Not all skills are equal - they have no innovation in terms of quantifying time/skills? I feel like they'll end up re-inventing money and markets in order to do so.
For this reason I'm doubtful of this sites longterm future.
If you're interested in this you should check out Chris Eliasmith's lab - they have a Neural Engineering Framework and NENGO, which in it's current implementation is like a Python to neural network compiler.
You can remove representational democracy and voting from the core. Instead replacing it with independent policymaking and voluntary agreements of smart contracts, you implicitly 'vote' by your use of a contract. Common Law in a real sense becomes the most popular contracts for any given period.
One-size-fits all policies won't be a thing in the future and we will have very different cultures operating under very different laws occupying the same physical space.
It's not about utopia but it certainly makes things far more liquid, transparent and cryptographically secure (unbreakable promises). It opens governance right up for innovation so we can at least iterate faster in a voluntary manner.
Perhaps this is true but when one Buffet, Walton, Gate, or Adelson controls about as much of the pie as a hundred million people I can almost guarantee no one will really like the results.
67 people own as much as 3.5 billion people at this point [0] (and that's Forbes saying that). I think that would be the greatest barrier to pure Libertarianism being a positive contribution towards humanity.
This line of thinking does not only apply to a Libertarian form of government (or lack thereof). Influential and wealthy individuals control power, and I think it's incredibly naive to think that Democracy or any other form of government out there is completely immune to that.
Note how I don't single-out wealthy individuals. Our society is run by influential people, the kind that can sway opinion through oration and manipulation. They will simply convince more people to use their single, noble vote on what they want.
The sky is the limit implementation-wise. Put yourself in their shoes, as an engineer/problem-solver, and see if you can figure it out in a decent manner.
Well, isn't the bounty is crowdfunded? So it's the public asking for this, via WikiLeaks. The press value of this move puts the issue in the media spotlight which also good for the issue in public favour, WikiLeaks using it's name makes more sense from a media perspective as opposed to "some random assortment of people".
Really, the TPP should be public, shouldn't we be questioning the trust of the Governments?
Well the problem is that policy making is completely institutionalized and only serves the 1%, which is why software like Ethereum is going to be so important in the future. It will democratize policy making and put it in the hands of everyone. As well as means to articulate any other form of meetings of the minds.
Democratizing policy making is not a guaranteed panacea. Things like the civil rights movement don't happen as a result of democratic policy; they happen when the majority are forced to live a better way.
The founders recognized pure democracy was not an ideal government, regardless of technological issues with regard to implementing it. A republic allows decisions to be made that the majority will never agree to.
Don't make them seem like a bigger deal than they really are. Most of the 1% has barely any more say in the direction of the US government than anyone else. The gaggle of assholes responsible for the plight of America couldn't fill up a small town.
Ethereum isn't about distributed servers. It's not like a VPS. Like Bitcoin is to banks, Ethereum is like to any contract or transaction in the meeting of the minds.
