The First E-President 169
Szentigrade writes "Popular Science is running a letter by Daniel Engber of the online Slate Magazine in which he offers the US Presidential nominees advice on using the full potential of the Internet upon their election into office. Some examples discussed in the letter include: a project already being developed that speeds up the patent approval process, a UK site that aims to improve government-citizen interactions, and perhaps most importantly, a call for government information to be 'presented in a standardized and widely used data format, like XML, so that anyone — in or out of government — could use and reconfigure it however they pleased.' Will 2009 be the first year of the E-President?"
It won't work (Score:5, Interesting)
The real "full potential of the internet" is that it allows the government to ignore people on a more massive scale than ever before.
Re:can they use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Many government agencies have to release public information whenever asked, including the school I used to work for. However, you have to figure out who to ask, and make an appointment, then fill out forms, then sometimes pay a small copying fee, then they give you copies of their budgets. Why the hell aren't all government agencies (especially the small, local ones!) putting this info on the web? I brought this up to the dean of finance and she damn near had a stroke! I would love, as a taxpayer, to be able to delve into a file of stuff, and see for myself exactly where the money goes, rather than look at the shiny charts that break it down into a couple of very generic areas. I know there are privacy implications, but you could list how much you pay for salaries in different areas/departments. Perhaps clump all office supply purchases into one line item. It really can't be that hard, but nobody wants to, and no taxpayers are demanding it.
Re:It won't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Not trying to be too harsh here, but you would rather do absolutely nothing and ignore the problem rather than try to fix it in any way you could?
Re:can they use? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it is time that we ask both major Presidential candidates to submit code samples. Bonus points will be awarded if they submit the code in Perl, Assembly, or FORTRAN.
I think blub [docforge.com] would be most appropriate.
Re:can they use? (Score:3, Interesting)
I imagine the issue is simply money. It would cost a lot of programming time to put something good together, especially spread across all of the local departments.
The only way to convince them to do it (without major public demand) would be to show it would somehow save them money in the long run. Maybe automating output in standard formats would allow other common systems to aggregate reports and generate graphs, saving manual labor, for example.
Electronic referendums are -VITAL- next step (Score:1, Interesting)
The people need to be able to veto any policy they dont want, with enough of a majority. The polititians need to realise that they -serve- the people, not the other way around. Common sense needs to be able to prevent things which we basically all know are wrong or unwanted choices. Give the people the choice! - it's their country, - not just yours. The people have to live with whatever wrong choice the polititians make for the next 100 years or whatever, while the polititian walks away...
Re:It won't work (Score:3, Interesting)
Refusing to legitimise the broken system by taking part *is* doing something. With enough weight behind it, non-participation can cause a lot of change.
Yes, in the direction opposite of reform, unless you are willing to take up arms.
I'm reminded of the first primes in SG1. They participate in an inherently evil system, but as they train their successors they teach them how to introduce moderation to the goa'uld's despotic tendencies.
They could choose not to participate, but the snake head would just find someone else to do it, and that soldier probably won't have those values.
By choosing to participate and do what little they can, they save thousands of lives.
In the case of democracy or representative republics, it's the same way. Choosing not to participate will not stop the injustice. Participating, however, will help mitigate it.
Re:can they use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Bonus points will be awarded if they submit the code in Perl, Assembly, or FORTRAN.
Bonus points if the same source works in 3 or more languages, see http://www0.us.ioccc.org/1986/applin.c [ioccc.org]
Re:It won't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Bullshit.
Sorry, but I don't buy that at all. Slow change from within is nonsense in the current situation, where embedded interests are perverting society slowly but enjoying the support of the citizenry.
Were it a totalitarian state with dictators, yes, people willing to work within the system might help.
Right now?
Dems or Repubs are going to keep on winning. The only protest possible is to stay home.
Re:It won't work (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, the reason things are getting bad is because america is refusing to elect the alternating unified governments they did in the first half of the 20th century.
Back then, things got done, and got done better.
Republicans would get upwards of a decade, then democrats.
This allowed them to actually implement, in full, their policies. They and the public got to see how they played out and apply correction where necessary.
In a gridlock situation, or one in which unitary governments fluctuate every 2-6 years, you don't get that happening, and have interference with "the great experiment" by a bunch of people who "don't think it will work" and don't even want to try.