Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters  (Read 1036 times)

Offline bytemaster

Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« on: December 13, 2014, 04:25:05 AM »

Aggregate Public Opinion Matters

Whether we like it or not the mob ultimately runs society.  Individual property rights mean nothing in a riot.   If public opinion turns against something nothing can resist it for long, not even the most oppressive governments.  A libertarian utopia is the result of changing public opinion and maintaining public support for universal application of the Golden Principle without exception.     

Unfortunately most people do not form their opinion based upon facts and reason, but instead defer to the opinions of others.  Each and every day people make decisions based upon what they think other people think.   Style, language, morals, religion, politics, and just about everything are heavily influenced by other peoples opinions.   When in doubt most people defer to public opinion over their own opinion and this is the heart of democracy.

Billions of dollars are spent every single year in an effort to shape and then measure the aggregate opinion of the entire population on politics alone.   There is an entire field of study dedicated to the manipulation of pubic opinion for profit.

Some of the more sophisticated techniques of manipulating opinion is by corrupting the measuring and reporting process.   If you can control the major media outlets and continuously show support of a minority opinion over a majority opinion then people will come to believe that the minority opinion is the majority opinion.   This can either be subtle or overt. 

Perhaps one of the most overt attempts to manipulate public opinion is the corruption of “scientific polling” prior to elections or the elections themselves.   As a result of publishing these scientific polls people conclude that some candidates are unelectable while others are extremely popular even if they are not.  If you can manipulate an election then you can change the very constitution of a society while facing limited opposition.

No one likes to be a minority that stands out against the majority.  They will often publicly support the majority opinion even if they privately object.  This creates a self reinforcing cycle that results in the quiet suffering and repression of the majority.

If we are to achieve a libertarian utopia it becomes critical that the market produce an actuate and fully trustworthy measurement of the aggregate opinion.   A private, incorruptible, continuous polling of the population would provide a means for people to feel safe communicating their desire to change the way society operates. 

Fortunately with the combination of the internet and modern cryptography we now have the tools necessary to produce a nearly incorruptible anonymous polling solution.   
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline fuzzy

Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2014, 04:43:21 AM »
Even without voting...the ability for us to use bitshares for polling is such a huge market.  Hard to believe all these functions and so many more exist in one single DAC. 
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11958
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2014, 05:01:14 AM »
@BM: are you talking VOTE or TRUTHCOIN? or maybe a mixture of both .. together with automated agents as proposed by luckybit ???
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2014, 05:03:46 AM »
Aggregate Public Opinion Matters

Whether we like it or not the mob ultimately runs society.  Individual property rights mean nothing in a riot.   If public opinion turns against something nothing can resist it for long, not even the most oppressive governments.  A libertarian utopia is the result of changing public opinion and maintaining public support for universal application of the Golden Principle without exception.     

Unfortunately most people do not form their opinion based upon facts and reason, but instead defer to the opinions of others.  Each and every day people make decisions based upon what they think other people think.   Style, language, morals, religion, politics, and just about everything are heavily influenced by other peoples opinions.   When in doubt most people defer to public opinion over their own opinion and this is the heart of democracy.

Billions of dollars are spent every single year in an effort to shape and then measure the aggregate opinion of the entire population on politics alone.   There is an entire field of study dedicated to the manipulation of pubic opinion for profit.

Some of the more sophisticated techniques of manipulating opinion is by corrupting the measuring and reporting process.   If you can control the major media outlets and continuously show support of a minority opinion over a majority opinion then people will come to believe that the minority opinion is the majority opinion.   This can either be subtle or overt. 

Perhaps one of the most overt attempts to manipulate public opinion is the corruption of “scientific polling” prior to elections or the elections themselves.   As a result of publishing these scientific polls people conclude that some candidates are unelectable while others are extremely popular even if they are not.  If you can manipulate an election then you can change the very constitution of a society while facing limited opposition.

No one likes to be a minority that stands out against the majority.  They will often publicly support the majority opinion even if they privately object.  This creates a self reinforcing cycle that results in the quiet suffering and repression of the majority.

If we are to achieve a libertarian utopia it becomes critical that the market produce an actuate and fully trustworthy measurement of the aggregate opinion.   A private, incorruptible, continuous polling of the population would provide a means for people to feel safe communicating their desire to change the way society operates. 

Fortunately with the combination of the internet and modern cryptography we now have the tools necessary to produce a nearly incorruptible anonymous polling solution.   

Well, I wrote something nice on another thread you just started. On this one, I suppose that if I have nothing nice to say, then maybe I shouldn't say it. But this voting thing lends itself to so many angles of critique. Someday, it may replace elections. That would be an improvement over the current situation, but I think it will take many years. And before then, in order to replace public opinion polling, it will need to offer results that are broken down by demographics and geographic location; without that, it won't be "scientific" in their world, and won't be credible enough to trust or use. I hope this solution includes those features.

Public opinion polls are not evil. If they were manipulated to the point where they were inaccurate (much beyond the margin of error), then those pollsters would be out of jobs. They need to be accurate and scientific. There are some that "push poll" people or frame their questions in marginally dishonest ways, but no one in the political world puts those "polls" on the same level as the truly predictive ones. There are also partisan pollsters, but everyone knows who they are and their stuff is taken with a grain of salt. Surprisingly, once you add that grain of salt, they come out pretty accurate.

Sorry, but I have to knock your argument on one other point. If you think present polls are keeping people from actually voting (if they know the real election won't matter, because the result is clear in advance), then won't this DAC voting solution have the same (dampening the real vote) effect?

Here's how I see it. What sucks about polls is what they DON'T ask, and how they don't follow up or lead to actual solutions. Of course, not, since they are owned and run by the companies who have a vested interest in electing certain politicians who support the policies those companies like. And THAT, I think, is where a better solution could be transformative. It can be broader in terms of reaching people that don't vote. But it also could be much DEEPER than the simple questions asked on these current polls. It could help re-invigorate democracy in a new way.

But I think all of this will take time. In the meantime, can we please get a functioning BTS 1.0 client? Thank you.


Offline sparkles

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2014, 05:10:41 AM »
Aggregate Public Opinion Matters

Whether we like it or not the mob ultimately runs society.  Individual property rights mean nothing in a riot.   If public opinion turns against something nothing can resist it for long, not even the most oppressive governments.  A libertarian utopia is the result of changing public opinion and maintaining public support for universal application of the Golden Principle without exception.     

Unfortunately most people do not form their opinion based upon facts and reason, but instead defer to the opinions of others.  Each and every day people make decisions based upon what they think other people think.   Style, language, morals, religion, politics, and just about everything are heavily influenced by other peoples opinions.   When in doubt most people defer to public opinion over their own opinion and this is the heart of democracy.

Billions of dollars are spent every single year in an effort to shape and then measure the aggregate opinion of the entire population on politics alone.   There is an entire field of study dedicated to the manipulation of pubic opinion for profit.

Some of the more sophisticated techniques of manipulating opinion is by corrupting the measuring and reporting process.   If you can control the major media outlets and continuously show support of a minority opinion over a majority opinion then people will come to believe that the minority opinion is the majority opinion.   This can either be subtle or overt. 

Perhaps one of the most overt attempts to manipulate public opinion is the corruption of “scientific polling” prior to elections or the elections themselves.   As a result of publishing these scientific polls people conclude that some candidates are unelectable while others are extremely popular even if they are not.  If you can manipulate an election then you can change the very constitution of a society while facing limited opposition.

No one likes to be a minority that stands out against the majority.  They will often publicly support the majority opinion even if they privately object.  This creates a self reinforcing cycle that results in the quiet suffering and repression of the majority.

If we are to achieve a libertarian utopia it becomes critical that the market produce an actuate and fully trustworthy measurement of the aggregate opinion.   A private, incorruptible, continuous polling of the population would provide a means for people to feel safe communicating their desire to change the way society operates. 

Fortunately with the combination of the internet and modern cryptography we now have the tools necessary to produce a nearly incorruptible anonymous polling solution.   

Well, I wrote something nice on another thread you just started. On this one, I suppose that if I have nothing nice to say, then maybe I shouldn't say it. But this voting thing lends itself to so many angles of critique. Someday, it may replace elections. That would be an improvement over the current situation, but I think it will take many years. And before then, in order to replace public opinion polling, it will need to offer results that are broken down by demographics and geographic location; without that, it won't be "scientific" in their world, and won't be credible enough to trust or use. I hope this solution includes those features.

Public opinion polls are not evil. If they were manipulated to the point where they were inaccurate (much beyond the margin of error), then those pollsters would be out of jobs. They need to be accurate and scientific. There are some that "push poll" people or frame their questions in marginally dishonest ways, but no one in the political world puts those "polls" on the same level as the truly predictive ones. There are also partisan pollsters, but everyone knows who they are and their stuff is taken with a grain of salt. Surprisingly, once you add that grain of salt, they come out pretty accurate.

Sorry, but I have to knock your argument on one other point. If you think present polls are keeping people from actually voting (if they know the real election won't matter, because the result is clear in advance), then won't this DAC voting solution have the same (dampening the real vote) effect?

Here's how I see it. What sucks about polls is what they DON'T ask, and how they don't follow up or lead to actual solutions. Of course, not, since they are owned and run by the companies who have a vested interest in electing certain politicians who support the policies those companies like. And THAT, I think, is where a better solution could be transformative. It can be broader in terms of reaching people that don't vote. But it also could be much DEEPER than the simple questions asked on these current polls. It could help re-invigorate democracy in a new way.

But I think all of this will take time. In the meantime, can we please get a functioning BTS 1.0 client? Thank you.

Give the man a break, he identified and fixed a major bug in BTS while on travel.   

Bytemaster has already said he doesn't like voting and doesn't want people to vote in real elections.  This is clearly an example where block chain technology solves another problem that we depend upon trust.   Whether they are scientific polls or elections we must trust the source of the data.   Now we don't have to do that any more. 

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2014, 05:29:20 AM »

Give the man a break

Go back and look at my 1000+ posts. I've been more supportive than almost anyone on this board. Some would call me a shill. And I'll continue to be supportive. I just don't see VOTE as any more important than getting BitShares ready. This Vote thing will bring in a few people, but it is experimental or long term at best. For whatever share I have through my AGS donations and all the BTS I've bought, I would vote to put developer time on getting this client ready.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 936
    • View Profile
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2014, 05:49:10 AM »
Once people are set up to vote in one BitShares powered election, I see nothing stopping them from using the same keys to weigh in on other elections or polls, and there's no requirement that all polls and elections be created by the same people.  That's a huge step in reducing the barrier to entry in credible polling, and in solving the problem of the critical questions that are currently left unasked.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
    • View Profile
  • BTS: Ander
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2014, 06:08:07 AM »
I also see a potential for Bitshares to eventually be used for prediction markets, which I think tie into this. 
Is this possible?  Part of the eventual plan?

Would the existence of price feeds give us an advantage in providing a prediction market, over what you could do with coins like Ripple and NXT?
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads


zerosum

  • Guest
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2014, 05:55:48 PM »

Give the man a break

Go back and look at my 1000+ posts. I've been more supportive than almost anyone on this board. Some would call me a shill. And I'll continue to be supportive. I just don't see VOTE as any more important than getting BitShares ready. This Vote thing will bring in a few people, but it is experimental or long term at best. For whatever share I have through my AGS donations and all the BTS I've bought, I would vote to put developer time on getting this client ready.

 +5% +5%

Offline Gentso1

Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #10 on: December 14, 2014, 03:08:06 AM »

Give the man a break

Go back and look at my 1000+ posts. I've been more supportive than almost anyone on this board. Some would call me a shill. And I'll continue to be supportive. I just don't see VOTE as any more important than getting BitShares ready. This Vote thing will bring in a few people, but it is experimental or long term at best. For whatever share I have through my AGS donations and all the BTS I've bought, I would vote to put developer time on getting this client ready.

 +5% +5%
+5%

Offline emailtooaj

Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2014, 03:50:16 AM »
Aggregate Public Opinion Matters

Whether we like it or not the mob ultimately runs society.  Individual property rights mean nothing in a riot.   If public opinion turns against something nothing can resist it for long, not even the most oppressive governments.  A libertarian utopia is the result of changing public opinion and maintaining public support for universal application of the Golden Principle without exception.     

Unfortunately most people do not form their opinion based upon facts and reason, but instead defer to the opinions of others.  Each and every day people make decisions based upon what they think other people think.   Style, language, morals, religion, politics, and just about everything are heavily influenced by other peoples opinions.   When in doubt most people defer to public opinion over their own opinion and this is the heart of democracy.

Billions of dollars are spent every single year in an effort to shape and then measure the aggregate opinion of the entire population on politics alone.   There is an entire field of study dedicated to the manipulation of pubic opinion for profit.

Some of the more sophisticated techniques of manipulating opinion is by corrupting the measuring and reporting process.   If you can control the major media outlets and continuously show support of a minority opinion over a majority opinion then people will come to believe that the minority opinion is the majority opinion.   This can either be subtle or overt. 

Perhaps one of the most overt attempts to manipulate public opinion is the corruption of “scientific polling” prior to elections or the elections themselves.   As a result of publishing these scientific polls people conclude that some candidates are unelectable while others are extremely popular even if they are not.  If you can manipulate an election then you can change the very constitution of a society while facing limited opposition.

No one likes to be a minority that stands out against the majority.  They will often publicly support the majority opinion even if they privately object.  This creates a self reinforcing cycle that results in the quiet suffering and repression of the majority.

If we are to achieve a libertarian utopia it becomes critical that the market produce an actuate and fully trustworthy measurement of the aggregate opinion.   A private, incorruptible, continuous polling of the population would provide a means for people to feel safe communicating their desire to change the way society operates. 

Fortunately with the combination of the internet and modern cryptography we now have the tools necessary to produce a nearly incorruptible anonymous polling solution.   



I don't like to talk politics, especially when I've had a few drinks... but Bytemaster, this recent comment is spot on!!  +5%

I truly believe everyone, outside of this forum, gets wrapped up with their day-to-day shuffle and don't consciously realize, just how much individual freedom is actually being eroded or taken away from them EVERY SINGLE DAY!!
It truly is a soft tyranny that most Governments (like the U.S.) are engaging on the people, through the means of Media control (some could argue through the education system also) by dumbing down the population and/or shielding themselves while throwing meaningless "media" curve balls and blatant misinformation to the public.
By using these tactics they can therefor gradually strip away the rights, opinions, power and ultimately the voice of the individuals.

Which leads me to respond of my thoughts after reading Bytemasters post...
**edit** sorry for the long post  :P

I, myself... can clearly see how beneficial the BitShares platform is, and will be to everyone around the globe!
I know a lot of us here have the same viewpoint, but in the background it seems to me we're still struggling with the best idea on how to wrap up the BitShare package and present it to the people to adopt. There are so many facets of BitShares in which to work from!!

Do we target people that are...
-Already into Crypto on the other Block chains?
-In the Financial World (Forex/Stock/Commodities Investors)?
-Wanting new ways to spend money or E-Currency?
-Looking to store assets in a decentralized way?
-Looking to transfer assets across country borders (Remittance)?
-In need of financial tools in under developed or oppressive country's?
-etc. etc. etc.

The points I just mentioned almost everyone here is on board with and  are aggressively trying to market it those exact demographics mentioned. But is this the best path? Is this how we should be spending 98% of our time and efforts?

For all tense and purposes, BitShares is a Financial and Social consensus tool.
The back bone for the financial side of the software is pretty much ready to go (especially with the coming updates).
The social side of the software (VOTE or it's equivalent) has a new spark and push behind it. I don't know that for a fact, but I'm sure Dan and team are aggressively tweaking and polishing this aspect of the platform for a reason. And I'd like to express my view point to see if it's on par with what Bytemaster and team have already concluded?!

So if the end goal of all this is to get mass adoption (I'm not trying to tout World Domination  ;D) there are some things to consider for the next big push forward.

I believe most people in the modern world today are complacent (for the most part) with the way they conduct, or interact with their current financial institution.
Now granted, everyone understand it's centralized and all that.
But... with the huge amounts of outstanding debt that's been created in the world today; I'd say it's safe to assume that majority of the people (the ones we want to have explore BitShares) are comfortable using their current financial instruments, why?
Well, the current system allows consumers to disconnect their responsibility for any bad actions or wrong doings (money mismanagement) that may have occurred by the consumer, or the institution itself if it had collapsed or had mismanaged the finances. Are burdens (ie Bankruptcy, Credit damage) associate for such actions? Sure, but most people can restart after a certain period of time and wash away their past irresponsibility. And the cycle can begin all over again.
So basically they, the consumer, can blame their faults on someone or something else for their life misfortunes which inevitably leads to a "comfort level" that money mismanagement is OK and still be able to place blame outside of themselves.
Which lends itself to near 0% risk on the consumers part. There are plenty of centralized businesses that will lend money to high credit risk people!

Now let's get into the Cryptocurrency realm, where the consumer is now 100% responsible for any and all of their financial actions!! No and, ifs or buts!
If someone happens to either loose their private keys, or improperly safe guard their computer and get hacked, or the coin they dumped their money into drops in value and dies off; Who can they go after? Who's going to reimburse their losses? Who are they going to blame? They don't want to blame themselves now do they? LOL
So by trying to push this new tech in the financial sense to the masses, is now asking them to leave their current comfort zone with centralized businesses.
Which will be very difficult to do.

There has to be another avenue to get people to interact with crypto without needing to do a whole paradigm shift, or asking them to move out of there current financial comfort zone.
On top of that there's a century's worth of saturated Banking, Credit Card and other established Financial Institutions in today's market to compete against.
With such a saturated financial market, can BitShares compete... ABSOLUTELY!!
But... it's still a big HUGE task to accomplish this either way you look at it.

Now, I think with BitShares implementing the Voting features, we can now instead pitch that side of the software (especially in light of Lite clients coming out).
Being able to introduce people to crypto through the back door of BitShares, called VOTE, by having them interact in crypto without them even knowing it.
I know Dan along with other team members were in California recently pitching VOTE to government officials along with others participants, but I have to ask, are we trying to go from ground floor to the top in one giant step? Are we biting off more than we can chew by taking that approach? Kinda like trying to kill the Elephant in the room approach?
Yes, it's great that there was strong interest of the protocol and all that BitShares has to offer, but there must be an easier way.

My approach would be this...
Let's take the Social aspect of BitShares (the VOTE functionality) and let's target the mass Social Media outlets with that sublet of the software.
Like Facebook, Google+, Linkedin, MySpace, etc. etc. and get them to see how easy and great it would be to merge the BitShare VOTE function into their platform.
List and name all the benefits and features that the BitShares software could bring to their user base of doing such. The ultimate in real time voter interaction.
Once one of these company's integrate the BitShares decentralized voting, through lite clients, now you get mass user recognition of BitShares along with people wanting to hopefully learn more about decentralization via crypto. You'll be able to put the BitShare name out there, without the consumer (or the masses) having to drastically change their paradigm to be willing to explore more of BitShares. It will seamlessly integrate into their everyday life.
Then when their comfortable with the BitShare name and learn to find out BitShares ALSO includes a robust financial side of the exact same software they've been using... BOOM!!!!

BONUS...and to my knowledge, no other cryptocurrency is able to exploit this avenue to gain mass adoption or recognition!!! Only BitShares has the goods!!!

So long story short. The bridge to mass adoption is through the VOTE features of BitShares as just explained (IMO of course).
Though the Financial aspect of BitShares is nothing to discount either!!

But knowing what we know of Bytemaster... I'm sure he's has already thought of this ions ago!!  :D :D :D :D








Sound Editor of Beyondbitcoin Hangouts. Listen to latest here - https://beyondbitcoin.org support the Hangouts! BTS Tri-Fold Brochure https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15169.0.html
Tip BROWNIE.PTS to EMAILTOOAJ

Offline fuzzy

Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2014, 04:42:01 AM »

Give the man a break

Go back and look at my 1000+ posts. I've been more supportive than almost anyone on this board. Some would call me a shill. And I'll continue to be supportive. I just don't see VOTE as any more important than getting BitShares ready. This Vote thing will bring in a few people, but it is experimental or long term at best. For whatever share I have through my AGS donations and all the BTS I've bought, I would vote to put developer time on getting this client ready.

 +5% +5%

I disagree. 

1) Voting does not have to be incorporated by the government for it to be extremely beneficial to our ecosystem.  Why?  Because voting is just another word for polling (in a way that is highly resistant to sybil attacks).  Why is polling so valuable?  Consensus...and what does our ecosystem rely on more than anything?  One word--Consensus.  'nuff said on that. 

2) How do we teach the layman of the benefits of our technology?  I have tried many pitches to the general public for this technology.  In order to teach about bitUSD, bitGold...etc, we first need to teach about the differences between fiat and money.  And that is just the beginning of the train wreck that ensues.  However, when I ask people "Do you know, for certain, when you push that little button on the black box next to so and so's name, that you are really voting for him/her?", they intuitively understand.  It is so easy to step into the value of transparency in voting...and from there it is a very small (but powerful) step to expand the conversation to "once this technology is adopted by everyone, we won't even need representatives...because you can vote on the issues that matter to you--directly and transparently" is an easy step to make. 

3) Polling services can make a great deal of money in and of themselves--without real world voting even being attached.

We ignore the value of these things and we are missing a huge representation of value.
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2014, 09:03:21 AM »

2) How do we teach the layman of the benefits of our technology?  I have tried many pitches to the general public for this technology.  In order to teach about bitUSD, bitGold...etc, we first need to teach about the differences between fiat and money.  And that is just the beginning of the train wreck that ensues.  However, when I ask people "Do you know, for certain, when you push that little button on the black box next to so and so's name, that you are really voting for him/her?", they intuitively understand.


They can understand it better perhaps. But does that mean they need it? Weirdos like us love this stuff, but I just don't see average people caring one way or another. We need BitUSD.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
    • View Profile
  • BTS: Ander
Re: Aggregate Public Opinion Matters
« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2014, 09:12:37 AM »
1) Voting does not have to be incorporated by the government for it to be extremely beneficial to our ecosystem.  Why?  Because voting is just another word for polling (in a way that is highly resistant to sybil attacks).  Why is polling so valuable?  Consensus...and what does our ecosystem rely on more than anything?  One word--Consensus.  'nuff said on that. 


I think this is a big deal.  It would be a lot easier for us to start out getting a polling service to use our product than an actual government election.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

 

Google+