A corruption score for bills, almost like a facebook for bills "This bill is friends with Exxon". It would figure out who spent the most getting the bill passed, and who they bought off to get it.
Just a simple thing for people to point to when they say things are corrupt. Granted in today's environment, that score would be 100% most of the time, but it would be interesting to have some idea just who bought the bill.
As sibling comment said, don’t generate an adultery score. That’s not productive or decent. Find actual evidence of wrongdoing, not draconian scoring systems.
Link: https://serenata.ai/en/
People already know who is corrupt, who is sexually harassing, etc.
Certainly their victims and co-conspirators know it. Probably their staffers, friends and family have a pretty good idea.
Often reporters themselves know who is dirty but don't have enough corroborating sources to get past the fact checkers.
So it seems like the Wikileaks model could be improved with a crypto market. Those in the know place bets on who is dirty and get a payoff when the dirt eventually gets disclosed.
It would be a nice incentive to get more disclosure, and it would directly reward the victims and leakers.
Credible whistleblowers have additional incentive, and it would serve as a good yardstick for just how much folks detest a given official.
Alternatively we could take the crypto and go full Weimar Republic with a Kickstriker[0] clone for politicians!
[0] - http://kickstriker.com/
Hard to protect leakers, victims and funders when the perpetrators have the power to trace payments and seize assets.
Alternatively, we can create an easy-to-use site for the common man who is willing to pony up some petty cash for whatever their version of "justice" is. At sufficiently high levels, in sufficiently corrupt societies they can trace things down and disappear you. This idea isn't for those places, and likely wouldn't even work anyway.
However, in nations with reasonably sound rule of law this could potentially work.
Adultery is not a crime.
(You can argue that it's an indicator of a person's character, or lack thereof, sure. But that's something different.)
That's pretty terrible.
Also the legend is pretty amusing:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/U.S._Adu...
Why not instead look at real crimes like pay-for-play, fraud, sexual assault, etc.?
Adultery was picked because it is a very common behavior which is nonetheless viewed very poorly by society. It's the kind of thing which historically gets politicians into trouble. Being named as an adulterer is a realistic thing for a politician to fear, as it could ruin their life - the way getting labelled a terrorist or a pedophile or similar will be a reasonable thing for a citizen to fear when systems are debuted that use the same technology to label people with a likelihood score. That is why adultery was picked. If you wanted to do by pay-for-play where would you get your training data set? Where are the people who have actually lost their office because of that? The others are the same. We have a long history of politicians getting busted for adultery, so we can have a good training dataset. And the results will be garbage and useless. That's the whole and entire point. Once you have an automated system built, it doesn't matter whether its conclusions have any merit. It will hand out judgements, no one will be able to explain what basis they actually have, but investigations will be targetted and reputations will be destroyed.
My intent isn't even to accomplish any of that reputation destruction, it is simply to show Congress the ill use such systems can and will be put to.
Likewise having a spiff 18 months ago at burning man or glasto isn't really a huge risk to security if its not a crime - would also help with recruitment for TLA's
Absolutely it could - that would all be factored into the percentage. Human behavior and chance encounters are the exact reason you could never say 0% or 100%, however.
Sounds like a really mean spirited thing to do. They are people too.