technologue

Since you've advanced literally no argument, I don't feel a need to respond to this. Sorry I hurt your brain?

Governance is fine, but there are contractual forms of governance and non-contractual (non-consensual) forms of governance.

But please don't use "social contract", it's just a liar's word. It is neither social or contractual what people do under a "social contract". It is naked force: "Do what I say or I will hurt you".

Since you have a PhD, I'll assume that you are not so lazy you can't separate these things in your brain.

One more reason why TED is no longer relevant to anyone with a brain.

Idiot.

[TIL] Glengarry Glenross and Death of a Salesman are RACIST AND MYSOGINIST.

Also, they are not fat-positive and I don't think I saw a single transgendered person in any of them.

We don't want to be New York. People trying to turn it into New York (with fancy woodwork restaurants that all look the same, an obnoxious banker class, and shitty manners) can please GTFO and go back to the east coast where you terrible humans belong!

Wrong Wrong Wrong. Could not be more wrong.

Freedom of Contract is one of the most important concepts of free market capitalism. People must have the right to review the terms of contract, decide to sign or not and be held to the terms, and there should be penalties for breach on both sides and conditions for dissolution of the contract.

The "Social Contract" you are talking about is no contract at all. It is imposed by force, you are given no chance to sign, a false choice (red or blue!) and only 1/385millionth of a say in it. There is no remedy for breach and no conditions for dissolution. It is the very opposite of voluntary exchange and mutual agreement.

DO NOT conflate the two, or go back to whatever liberal arts school terribly educated you.

Yeah a normal businessman doesn't threaten to throw me in jail if I don't give him money for his pet project. Please DO NOT conflate taxation with charity, they are NOT the same in any way, shape or form.

Since this board is full of logical people (programmers), I'm curious to know why any of them think that a system based on tyranny of the majority would increase freedom for people?

Also, I'm really curious what sort of things you all think you can "hack" that will really make people more free. After this, will the NSA be gone? How about the entire military industrial complex and all it's mouthpieces on tv and in Congress? What about the drug war and the power of big pharma? Diebold? Dynasty families like the Bush's and Clintons? Etc Etc Etc.

If any of you were serious about freedom you would be figuring out how to hire lawyers, not coders. A better voting app is just an easier way for my representatives to give me false choices.

You're high, the guy did NOTHING wrong. The police are to blame for this.

As a hardcore libertarian, I approve of your layman's explanation.