View source for Commentary on technology and feasibility of the ratings system

{{Main|Ratings system}}

==Technology==
The system we are proposing is far-reaching and may strike many as unrealistically grandiose. But it is also unrealistic to doubt the impact of technology. Consider that today our [[Mobile technology|mobile technology]], in particular, has wrought a type of dystopian present where everyone is addicted to their phones. I was looking at students at a bus stop not long ago and every single one of them was immersed in their phone. It reminded me of a [[wikipedia:Star Trek: The Next Generation|Star Trek TNG]] episode from decades ago where everyone became addicted to a video game and couldn’t stop playing it. The game somehow acted upon the pleasure center of the human brain. We know that mobile software, particularly [[Social media|social media]], is doing largely the same thing. It is furthermore known to be having profoundly negative effects on politics and social interaction. So we have an example of a technology that has changed the habits of nearly everyone, along with a profoundly negative aggregate effect. If someone had predicted this 20 years ago it most likely would have been critiqued for being unrealistically far-reaching.

Furthermore technology has a tendency to [https://digitaltonto.com/2017/the-30-years-rule-innovation-takes-a-lot-longer-than-you-think/ lag in its economic and societal effect]. [[wikipedia:Thomas Edison|Thomas Edison]]’s first electric generating plant was established in 1882, about 40 years before electricity started having a major impact on the economy. The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos “Mother of all Demos”], where the first computer with windows, mouse, video conferencing, [[wikipedia:Revision control|revision control]], etc. was shown, was done in 1968, which was approximately 30 years before these technologies would be widely used by the public. Usually the introduction of a technology needs to wait for further refinements combined with social conditioning, mass adoption and finally to a societal change, presumably for the better.

In our case, the technology exists in parts and plenty of social conditioning has taken place. Acceptance of a tool like the one we are proposing might be a challenge but not impossible given people’s facility with the internet, mobile devices, and social media. Furthermore, our ideas are coupled with widespread dissatisfaction of government, media, educational institutions, etc. It seems the time would be ripe for a defining change.

==Prospects for reform==
Alongside the impact technology can have, we might ask how likely we are to reform "the system" when so many other attempts have failed (or fallen far short). An interesting web-site exists to [[https://www.govtrack.us/ govtrack.us track bills]] as they make their way through [[wikipedia:United States Congress|Congress]]. We are contemplating an improved version of this ourselves through the [[ratings system]]. Its author, [[Joshua tauberer|Joshua Tauberer]], has quite a bit of [[https://medium.com/civic-tech-thoughts-from-joshdata/so-you-want-to-reform-democracy-7f3b1ef10597 criticism for those attempting to reform democracy]].

We don’t fundamentally agree with Josh because he dismisses reformers the way so many do, by saying “the world is too complicated for your simple mind to fix”. Even if this turns out to be true for most people, if we all took his advice nothing would change. It’s kind of like criticizing people who start businesses because most businesses fail.

Nevertheless he offers some insights worth reminding ourselves of: focus on what you can really do, test it with real people, iterate, and don’t expect success right away. With this in mind, our goal should be to create a durable framework that can evolve and gain users over time. If we can do this, and the virtuous cycle of ratings works, we will have something that can catalyze real change.

On this we can take a page from the [[wikipedia:Cryptocurrency|crypto community]]. They set out idealistically to replace central banks (and banks in general) with a decentralized virtual monetary system. They didn’t succeed but did manage to create an organically durable movement. It is unlikely in the extreme that crypto will simply die as it may have in [[Cryptocurrency|Bitcoin]]’s earliest days, or be killed through government intervention. Crypto and its supporting platforms are still being developed at a healthy pace. It isn’t clear where the movement will end up but it may yet lead to a future that changes fundamentally the role of money in our society. It has certainly attained the staying power that makes this prospect possible.

In some sense crypto is itself a system of communities with a built-in rating system. Each currency, if traded openly, is [https://coinmarketcap.com/ "rated" against its peers] and traditional currencies through an exchange rate. This rate is produced by normal market forces but is also the result of participants rating the merits of the specific currency in question, its mission, values, the people involved, etc.