another idea for democracy based on super-majority voting instead of simple majority of representatives chosen in many cases by plurality votes. In such a government everything requires a super-majority of the vote, such as 80% of the vote.
Legacy applications can benefit from big data approaches without the need to replace the legacy architecture with new technologies. Instead the big data can augment the application by collecting higher volume, variety, and velocity data about the user’s activity using the application. Analysis of this data can inform decision makers where there may be problems with the work-products. Correspondingly, it can provide requirements analysts with information about where improvements are needed or with more complete library of edge cases to consider for new designs.
Because the governments are distinct and have distinct voting populations, I expect there to be conflicts between the two governments. Such conflicts will be similar to international conflicts but with major differences. The two governments have interspersed populations living in same geographic territories making physical conflict unlikely. For example, in extended families that young and old voters may live in the same house. Also, the two governments are not peers in conflict like nations would be. The operational government would have full control over all of the police and military. Although the government of debt obligations lacks an army, it controls access to new debts needed to finance the provisioning or deployment of forces. In the abstract, there is nothing stopping the armed operational government from conquering the obligation-servicing part of the government.
The other government has a minimum voting age of 55. Upon reaching this age, a person can voluntarily participate in this part of government but when he does he forfeits his participation in the first government. Participation in this government should offer many advantages that will encourage this switch in participation. This government is responsible for all of the entitlement and personal benefit programs of the government. These are expenses unrelated to the operation of the government. Instead it is focused on the welfare of the people. While this will include welfare for younger adults, the bulk of the benefits will go to older people. This government will also be responsible for servicing all of the government debts, including operational debts likely incurred when the voters were younger.
Government by data and urgency will operate very different from the present governments. The focus shifts to immediate issues that can be informed by recent data. Unlike the present government with accumulating perpetual laws, this new form of government exclusively enacts short-lived rules that get updated when new data becomes available or get retired when priorities change. Similarly, the government views the population in terms of future possibilities instead of past performance.
Governing by data dispenses with the notions of causality, justice, accountability. In their places, we can have more comprehensible rules based on current data available to everyone. The recent advancement and maturity of big data technologies makes possible this new form of government. Taking the most advantage of the most recent information requires us to dismiss old decisions, including decisions involving punishment. There is good reason to expect that such nimble government can be much more beneficial to society. The frequency of making new decisions on newer information will make the consequences of bad decisions more tolerable. The result will be a society with fewer rules and where all of the rules have immediate relevancy that everyone can verify by checking the data.
Being placed under oath to tell the whole truth even in an adverse interrogation is a recognition that one is qualified as independent thinker. That recognition deserve reciprocal respect by drawing honest and frank answers from the thoughts, knowledge, doubts, and fears from one’s own person, free from supervision or deferment to political handlers or lawyers. The implicit qualification to work independently is to accept the obligation to be accountable for the independent work performed. If one does not wish to accept this accountability, he should not have accepted a contract to provide independent contributions, and instead work under supervision of someone who will accept this obligation.