Author Topic: Hard Questions for Bytemaster  (Read 32648 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CryptoPrometheus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Whether I agree with you or not doesn't matter. Popular media would crucify you on this.


Which is why it wouldn't be promoted as official recommendation but you better believe the grass roots should call for it.

If that's the result you want (that people use VOTE and stay home from the polls), then you don't even have to utter those words. It's a lot safer if you don't. All you have to do is promote the heck out of VOTE. There will be enough people like Gamey who don't bother with real voting, or maybe even think naively that they've done their civic duty by pushing a few buttons, and thus VOTE will gradually have plenty of users who are not real voters. If it's easy to use and fun, then that will happen naturally; no one needs to say it.
This is why FMV is Adam's thing.  He actually believes in the democratic process and thus can market and promote it honestly.   I on the other hand would be dishonest to encourage voting in the official elections and in the event VOTE became the official system I would encourage everyone to vote "NO ONE" for every position as a protest vote.    That is me being honest.

Vote For "Nobody" - 2012 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-N7TRvStu0
"Power and law are not synonymous. In fact, they are often in opposition and irreconcilable."
- Cicero

Offline Vizzini

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: vizzini
Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Says a reporter who comes calling
I would write about this Bit Shares
Replies Byte Master to the reporter
Your national TV network is but a sham
A tool of a government I can not recognize

Unethical it is for me to promote my cause
In your wrap of a fish, your agent of tyranny
Propaganda for a system of violence to control the masses
In my life, there are no banks, no kings, no armies, and no stations
How can we discourse if your existence is ethereal?

Oh wait, I've just dismissed all the institutions
No way remains for me to grow my dream
But say no more, I've made my choice
Standing on principle, I'll close my eyes and see the world as I wish it
Far better I should starve and swing my fists in peace

Aw, maybe I should have swallowed my pride yet again
And played by those rules just a wee bit longer
I could have been king, had I played the contender
The system, it could have crashed down on terms I dictated
Gawd, I sure hope the devs and 'investors' won't mind...me standing on my own behind

Fortunately, he woke up and realized it was all a bad dream. He wiped away the sleep, dismissed it as a cautionary tale, and went forth unto the world with fork in hand. Another chance, thought he. I can still make this happen. 
Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

Offline bytemaster

Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Whether I agree with you or not doesn't matter. Popular media would crucify you on this.


Which is why it wouldn't be promoted as official recommendation but you better believe the grass roots should call for it.

If that's the result you want (that people use VOTE and stay home from the polls), then you don't even have to utter those words. It's a lot safer if you don't. All you have to do is promote the heck out of VOTE. There will be enough people like Gamey who don't bother with real voting, or maybe even think naively that they've done their civic duty by pushing a few buttons, and thus VOTE will gradually have plenty of users who are not real voters. If it's easy to use and fun, then that will happen naturally; no one needs to say it.
This is why FMV is Adam's thing.  He actually believes in the democratic process and thus can market and promote it honestly.   I on the other hand would be dishonest to encourage voting in the official elections and in the event VOTE became the official system I would encourage everyone to vote "NO ONE" for every position as a protest vote.    That is me being honest.
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 donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Whether I agree with you or not doesn't matter. Popular media would crucify you on this.

Which is why it wouldn't be promoted as official recommendation but you better believe the grass roots should call for it.

If that's the result you want (that people use VOTE and stay home from the polls), then you don't even have to utter those words. It's a lot safer if you don't. All you have to do is promote the heck out of VOTE. There will be enough people like Gamey who don't bother with real voting, or maybe even think naively that they've done their civic duty by pushing a few buttons, and thus VOTE will gradually have plenty of users who are not real voters. If it's easy to use and fun, then that will happen naturally; no one needs to say it.

Offline bytemaster

Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Whether I agree with you or not doesn't matter. Popular media would crucify you on this.

Which is why it wouldn't be promoted as official recommendation but you better believe the grass roots should call for it.
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 donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system.

Whether I agree with you or not doesn't matter. Popular media would crucify you on this.

Offline bytemaster

Quote
It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead

I claim it is unethical to vote in a rigged system and thus unwittingly give your support to a corrupt system.   So as long as we are going to be judging people, I think supporting a rigged system is far worse than encouraging people to shun a rigged system. 
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 bytemaster

My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy.    You say voting in current elections matters but the whole message of VOTE is actually that "you cannot prove that it matters" and in fact the current system effectively facilitates "vote theft" where we prevent "vote theft".   You shouldn't vote in a system that allows your vote to be stolen without you even knowing it.  By stolen I mean counted differently than you intended or not counted at all.

I think FMV should simply focus on the positive (vote where you can count it) and let others (LewRockwell) recommend not voting in the official system.  The good thing is that once the technology is out there people can and will campaign to abandon/shun the old system and this is GOOD for FMV. 

A controversy highlights the problem with the current system and the benefits of the new system.



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 donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile

What specific law would you break saying "Protest the elections, vote using our non-binding voting system instead".   What laws are you referring to? 


I do somewhat doubt that FMV should frame it as a protest.  As in "do this and not the real election".   It seems like a subtler approach would be better received.  Tons of novel angles though with this whole thing.  Digital citizens etc.  So many issues one can raise as a protest that is a problem with both parties.  Then you have electoral college bullshit that disenfranchises people.

It's not illegal, but it's a hideous way to market this. The media's whole pitch during elections is voter turnout. If someone feeds them a line that 'BitShares is encouraging people to vote online instead of voting where it counts' then we're done. Screwed. F*** the rest of the good work, f*** the product, f*** all the hard work and the money people have put into this. Stick a fork in it 'cause it'll be done. I also won't support anything that's marketed this way.

The better approach is to encourage using both (real voting + BitShares Vote) until this one gains enough use to become considered as a plausible alternative.

In the long term, I think VOTE has real possibility. In the short term, it's a referral/sharedrop for BTS.

I agree with you, but you are being a bit dramatic.  If these same people were not going to vote it doesn't matter.  Any press is good press.   One could argue that they are being part of the process by voting somewhere else. 

Abstaining from voting is just as much of a right as voting.  The problem is you can't tell people from Bytemaster from people like me.  I don't vote because I'm lazy and the odds of it mattering are not worth the effort required.

I'm as cynical as you are, even though I do vote, and I believe the system can be much better. I'm dead serious about my earlier critique, though. It's really unethical to encourage people not to vote and "vote" here instead. And it kills this in the court of public opinion. Better to encourage both kinds of voting publicly, knowing full well that some people (like yourself, unfortunately) may stay home and just push a few buttons online instead.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile

What specific law would you break saying "Protest the elections, vote using our non-binding voting system instead".   What laws are you referring to? 


I do somewhat doubt that FMV should frame it as a protest.  As in "do this and not the real election".   It seems like a subtler approach would be better received.  Tons of novel angles though with this whole thing.  Digital citizens etc.  So many issues one can raise as a protest that is a problem with both parties.  Then you have electoral college bullshit that disenfranchises people.

It's not illegal, but it's a hideous way to market this. The media's whole pitch during elections is voter turnout. If someone feeds them a line that 'BitShares is encouraging people to vote online instead of voting where it counts' then we're done. Screwed. F*** the rest of the good work, f*** the product, f*** all the hard work and the money people have put into this. Stick a fork in it 'cause it'll be done. I also won't support anything that's marketed this way.

The better approach is to encourage using both (real voting + BitShares Vote) until this one gains enough use to become considered as a plausible alternative.

In the long term, I think VOTE has real possibility. In the short term, it's a referral/sharedrop for BTS.

I agree with you, but you are being a bit dramatic.  If these same people were not going to vote it doesn't matter.  Any press is good press.   One could argue that they are being part of the process by voting somewhere else. 

Abstaining from voting is just as much of a right as voting.  The problem is you can't tell people from Bytemaster from people like me.  I don't vote because I'm lazy and the odds of it mattering are not worth the effort required. 
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile

What specific law would you break saying "Protest the elections, vote using our non-binding voting system instead".   What laws are you referring to? 


I do somewhat doubt that FMV should frame it as a protest.  As in "do this and not the real election".   It seems like a subtler approach would be better received.  Tons of novel angles though with this whole thing.  Digital citizens etc.  So many issues one can raise as a protest that is a problem with both parties.  Then you have electoral college bullshit that disenfranchises people.

It's not illegal, but it's a hideous way to market this. The media's whole pitch during elections is voter turnout. If someone feeds them a line that 'BitShares is encouraging people to vote online instead of voting where it counts' then we're done. Screwed. F*** the rest of the good work, f*** the product, f*** all the hard work and the money people have put into this. Stick a fork in it 'cause it'll be done. I also won't support anything that's marketed this way.

The better approach is to encourage using both (real voting + BitShares Vote) until this one gains enough use to become considered as a plausible alternative.

In the long term, I think VOTE has real possibility. In the short term, it's a referral/sharedrop for BTS.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Well you certainly implied you intend to skirt the laws and procedures by side election mandate here:
Quote
If you bring it straight to the people and hold a parallel election and offer them a compelling goal:  help us achieve higher voter turnout than traditional elections and restore integrity to the process then government will have no choice but to pay attention or fight it.    Either way it brings massive media attention to the cause.


What specific law would you break saying "Protest the elections, vote using our non-binding voting system instead".   What laws are you referring to? 

I think this is a very interesting conversation and you act like you know more about such things than anyone else present.

I do somewhat doubt that FMV should frame it as a protest.  As in "do this and not the real election".   It seems like a subtler approach would be better received.  Tons of novel angles though with this whole thing.  Digital citizens etc.  So many issues one can raise as a protest that is a problem with both parties.  Then you have electoral college bullshit that disenfranchises people.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Oh wait. I remember now. If you can look it up, it means other people can ask you to look it up too.
So like in my Scottish example, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11865.msg157931#msg157931

loads of people were putting up YES posters, submitting to neighbourhood and community pressure, luckily the ability to prove who they voted for is put out of their hands, so their freedom & privacy is greater protected. Not that the current system is great but had there been a mechanism where you could verify to the community who you voted for, then there would be neighbourhood/community pressure to do that and just pretending to support YES wouldn't have sufficed and the outcome of the election would have been different.

I think the only way to combat that is by building the tools to provide reasonable plausible deniability and having a culture where asking someone to prove their vote is simply taboo.

The client can be designed so that the private key that authenticates the ballots submitted under a pseudonym is randomly generated. This means that if the private key is erased, there is no way to get it back and thus no way to update the ballot (before the election ends) or to provide a challenge-response proof to someone that a particular ballot belongs to you. The private key would be securely stored on the user's computer as long as the user still wants to be able to update the ballot before the election ends. After the election ends, the client could automatically erase the private key (prior to this point the client would have already verified that the user's latest ballot was counted in the blockchain). However, the user would have the option of committing to the latest ballot manually before the election ends by pressing a button in the client, which would essentially just erase that private key.

That option to commit their votes prior to the election ending provides plausible deniability. If someone demands that you prove that you voted a particular way, you can simply claim that unfortunately you already committed your vote (even if this is not true) and therefore it is impossible for you to provide proof. If we have a culture where many people actually commit their votes after submitting their ballot but before the election ends, then this claim seems plausible. More importantly, it is impossible for the person demanding the proof to prove otherwise.

Now, someone could of course demand prior to the election even opening that you prove to them how you voted before erasing the private key. I think the only solution to this is for the person to just ignore that request, submit their ballot, erase the public key, and simply state that although they did vote the way the person wanted (whether true or not) they deleted the private key anyway because they refuse to provide proof since it is morally wrong (it creates an environment in which other people who vote the way society does not like can be extorted to vote against their will). Society should value the right for people to vote without being extorted to prove how they voted far more than whether they voted favorably on any particular issue.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2014, 11:19:49 pm by arhag »

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
The political ignorance and naivety is quite alarming. Did you read anything about how a voting system is implemented?  There are laws and procedures. Read them, abide by them, and maybe voters will take you seriously. To get there is a path that you are not equipped to travel at this point. Don't take my words as trash talk or nay saying, take them and analyze what realistic steps need to be taken and implement them beyond a bar stool and high fives about what a cool idea you all had.

The sooner you realize that you have to work within he laws of the land were you wish to succeed, the sooner the dreams will come to fruition. I am sick of the constant pie in the sky view of a lot of people here who think the are going to somehow circumvent the government. It would be ignorant to think that your back door idea will somehow prevail. See any political Party not Republican or Democrat and look at where they are.

Look at the laws. Please. A grassroots campaign will blossom within about 1/1000% of the people you wish to reach and die a slow death.

NewMine we know EXACTLY how the voting system is implemented in CA and had someone THERE during the November election with the the registrars and given a step by step inside view on HOW it is done today.   We know the entire existing process inside and out (for CA).   We are talking to the people responsible for buying voting systems and hearing EXACTLY what they want and need.  To say that we are ignoring the laws and procedures is very far fetched.

We happen to KNOW that the Laws and Procedures are hopelessly broken.  IE: you cannot have a honest voting system while fully complying with the letter of the law.   The laws will have to change. 

But thats OK we are not trying to FORCE our system on anyone because that is 100% against what BTS is about.    We are creating an ALTERNATIVE approach and demonstrating that it is cost effective and viable.   This ALTERNATIVE will give people the ability to actually know in real time what their fellow citizens think without having to rely on the media.  This ALTERNATIVE gives the people a VOICE even if the government ignores it, everyone will hear it.

So a grassroots effort is appealing to people that want a VOICE, that want CHANGE, and that want the government to adopt what we have produced.

You claim voters will not take it seriously and I agree that many voters will not, but you better believe that "non-voters" will take it more seriously.   After all I don't VOTE because the system is rigged.  I don't take polls or trust polls because they are easy to ballot stuff with fake IDs.   I don't sign petitions because I care about my privacy.   But I would use FMV because I can maintain my privacy while signing petitions and expressing my opinion on political candidates or other issues.   

Every election LewRockwell.com has article after article asking people to send a message by "not voting" and remove legitimacy from the voting process.   Now we can offer an alternative, "Don't vote at the polls, file a protest vote at FMV".   

Well you certainly implied you intend to skirt the laws and procedures by side election mandate here:
Quote
If you bring it straight to the people and hold a parallel election and offer them a compelling goal:  help us achieve higher voter turnout than traditional elections and restore integrity to the process then government will have no choice but to pay attention or fight it.    Either way it brings massive media attention to the cause.

Then you also reinforce the fact in your second paragraph above.

Also encouraging voters to not vote in the official election and instead vote at Bitshares VOTE is dangerous and would counter anything VOTE is to stand for and backfire as the official elections have real world consequences/results and Bitshares VOTE is just a protest du jour hat the "cause heads" will soon forget before the next election.

Nothing is going to change. This I know. We just wait and see, I guess.

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
My concern when I first saw this, is that it could affect Voter privacy. Provided the system doesn't make it possible to determine who you voted for very easily though, it could be quite good.

Isn't the whole idea that the voting is anonymized, but you can use your private key to look up who you voted for and verify that it was counted correctly, or something like that?

This way both privacy and accuracy are assured?

Yeah it seems that way, which is great. I haven't looked into it much. I was recalling earlier discussions about Vote selling and effects on voter privacy - https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10057.msg131114#msg131114

I just remembered that when I saw the VOTE discussion here, none of that may be particularly relevant now.

Oh wait. I remember now. If you can look it up, it means other people can ask you to look it up too.
So like in my Scottish example, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11865.msg157931#msg157931

loads of people were putting up YES posters, submitting to neighbourhood and community pressure, luckily the ability to prove who they voted for is put out of their hands, so their freedom & privacy is greater protected. Not that the current system is great but had there been a mechanism where you could verify to the community who you voted for, then there would be neighbourhood/community pressure to do that and just pretending to support YES wouldn't have sufficed and the outcome of the election would have been different.

So for me, I don't see a big market or future for vote atm, in the political process. I think BitAssets are still going to be huge though.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2014, 10:31:01 pm by Empirical1.1 »