http://emergentchaos.com/archives/2006/10/the-hugo-chavez-test-for-voting-machines.html The Emergent Chaos Jazz Combo Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:33:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://emergentchaos.com/archives/2006/10/the-hugo-chavez-test-for-voting-machines.html/comment-page-1#comment-2809 Daniel A. Nagy Thu, 02 Nov 2006 08:16:21 +0000 http://emergentchaos.com/?p=2037#comment-2809 There is nothing fundamental about the right to vote and the right for one's vote to be counted. At a well-specified level of technology that is about to be superseded, voting has just been a cheap, yet reasonably accurate substitute for violence. In a world, where anything even remotely efficient (including violence and security) could be achieved only by massive concentration of capital and joint effort, it was true that one who had more followers would probably come out on top from violent confrontation. Hence, people were willing to fight for the right to vote. Those times are about to be over. As the means of production as well as those of warfare are becoming smaller and cheaper (an inevitable consequence of technical progress), the above mentioned basic democratic assumption fails. When small groups or even individuals will be sufficiently empowered by technology to fend for themselves, democracy, this repugnant invention of slave-masters, will fade away. On the internet, that is already the case. With potent means of defense like strong encryption, geographically dispersed backups and hot-spares, I have no reason (and no desire) whatsoever to submit to the will of the government, no matter how democratic the process from which it derives its power. Voting about issues concerning the internet (or its use by individuals) is pointless. Democracy is, indeed, the most efficient means of coercion. However, as we all know from economic theory, coercion is still an inefficient means of allocating resources. There is nothing fundamental about the right to vote and the right for one’s vote to be counted. At a well-specified level of technology that is about to be superseded, voting has just been a cheap, yet reasonably accurate substitute for violence.
In a world, where anything even remotely efficient (including violence and security) could be achieved only by massive concentration of capital and joint effort, it was true that one who had more followers would probably come out on top from violent confrontation. Hence, people were willing to fight for the right to vote.
Those times are about to be over. As the means of production as well as those of warfare are becoming smaller and cheaper (an inevitable consequence of technical progress), the above mentioned basic democratic assumption fails.
When small groups or even individuals will be sufficiently empowered by technology to fend for themselves, democracy, this repugnant invention of slave-masters, will fade away.
On the internet, that is already the case. With potent means of defense like strong encryption, geographically dispersed backups and hot-spares, I have no reason (and no desire) whatsoever to submit to the will of the government, no matter how democratic the process from which it derives its power. Voting about issues concerning the internet (or its use by individuals) is pointless.
Democracy is, indeed, the most efficient means of coercion. However, as we all know from economic theory, coercion is still an inefficient means of allocating resources.

]]> http://emergentchaos.com/archives/2006/10/the-hugo-chavez-test-for-voting-machines.html/comment-page-1#comment-2808 David Brodbeck Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:13:52 +0000 http://emergentchaos.com/?p=2037#comment-2808 I'm just glad Republicans finally have a reason to worry about voting machines. For a long time it seemed like this was treated as a partisan issue, with the Republicans saying everything was fine and accusing anyone who brought it up of being a sore-loser Democrat. Now that both parties feel threatened by it, maybe we can get something done about it. I’m just glad Republicans finally have a reason to worry about voting machines. For a long time it seemed like this was treated as a partisan issue, with the Republicans saying everything was fine and accusing anyone who brought it up of being a sore-loser Democrat. Now that both parties feel threatened by it, maybe we can get something done about it.

]]> http://emergentchaos.com/archives/2006/10/the-hugo-chavez-test-for-voting-machines.html/comment-page-1#comment-2807 Allan Friedman Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:29:57 +0000 http://emergentchaos.com/?p=2037#comment-2807 Adam, that's a great test, for voting technology and a large swath of policy. Assuming that an adversary can manipulate the process is a great recipe for transparent process. If Hugo Chavez had a controlling share of Halliburton, would the Right be so cavalier about no-bid contracts? Adam, that’s a great test, for voting technology and a large swath of policy. Assuming that an adversary can manipulate the process is a great recipe for transparent process. If Hugo Chavez had a controlling share of Halliburton, would the Right be so cavalier about no-bid contracts?

]]>