anotherpersonhasclaimedthisus:
@socialjusticemunchkin, I haven’t engaged with your OpenGov posts because holy hell is that a lot of text and I am a very lazy person.
but a more defensible reason is that the framing of government as software is fundamentally misguided I feel. it drags the debate in a direction that feels more comfortable to geeks (upgrade your government! open source it! hack it!) while obscuring the actual problems that need to be solved and replacing them with the vague idea that existing players are just too dumb to spot obvious wins.
like, if your proposal takes from granted axioms that aren’t even accepted by a majority of the population then it’s going to be a rocky road to acceptance, is part of what I’m saying.
from what I’ve come to expect you’re primarily concerned with the idea that things sold on geek appeal are hyped up cargo cults sans substance and so we should always defer to the interpretations of ancient mystery cults who know better
Now That’s What I Call A Charitable Interpretation, Vol. 16 :)
don’t get me wrong I am all about geek appeal when it comes to geeky things, it’s just that I know how tempting it is to ignore all the domain-specific experience in a particular area and just charge in with One Weird Trick and then be shocked when it turns out not to work (mostly because I’ve done it many times myself).
but to get back on topic, I mean governance models are not closed source, this is important as it undercuts the concept of OpenGov. anyone can grab an existing constitution and run with it, and plenty of nations do, copying bits and pieces into their own constitutions, most of which end up ignored in actual practice which is the only part of governance that actually matters. (eg. see China, where pointing out rights guaranteed in the constitution is subversive).
so the Open part of OpenGov is a misnomer, it really should be MicroGov or ExoGov to continue the software metaphor, as the purpose is to radically slim down and present a minimalist set of interfaces for other non-gov “software”.
I mean if you’re going to go geek, go full geek.
Gnondamnit if it’s a question of naming then I’m totally going to rename it all right, the OpenGov was just a reference to the “open-source platform for providing crucial technologies for governance”.
It’s sg now, in the grand tradition of suckless naming.
1 week ago · tagged #we need a suckless government #shitposting · 22 notes · source: argumate · .permalink
rageofthedogstar liked this
not-even-even liked this
not-a-lizard liked this
collapsedsquid liked this
socialjusticemunchkin reblogged this from trashworks and added:if by “naturally empirical” you mean “finds out what works, for the meaning of ‘works’ it is operating within” then...
metagorgon liked this
trashworks reblogged this from socialjusticemunchkin and added:#we need a suckless government*heart palpitates*do you consider the market to be naturally empirical? it’s pretty clear...
blashimov liked this
argumate said: you know .sg already has a government many Silicon Valley people idolise :)
speakertoyesterday liked this
nibblrrr liked this- argumate said: AppleGov, GoogleGov, now we’re talking
- argumate liked this
anotherpersonhasclaimedthisus reblogged this from argumate and added:Oh yeah I know you geek with the best but there is a snobbery involved whenever someone does that thing with the one...
defectivealtruist liked this- argumate reblogged this from anotherpersonhasclaimedthisus and added:
Now That’s What I Call A Charitable Interpretation, Vol. 16 :)don’t get me wrong I am all about geek appeal when it...