You can change your vote every 3 months and you can vote for anyone who's registered as a candidate. This replaces elections.
If your candidate is in the top 500 in the country, they get to sit in Congress. Their voting power however is determined by their national support.
The effects are as follows: Parties will shrink. You can't vote for the default candidate, you have to pick one. This creates room for new parties and independents. Congress members become highly accountable. If they don't do what their support base wants, they'll become less powerful within hours and much less powerful within 3 months. At the same time, the electorate are significantly empowered and thus motivated to take an interest. The local link is reduced. You can obviously choose to pick a local representative but most probably won't and thus are unlikely to meet their representative.
I don't know if it would be better than eg New Zealand's 3 yearly PR system. But it would be a lot better than the anti-democratic broken systems of the US and UK.
I'm also looking for a name, as catchy and populist as the Robin Hood Tax.
Your edits will be instantly reverted by people who think they own the article. They know the rules 50x better than you. They know how to break them without getting punished. Their policy on Verifiability is broken and self-contradictory (see discussion page and even Jimbo thinks so), mandating inclusion of lies if from a more reliable source than any criticism.
Yes, rape is one of the charges and it was ruled today that unprotected sex initiated while she was asleep after she refused consent to unprotected sex counts as rape in the UK too.
You're right about the US extradition treaty (which is being reviewed by the Home Secretary). I suspect he's safer from assassination in British custody but the damage to Washington has already been done. It might serve them better if he is sent down for rape.
There's not a lot of difference between the Supreme Court and Supreme Judges sitting as Lords in the House of Lords.
Different from the US, it is believed we have no constitution (this has never been tested). As such, it is merely the Court's job to interpret the garbage legislation produced by the House of Commons.
I largely agree. Most of what makes Opera superior has either been copied by other browsers, is well-hidden (massively configurable UI without bloaty extensions) or is something you only realise the value of when you use it a lot (gestures).
I don't know why you'd use spyware aka Chrome. FF finally catching up to Opera/Chrome's speed makes it a worthy competitor.
Anyway my point was more that capitalism almost never makes the superior product the most popular. Instead it's the one with the best marketing muscle. Firefox got a lot of nice free publicity and we should all be grateful. But MS left the door open. They practically stopped development of IE for 4 years, their biggest mistake yet.
Only because the public don't realise how much Google is spying on them do they use Chrome. And of course, it would be nowhere without Google's immense marketing power.
Politics is much the same. Marketing over quality every time.
Slashdot Mirror
He's not talking about electoral systems so Arrow's is irrelevant.
This is remarkably similar to one I came up with the other day. Already made a post about it.
You can change your vote every 3 months and you can vote for anyone who's registered as a candidate. This replaces elections.
If your candidate is in the top 500 in the country, they get to sit in Congress. Their voting power however is determined by their national support.
The effects are as follows:
Parties will shrink. You can't vote for the default candidate, you have to pick one. This creates room for new parties and independents.
Congress members become highly accountable. If they don't do what their support base wants, they'll become less powerful within hours and much less powerful within 3 months.
At the same time, the electorate are significantly empowered and thus motivated to take an interest.
The local link is reduced. You can obviously choose to pick a local representative but most probably won't and thus are unlikely to meet their representative.
I don't know if it would be better than eg New Zealand's 3 yearly PR system. But it would be a lot better than the anti-democratic broken systems of the US and UK.
I'm also looking for a name, as catchy and populist as the Robin Hood Tax.
Except it works in Switzerland.
Your edits will be instantly reverted by people who think they own the article. They know the rules 50x better than you. They know how to break them without getting punished. Their policy on Verifiability is broken and self-contradictory (see discussion page and even Jimbo thinks so), mandating inclusion of lies if from a more reliable source than any criticism.
Yes, Switzerland is the only one I know of.
Two main problems with it:
1. You need a politically-savvy electorate. You don't get this without direct democracy. Chicken & egg.
2. Those in power will never give it up.
Since all Acts override previous ones, in what sense do we have a constitution?
I remember one High Court Judge suggesting otherwise - and so I added the "untested" modifier.
The most seriously legal charge is rape, even under UK law. That was ruled upon by the High Court today.
Yes, rape is one of the charges and it was ruled today that unprotected sex initiated while she was asleep after she refused consent to unprotected sex counts as rape in the UK too.
You're right about the US extradition treaty (which is being reviewed by the Home Secretary). I suspect he's safer from assassination in British custody but the damage to Washington has already been done. It might serve them better if he is sent down for rape.
There was no consent to unprotected sex (she was asleep). Consent to protected sex was unwillingly given.
All alleged of course.
There's not a lot of difference between the Supreme Court and Supreme Judges sitting as Lords in the House of Lords.
Different from the US, it is believed we have no constitution (this has never been tested). As such, it is merely the Court's job to interpret the garbage legislation produced by the House of Commons.
Close up magic used to be his speciality. I'm an ex-friend.
Century of the Self is great stuff and highly relevant today.
Power of Nightmares is about Al Qaeda.
Haven't seen Machines...
Since the crash, you're probably spending more in electricity than getting back in Bitcoins.
Not all companies out there exist to screw us out of as much money as possible.
Google is supposed to be a company that Does No Evil. I think it's kinda obvious that's no longer true.
Britain has almost no rights left thanks to the Blair administration.
Labour are still pushing ID cards???
Definitely worth a watch.
Some of the things I really like - procedurally generated trees and grass. And the radiosity.
But the more realistic you try to make stuff, the more my brain notices stuff that isn't quite right.
DX 10 & 11 are clearly a lot better than DX 9 though.
I largely agree. Most of what makes Opera superior has either been copied by other browsers, is well-hidden (massively configurable UI without bloaty extensions) or is something you only realise the value of when you use it a lot (gestures).
I don't know why you'd use spyware aka Chrome. FF finally catching up to Opera/Chrome's speed makes it a worthy competitor.
Anyway my point was more that capitalism almost never makes the superior product the most popular. Instead it's the one with the best marketing muscle. Firefox got a lot of nice free publicity and we should all be grateful. But MS left the door open. They practically stopped development of IE for 4 years, their biggest mistake yet.
Only because the public don't realise how much Google is spying on them do they use Chrome. And of course, it would be nowhere without Google's immense marketing power.
Politics is much the same. Marketing over quality every time.
Banks aren't individuals capable of acting. Bankers acted in their own self-interest.
Not all of them of course, but profits were demanded and nice people driven out. Usual story.
Camera trickery in most cases.
I used to be friends with Derren. He was incapable of predicting anyone we mutually knew beyond simple magician's distraction
Don't let it put you off his earlier documentaries.
The browser that all other browsers are based on you mean?
The browser that was out 10 years before Firefox?
He's being polite about Google. He's basically accusing them of behaving like Microsoft.