Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Google: Gmail users shouldn't expect email privacy

<< < (4/9) > >>

TaoPhoenix:
I can't answer that without moving the thread to the basement  :P

Seriously though, coordination existed and is being crushed ... unions.
The majority, not saying you, of the people that laugh at the third party idea are the ones that could help create it, by doing something instead of laughing. The people in power that will be most harmed by third party are not laughing but are happy that 'you' are laughing about it.
-rgdot (August 15, 2013, 08:31 PM)
--- End quote ---

Oh, I am not laughing at third parties at all. I am doing my modest best to just keep putting the ideas in a few places. The "Laughing" is often fake, instigated by the Big Media.

In my mind, the problem with Unions is that they are/were still a type of "1.0 slow". The coordination I am referring to is specifically a 2.0 Viral Social thing, that I think we still have an edge shot at doing, but only once. But I believe there is that once, but then we'd better make it count.

Structurally it's fairly simple. People can log on, and some well funded team posts all laws and all votes for example of all US Congress. (Stay simple, skip the states for now.) In a sense, with modern web building, that isn't that hard. It's not 1997 where the big leagues could be 2 people posting a cool little page anymore. Get a team of say 70 on this, do it big, do it right. Then for each law, you can roll it up and down in depth. Then each "potential voter" can Upvote or Downvote a specific piece, and then tie that to "would this rep's position on this law make me Kick Him Out"?

Then you can optionally Share My Vote so that other people suddenly see that "gee, there's this crowd of people Kicking Him Out over this SOPA thing, what's that and why?"

That's the coordination I mean. So then with summarizing functions, the Voters across the nation modularly join each other getting really upset over some rep on X position of several bills, and they see each other etc etc, and suddenly on election day, *it happens*.

There's nothing like that out ... YET. To me Social Media is (for worse!?) stuck on *entertainment*. Cat Photos, Farmville, Tweets, etc. But turn Elections away from this somber thing it is, into a *game*, and I think it could really work. Might not get it all the way to the President, but I really bet you can get it to work on specific state congress critters. (Because there are so many of them.)

I would *love it* if anyone felt like whipping up a prototype - I simply don't program, but I guarantee it's not "all that tough" logic wise. (It only does about 12 things.)

Renegade:
To my mind, the only question remaining is: How soon before it's tried - and by whom.-40hz (August 15, 2013, 10:33 PM)
--- End quote ---

1) As soon as they possibly can.
2) The same people who have orchestrated the whole show to begin with.

I think I should stop there.

Renegade:
@rgdot - Something like that would be very interesting to see. I would worry about the typical way that legislation is done though. e.g. The 2012 NDAA slipped in a trojan horse to allow for the indefinite detention of anyone, and they whined about how they had to pass it anyways. The same thing happens with other legislation, i.e. Create something non-controversial or something that you have to pass thanks to a crisis that you've created, then slip in a trojan horse.

Renegade:
Blah - I should note there that you'd need a pretty complex way to "vote" as you'd have to have it very fine-grained with voting/liking/starring down to the point level. It's certainly not impossible, but it's not like you could simply "vote on Bill ACME-456". Sure, you might want to pass legislation to make rocket-skates legal everywhere, but you sure as guns don't want to outlaw hunting road runners. ;D

app103:
I'll just leave this here...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page