santisiri

that’s why it’s a voting mechanism and not based on artificial intelligence. only humans can acknowledge other humans. in the original paper is referred to as “attention mining”.

That's what the first chart in the article showing twitter conversations throughout all of 2016 regarding the election aims to prove.

the manifesto in the README is from 1996, a classic cryptonarchist text. that said: the main thing you want to battle in politics is corruption, and we had plenty of experience facing that when we started the Partido de la Red. In that respect, blockchains can play a huge role enabling not only more transparent administration of organizations but also, opening up new institutional arrangements only possible on the internet itself.

hi hackernews, i'm the founder of http://democracy.earth and lead coder of http://sovereign.software. happy to answer any questions and doubts regarding this project (and past ones we started like the partido de la red and democracyos).

absolutely right.. actually we could've gone with a GPL license, yet we want to make sure the greatest degree of freedom is embedded in the rights to use this software and MIT's simple licensing looks like the most fit for that purpose.

i remember first time i was pointed to it. classic cryptoanarchist manifesto in silicon valley written by grateful dead lyricist. has that san francisco spirit in it.

yes, i'm aware it can sound funny at a first read.. but 'first they laugh at you, etc..'

Hey folks, I'm lead developer of Sovereign (and YC alumni, winter batch 2015) and also original creator of DemocracyOS.

In the light of recent events, we released the source code of Sovereign, a new app for decentralized governance where we are working on a liquid democracy model that can operate with a blockchain.

Happy to answer any questions and get feedback regarding this.

Thanks for acknowledging my point. Busy day today! Bye

I replied from a Mobile App. Stats are for Buenos Aires city, that's where we run. Im proving that you never been into a slum.

You've said "personal experience is statically insignificant"

I agree, that's why I replied 93% of under 30 year olds in Buenos Aires access social media at least once a week.

I mentioned my personal experience because it was obvious how many of these kids access the internet. You see that 93% stat everywhere if you actually cared and waled the streets of the city.

These attacks where the most common ones we had during the campaign. So let me give you an update: the largest organisation that implemented DemocracyOS is a political party from Kenya. Over there 25% of the GDP is already transacted through mobile devices.

I traveled a lot around the world, specially Latin America. And I did notice that civic adoption of technology is way stronger in developing nations that are struggling than in developed ones. Venezuela is an impressive case if you ever get to see what's going on ever there.

So no, I don't bullshit. I've been working on this for many years now.

Oh, I forgot: 93% of < 30 year olds access social media at least once a week in Buenos Aires.

Stats? 72% of the Homes of Buenos Aires have Internet access. Of those, 88% with broadband access.

source: INDEC. National stats often used by Google too in Argentina (they where leaked to me, but it's public you can look for them).

don't hide in Spanish.

It just proves that you have never been in a slum from Buenos Aires. And yes, denying a rant with a rant speaks for itself. :)

Just had this epiphany: DemocracyOS's name is intrinsically democratic.

A great challenge we face is precisely this. Today DemocracyOS is strong at a local city-level. We don't believe we are ready for Federal level yet as we must understand how checks and balances work at this scale.

Yes. We do better in the younger generation. We are building for the future and thinking the long term.

and again: only rich people believe internet is for the rich. In every slum you'll find every single kid with a huge smartphone.

As you came to realize by the end of your rant: the gap is more generational than Socio-economical. That's why this makes sense in the long term.

More than willing to figure out the ways of doing consensus. Yet any enforcement on the need to consent some perceive it as a dangerous dictatorial pattern.

You're to tied to theory, I'm talking from an abstraction: democracy as a force in society unleashed when no single ideology dominates a culture.

The kind of hardware we deal with it's called Congress. There's where the party we've built comes into place.

Very insightful, there's no doubt we have a lot of work to do.