A Millennials-Based Voting System

21

October

2016

No ratings yet.

Have you voted yet? I am currently 21 years old, and I shamefully confess that I have not yet voted. I have a lot of good reasons why I haven’t, but the one I would like to focus on is lack of easy access to voting. Ever since I turned 13 I have been living out of my country of nationality, which makes it harder to vote. I could vote from any country Ecuador, my country, has an embassy/consulate in. If I live in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, the process would involve going to the consulate in Amsterdam or The Hague, registering, and when time has come sending my ballot. The whole process would probably take a total of 6 hours. Whereas making an online transfer can be done in less than a minute. My point being that millennials have not been properly equipped with the ability to go through one of these processes without finding it completely inefficient and “a waste of our time”. Could this be the reason why the turnout for Brexit for people between 18 and 24 was so low? I’m not going to go into how we must change society so that this stops happening, but into changing the process to fit the new society.

Online voting has been the standard in Estonia since 2005, when will the rest of the world level up? One of the main concerns regarding online voting is security. How can you make sure that no one will hack the system and change the results? This is a very valid concern, since the amount of people with accessibility (even if limited) to the system will be higher than it currently is. But what if we implement a system that works in a very similar way to Bitcoin. A peer-reviewed system that can work with verifications. Currently, you have to trust that the counting systems and people involved with these, but how about not having to trust anyone and being able to check it all.

A downside of this could be that people do not want to share with others who they voted for, even less so with authority figures. But imagine the following scenario: you have to provide your citizen information to be able to vote, and after you cast your vote, you are given a username which you can use to track your vote without allowing your ID to be linked to the vote. The rest of demographical information can remain in the system and allow for better analysis of the results.

This is a highly simplified version of how an online voting system could work. There are countless things that must be taken into account before making a change in the process, but providing an online voting system would definitely increase the participation of a specific segment of the population in political activities. Don’t you think?

Please rate this

Letting Go of the Plank

21

September

2016

No ratings yet.

The past weekend I escaped my current routine and ended up in Hotonne, France in a gathering in the name of world peace. The house where the gathering took place was so secluded from the rest of the world, that it gave space for self-reflection. Is life all about profit? The question had its place in a presentation by Alexander Schieffer, a professor at the university of Saint Gallen and some of his students. Their ideas lie in the belief that there needs to be a change in the current system, to reflect a new era of an “integral development.” The system we live in relies on a self-destructive cycle, while the proposed one relies on each of it’s parts working together to a achieve better results: “Combining four mutually reinforcing perspectives: enterprise & economics; nature & community; culture & spirituality (society); as well as science systems & technology.”

The nature of information, including the rise of platforms, online markets and the Internet itself, increases fairness, linked to the societal perspective from the model. The hot platform of today, Uber, shows this accurately by pricing and regulating the transportation service appropriately, taking into account country characteristics, time spent and distance. Never again will I ride a regular taxi in Panama City to be charged 3 times the market price. It must be clear that increased fairness is similar to, but not the same as increased customer bargain power.

Uber is just one example, but fairness is in many cases not the goal of the company, but an additional effect. How about consciously wanting the information strategies to include ways in which the other perspectives are leveraged? How about these include leveraging nature, instead of just reducing the damage caused to it, and leveraging society instead of leveraging a few individuals? What if we think about nature and society the same way current theories think about profit and companies’ sustainability and competitive advantage? I believe that the potential of information strategy to leverage the three perspectives: business, nature and society is enormous. Why then, just focus on business, if by doing so we come closer to our end?

To conclude, I will quote the same extract a wise economist and artist, Wolfgang Somary, shared with us this weekend. An excerpt from The Odyssey, of when Odysseus was stuck in a storm, holding to a rotten plank and was given a veil and instructions to save himself, he said: “I will not obey her yet, since the land, she said I would escape to, was far away when I saw it. This I shall do, and this seems best, to wait here as long as the timbers hold, and endure in misery, then if the seas beat the raft to pieces, swim, for want of a better plan”. Should we get started with a new system, or keep holding on to the, temporary plank?

Please rate this