PresidentObama on GitHub(github.com)
github.com
PresidentObama on GitHub
https://github.com/presidentobama
14 comments
I'd be glad to see a public key on whitehouse.gov and a signed message on the GitHub account. Anyone could register this name.
[edit] whoops, didn't realize it was a bot
[edit] whoops, didn't realize it was a bot
I guess the username BarackObama was already taken?
https://github.com/barackobama
https://github.com/barackobama
I'm trying to find the CIA torture program repository.
I need to report a fairly serious bug.
I need to report a fairly serious bug.
guess he doesn't like to work weekends.
His social media team is getting busy!
His most recent activity [1] is an issue opened on sunlightlabs/us-laws and based on the link seems to be automated (uses ifttt's URL shortener, presumably it's hooked up through that). I haven't checked the rest, but I assume they're all pretty similar
[1] https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135
[1] https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135
I'll just leave this link here
https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135#issuecomm...
https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135#issuecomm...
Yes. The whole point of that repo is for there to be a single issue for every new law starting 12 March 2014. That's all it does.
Doesn't hurt to have (yet )an(other) automated process showing what laws get passed.
Doesn't hurt to have (yet )an(other) automated process showing what laws get passed.
[deleted]
It'd be interesting to see a system where a government had a GitHub and people could submit laws as pull-requests
Unfortunately, such a system would be very difficult for U.S. law. See this previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3968653
The laws would never pass the Travis CI tests.
Doable with Ethereum and Smart Contracts..
This is a serious and important idea.
Could you explain why? It seems like just as strange a technological barrier (for the average citizen) as the current process of proposing a law.
I'll try.
I think the founders got an impressive amount of the "free and open nation" concepts right.
I think the Sears and Roebuck Catalog was an effective tool in its time.
I would rather order from an online store than the Sears and Roebuck Catalog. It'll be faster, more responsive, more transparent experience. The store owners intend it and the internet as a medium allows it to a greater extent than was previously possible.
I wouldn't want to run a company without the internet and I think the core and true functions of our government are not run at web speed or with web transparency.
I feel very disconnected from my elected representatives. I suspect this is a shared feeling. It is hard for me to see them "put out work" and hard for me to understand how good a job they do at anything past staying visible.
This is because we still use the best system available to us 150 years ago. What is the best system used today to collaborate? Git. What's the best place to use it? Github.
Look at the crazy stuff we are able to build using that tool. Truly we're living the buzz words and "harnessing the internet".
I'd rather have 100 OSS project leads deciding government policy than our current 100 senators. I value the culture and medium by which they arrive at decisions so much that I'd make that choice "blind", meaning if I didn't know how red or blue they were, I'd still do it. I think the process/medium/culture is strong enough to override any level of partisan feelings.
Were this to occur. Were laws github repos on various topics and proposals were pull requests and amendments were patches we'd have a few core changes.
1. We'd move from fixed terms to respect based terms. Instead of power brokers and entrenched incumbents it'd be about output and the share of a community that continues to be willing to line up behind your vision.
2. Forks. Governments as currently implemented don't allow iterations. Wouldn't it be interesting to declare your county a fork of the "MIT Common Government License" or to yearly declare which license you will abide by. Too hard? Depends on the delivery medium.
3. Education. I increasing hear leaders calling people "folks". I'm a citizen. You're a citizen. I'm obligated to be educated for our democracy to work. When the medium changed we got Khan Academy, CodeSchool and 100s of similar things. I think the impact of this great good is yet to be felt but it gives me hope that these new medium skills can be learned to an extent where they form a basis of participation.
Right now a political party is strong if it can get people out to check the right box or out in the street to yell. Wouldn't it really be something if strength was in number of upvoted feature pushes? Number of accepted patches?
4. Voting. It is hard to vote with your feet. It is easy to vote with a +1. I trust upvotes for my products (amazon), jokes (reddit) and computer news (HN). We can't evaluate new ideas on a technical and work flow basis the same way? Seems like we can and should. Seems like checking one box every 4 years or even every local election seems grossly slow.
Today I'd like to upvote the "stop torturing people" pull request. I feel like this is reasonable and we could get traction on this. I feel like tomorrow morning the draft could be ready and public viewable. The patch could be vetted and merged next week. In public. At the speed of OSS.
Instead, this will be today's news item. Tomorrow it'll fade into the next one. The senators will ultimately decide behind closed doors and the decision will be the wrong one, influenced in the wrong way - not because they're evil or even ill intentioned, but simply because we work in the wrong medium.
I think the founders got an impressive amount of the "free and open nation" concepts right.
I think the Sears and Roebuck Catalog was an effective tool in its time.
I would rather order from an online store than the Sears and Roebuck Catalog. It'll be faster, more responsive, more transparent experience. The store owners intend it and the internet as a medium allows it to a greater extent than was previously possible.
I wouldn't want to run a company without the internet and I think the core and true functions of our government are not run at web speed or with web transparency.
I feel very disconnected from my elected representatives. I suspect this is a shared feeling. It is hard for me to see them "put out work" and hard for me to understand how good a job they do at anything past staying visible.
This is because we still use the best system available to us 150 years ago. What is the best system used today to collaborate? Git. What's the best place to use it? Github.
Look at the crazy stuff we are able to build using that tool. Truly we're living the buzz words and "harnessing the internet".
I'd rather have 100 OSS project leads deciding government policy than our current 100 senators. I value the culture and medium by which they arrive at decisions so much that I'd make that choice "blind", meaning if I didn't know how red or blue they were, I'd still do it. I think the process/medium/culture is strong enough to override any level of partisan feelings.
Were this to occur. Were laws github repos on various topics and proposals were pull requests and amendments were patches we'd have a few core changes.
1. We'd move from fixed terms to respect based terms. Instead of power brokers and entrenched incumbents it'd be about output and the share of a community that continues to be willing to line up behind your vision.
2. Forks. Governments as currently implemented don't allow iterations. Wouldn't it be interesting to declare your county a fork of the "MIT Common Government License" or to yearly declare which license you will abide by. Too hard? Depends on the delivery medium.
3. Education. I increasing hear leaders calling people "folks". I'm a citizen. You're a citizen. I'm obligated to be educated for our democracy to work. When the medium changed we got Khan Academy, CodeSchool and 100s of similar things. I think the impact of this great good is yet to be felt but it gives me hope that these new medium skills can be learned to an extent where they form a basis of participation.
Right now a political party is strong if it can get people out to check the right box or out in the street to yell. Wouldn't it really be something if strength was in number of upvoted feature pushes? Number of accepted patches?
4. Voting. It is hard to vote with your feet. It is easy to vote with a +1. I trust upvotes for my products (amazon), jokes (reddit) and computer news (HN). We can't evaluate new ideas on a technical and work flow basis the same way? Seems like we can and should. Seems like checking one box every 4 years or even every local election seems grossly slow.
Today I'd like to upvote the "stop torturing people" pull request. I feel like this is reasonable and we could get traction on this. I feel like tomorrow morning the draft could be ready and public viewable. The patch could be vetted and merged next week. In public. At the speed of OSS.
Instead, this will be today's news item. Tomorrow it'll fade into the next one. The senators will ultimately decide behind closed doors and the decision will be the wrong one, influenced in the wrong way - not because they're evil or even ill intentioned, but simply because we work in the wrong medium.
I think you're saying "the current system is antiquated, and we need a new one," but I'm not convinced Github is the right one. Sure, Github has great ideas like forking and transparency, but it also has a ton of barriers, like memorizing a bunch of terminal commands/flags or using a relatively buggy UI. You could also argue that Github reduces the weight of a (citizen) vote or a comment. Just because we trust anonymous feedback for products on Amazon and news stories does not mean we should have the same trust in legislation.
I think what's needed is a new system designed from the ground up, using the good ideas that git has but avoiding the limiting ones.
I think what's needed is a new system designed from the ground up, using the good ideas that git has but avoiding the limiting ones.
And even more on this.
We citizens are abstracted from the process of making law now. There is no meaningful way through the hole to participate as it stands today.
The barrier of a pull request would be high, but it would be like water breaking over a dam. What we need is a punch through and then iterations and use to smooth the edges and make participation easier and available to an ever wider group.
We basically need what has happened with OSS to be what happens in government.
I'm worried about the barriers too, but I'm even more worried about today's impossibilities of meaningful participation not changing.
We citizens are abstracted from the process of making law now. There is no meaningful way through the hole to participate as it stands today.
The barrier of a pull request would be high, but it would be like water breaking over a dam. What we need is a punch through and then iterations and use to smooth the edges and make participation easier and available to an ever wider group.
We basically need what has happened with OSS to be what happens in government.
I'm worried about the barriers too, but I'm even more worried about today's impossibilities of meaningful participation not changing.
I think you're on the right track, but it's a bit more complicated than just 'moving to github'.
For example, majority voting isn't always the best solution to every problem. Should court cases be decided like a reddit link where most people don't read the content, or the highest comment is a stupid pun?
I have no doubt that our institutions need to be updated and/or replaced, but it will likely have to be done piecemeal to minimize negative disruptions.
There are a lot of (technical) problems that will need to be solved to support such a system.
Don't forget that you'll need to convince everyone else in the country to switch to the new system.
For example, majority voting isn't always the best solution to every problem. Should court cases be decided like a reddit link where most people don't read the content, or the highest comment is a stupid pun?
I have no doubt that our institutions need to be updated and/or replaced, but it will likely have to be done piecemeal to minimize negative disruptions.
There are a lot of (technical) problems that will need to be solved to support such a system.
Don't forget that you'll need to convince everyone else in the country to switch to the new system.
Good points.
I think the jury system works so well because 12 people in a room eliminates the need for web speed to a large extent.
Court cases should not be decided but facebook upvotes.
On the other side, I work in the medical field and I see decades of lost progress because "this is so important it should be heavily regulated" which has the opposite effect.
So...what's so important that is shouldn't be facebook upvote decided and will the "super important issues" system we replace it with be scalable and transparent enough to do the job?
I'll think on this. It seems like both answers aren't good enough.
I think the jury system works so well because 12 people in a room eliminates the need for web speed to a large extent.
Court cases should not be decided but facebook upvotes.
On the other side, I work in the medical field and I see decades of lost progress because "this is so important it should be heavily regulated" which has the opposite effect.
So...what's so important that is shouldn't be facebook upvote decided and will the "super important issues" system we replace it with be scalable and transparent enough to do the job?
I'll think on this. It seems like both answers aren't good enough.
Reddit is a perfect example on why democracy fails.
If you culture/condition humans to behave/act stupid to appeal to one another for affection, you garner no substance or value. Their deltas are null.
Perhaps a new society/culture/civilization derived from a categorical intelligence is needed. Then we could analyze our resources, grow our culture based off this data, and evolve ourselves out of the current stupidity that exists today.
Perhaps a new society/culture/civilization derived from a categorical intelligence is needed. Then we could analyze our resources, grow our culture based off this data, and evolve ourselves out of the current stupidity that exists today.
I watched this TED Talk last night which I found very interesting:
http://www.ted.com/talks/pia_mancini_how_to_upgrade_democrac...
> Pia Mancini and her colleagues want to upgrade democracy in Argentina and beyond. Through their open-source mobile platform they want to bring citizens inside the legislative process, and run candidates who will listen to what they say.
http://www.ted.com/talks/pia_mancini_how_to_upgrade_democrac...
> Pia Mancini and her colleagues want to upgrade democracy in Argentina and beyond. Through their open-source mobile platform they want to bring citizens inside the legislative process, and run candidates who will listen to what they say.
The average citizen can use Twitter, which has been pivotal in recent revolutions. The Github/git process and format brings something that is crucial to the political process we've been missing: transparency.
And to add, it would be cool to put them in a repo when introduced, see history of where they are amended and by who, and then after they are passed see links beside each passage every time they are referenced in court.
Also, have the entire thing versioned/archived into the Internet Archive.
Probably easier than the current way of directly influencing legislation (for the average citizen)
Imagine if we could analyze a current law (ex. Computer Fraud & Abuse Act) and tweak the parts that are being abused or used in a way that they weren't intended. Or each time a law is added (merged with Master branch) we could see who voted in favor of that law (i.e. greater transparency). Other countries could take our constitution/laws up to a certain point (commit) and then branch off and implement their own approach. There are many ways we could utilize git to improve how laws are created/modified/deleted.
Laws are just rules and processes humans have come up with in a best effort to guide society in the right direction, no different than code is just logic programmers come up with to direct servers and clients to interact in a desired way. We've realized the importance of version control in the software realm, it's time to take it's powerful properties and apply it to the political sphere.
Laws are just rules and processes humans have come up with in a best effort to guide society in the right direction, no different than code is just logic programmers come up with to direct servers and clients to interact in a desired way. We've realized the importance of version control in the software realm, it's time to take it's powerful properties and apply it to the political sphere.
Wait, isn't there already a website which lists who voted which way in the united states? If not that's astounding.
Git blame, for starters.
Has a body of theory, but is still in very early stages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Government
That said, there would have to be some guarantee of an active political process behind it. Most likely scenario is that it becomes a largely ignored dumping ground, similar to your average petition site.
That said, there would have to be some guarantee of an active political process behind it. Most likely scenario is that it becomes a largely ignored dumping ground, similar to your average petition site.
I think Open-source governance is pretty relevant here as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_governance
[deleted]
I would love to use git blame and git cherry-pick!
If you look here, he's already doing that:
https://github.com/PresidentObama?tab=activity
https://github.com/PresidentObama?tab=activity
I'm almost certain that's a bot.
See https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135
See https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135
And it reveals a complete misunderstanding/misuse of GitHub Issues: the issue is filed after the law has been passed and signed into effect, so the issue is "opened" only after we would have closed the issue, and it appears that it will never get closed.
Sunlighter here (though this isn't my project). This was mostly done to test our IFTTT channel (https://ifttt.com/sunlightfoundation), so I think we were limited in terms of what actions we could trigger. We've talked about doing a non-IFTTT version that would extend the metaphor way further, but haven't (yet) actually made it happen.
Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying, are you implying that once a feature (law) has been pushed into production (signed off) there can be no issues filed against such feature?
For this analogy, a bill should actually be a pull request and a signed law is a merged request. I think the problem is that an 'issue' should be a proposal, a bug report, etc. In this case, none of the 'issues' being created are intended to be closed.
It's not intended to provide a medium of discussion (at least pre-vote) - it's intended to be a directory of laws. I would assume Issues is only used for IFTTT compatibility.
And if you think that we (coders) use it to control a source code, that will be turned into a program, or platform..
Now, if the "source code" is projects, laws, discussions, and once this process reach some goal, this could be "compiled" and the resulting platform would be a full State managed in digital form..
Now imagine all this together with automation, the compiled platform (which is "The State") can launch given its program (legislation) not only a way humans control themselves but how automated systems can help us with that..
I mean besides something like robots, a police car would receive the new "program", so the cops would abide to the current legislation.. the car could have cameras and detect if crimes or other things happens, according to the program it has, the federal constitution, etc.. this is just a glimpse
In a IOT world, a government that had automated all of its platforms, machines, etc.. given a current state of a Government platform, a binary, that could flow and update everywhere, with the current laws
Now, if the "source code" is projects, laws, discussions, and once this process reach some goal, this could be "compiled" and the resulting platform would be a full State managed in digital form..
Now imagine all this together with automation, the compiled platform (which is "The State") can launch given its program (legislation) not only a way humans control themselves but how automated systems can help us with that..
I mean besides something like robots, a police car would receive the new "program", so the cops would abide to the current legislation.. the car could have cameras and detect if crimes or other things happens, according to the program it has, the federal constitution, etc.. this is just a glimpse
In a IOT world, a government that had automated all of its platforms, machines, etc.. given a current state of a Government platform, a binary, that could flow and update everywhere, with the current laws
Yeah, let's please not automate the cops, or anything with a weapon.
I bet we'll see this in virtual worlds.
They do. Type up a bill and mail it to your Congresspeople.
I don't see how the medium changes proposing laws.
I don't see how the medium changes proposing laws.
I think the difference is that with a PR it's public knowledge if the government responds/acknowledges/denies the request. It's also easier to type a bill and email it rather than use snail mail (I'm assuming that's what you meant).
You could e-mail a bill you wrote to your Congressman right now. Congress may be out of touch, but they do have e-mail.
The transparency angle is interesting, but I still don't think anything would change. Pull requests would be ignored like petitions, or receive canned responses like letters.
The primary problem here is not technological.
The transparency angle is interesting, but I still don't think anything would change. Pull requests would be ignored like petitions, or receive canned responses like letters.
The primary problem here is not technological.
I can't wait for the day when the president actually has a github account before entering politics.
Why?
In general I want more politicians to be engineers or math/science types. Right now they're 95% lawyers, so they don't really represent the rest of society. I'm an engineer-type so I want to be better represented, I guess.
I think it could happen. If Aaron Swartz had lived, I think he may have eventually run for office. We still have some in the HN community who could enter politics.
I think it could happen. If Aaron Swartz had lived, I think he may have eventually run for office. We still have some in the HN community who could enter politics.
I'm sure having a Github account is a strong indicator for certain ideologies.
He needs to add a repo for his Hour of Code effort!
(http://www.wired.com/2014/12/obama-becomes-first-president-w...)
Can you imagine the bashing the internet would give him? Or the comments on how he should have written it in language x instead of y.
Looks like I've found my obligatory "follow" on GitHub. It's probably going to be far more interesting than following Linus Torvalds on Twitter! :)
That being said, I'm extremely happy that this is happening. It has the potential to bring alot of exposure to the idea of "open source" to government. I think it can and will work if adopted. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.
https://github.com/sunlightlabs/us-laws/issues/135
Interesting first comment.
Interesting first comment.
Github user saeedmalekpour:
Mr. President, I have been in Evin Prison, Iran for 6 years because my open source code was found on a website the regime didn't like. In the spirit of freedom, democracy and the hour of code - please help me in any way you can (account administered and message sent with permission of Saeed's family) Proof: https://twitter.com/stephenfry/status/518460637916446720
More information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V57pfl6nkD0
Mr. President, I have been in Evin Prison, Iran for 6 years because my open source code was found on a website the regime didn't like. In the spirit of freedom, democracy and the hour of code - please help me in any way you can (account administered and message sent with permission of Saeed's family) Proof: https://twitter.com/stephenfry/status/518460637916446720
More information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V57pfl6nkD0
Let's hope he keeps the nuclear launch codes out of his code and in environment variables.
Amazing but I'm a little bit frustrated at the username he chose. 'PresidentObama'. One day he will no longer be president and then maybe he will understand the difference between identity and value.
I believe you do not lose that title after you step down. Bill Clinton is still referred to as President Clinton. And its not just for Presidents either, same holds true with other posts. Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusetts from 2002 to 2006 but he was still referred to as Governor Romney during the 2012 Presidential election.
I think US Presidents keep their title.
Not officially. But most people and the media tend to make that mistake. If you are talking about something someone did as president then it is OK to say something like "while in office President Clinton did...", but if you're talking about something Bill Clinton did after leaving office you should say "Mr Clinton" or "Former President Clinton"
I read somewhere that president is the one job where that is not supposed to happen, I.E. you revert to your previous title (for Obama Senator). I have never observed this to happen in real life.
If you culture/condition humans to behave/act stupid to appeal to one another for affection, you garner no substance or value. Their deltas are null.
Perhaps a new society/culture/civilization derived from a categorical intelligence is needed.
Then we could analyze our resources, grow our culture based off this data, and evolve ourselves out of the current stupidity that exists today.