I have seen many a democratic initiative ruined by trolls, bot accounts, duplicate accounts, and assholes. The best way to ensure that democracy doesn’t spiral into Haiti is to allow only financial contributors of $5 or more to vote (once the boss man has his contributions system up and running). You want to help build this community? OK, then put your money where your mouth is. To be clear, it should still be one vote per person, whether you donate $5 or $500.

  • Difficult_Bit_1339@sh.itjust.worksM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s an interesting idea.

    If you’re going to have a place that is ran by votes, you need a method of ensuring that each person voting is a distinct person and not the 5th alt of a person trying to push a specific result. Donations create a trail between an account and a specific person.

    On the other hand, I firmly believe that anonymity is an important factor in freedom of speech. The de-anonymization of the Internet has caused a lot of problems with social media.

    I’d say Nay for now, but the idea of having a system to enforce ‘One Person, One Vote’ is a good one. But maybe money/real ID isn’t it.

    • tcely@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      With a robust voting population, having 5 alts is not sufficient to affect the outcome anyway.

      • Difficult_Bit_1339@sh.itjust.worksM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        True, 5 wouldn’t do anything, but I can write a Python script in a few minutes that would keep creating alts as fast as the server would allow for weeks. Hundreds of thousands of users. Then I can single-handedly affect the outcome of any poll.

        It wouldn’t take too much more automation to have them generate realistic looking comments using AI so they appear to be active users. Actually, how can you tell that I’m a real person? Maybe I’m a bot that can produce realistic looking conversation. :P

        Electronic voting is a difficult thing to do in a way that is secure and accurate. I do think the idea of having a say in how the server works is a great idea. But it’s one that is tricky to implement correctly.

        • tcely@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I thought the captcha was supposed to make automatically created accounts much harder. Do you have a way past that?

          From my experience with AI, so far, just checking that you understand the concept of now and how it relates to past and future dates would be a good test.

          Yeah, the implementation won’t be easy or perfect, but we should still aim to make it better.

          • Difficult_Bit_1339@sh.itjust.worksM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Captcha solving services exist. At worse you’re essentially paying low wage workers to solve captcha for you. There are some AI image processing that can solve some captcha but their accuracy can vary.

            In the end it boils down to making the cost as high as possible for spammers and also reducing the benefit of having a spam account by rapidly detecting and removing them.

            It’s a hard problem to solve even for companies with massive resources.