the point. The question is whether it's a good idea - and it's not when people don't know or don't care about what they're voting on, both of which requires education and rational (long-term) thinking.