[HN Gopher] Polis - Large Scale Discussions
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Polis - Large Scale Discussions
        
       Author : manx
       Score  : 64 points
       Date   : 2021-11-27 14:48 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (compdemocracy.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (compdemocracy.org)
        
       | patcon wrote:
       | If anyone is interested in a visual walk-through of Polis'
       | emergent dynamics, using a live example discussion from the UK, a
       | few of us fans of the tool created a YouTube video:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVJE6GXqzsw&list=PLSL_F7Lwul...
       | 
       | (we'd intended to make more, but life got busy)
       | 
       | EDIT: There's an unofficial Polis User Group in a Discord
       | channel. We used to run weekly open calls to help people learn,
       | but for now we just have the Discord. Details:
       | https://link.g0v.network/pug
        
       | BeefySwain wrote:
       | I thought this looked really cool, but couldn't find a way to
       | browse existing discussions/polls, so I created one:
       | 
       | Topic: ZFS in Mainline
       | 
       | https://pol.is/3h8kkbfdme
        
         | manx wrote:
         | Here is a big one from Taiwan:
         | https://polis.pdis.nat.gov.tw/report/r77xrzjr7nnf6872eiddp/
         | 
         | And an interesting article about how they're using it:
         | https://www.wired.co.uk/article/taiwan-democracy-social-medi...
        
           | colinmegill wrote:
           | This is a solid article and entry point.
           | 
           | A chapter of Carl Miller's Death of the Gods is one of the
           | better narrative deep dives: https://www.amazon.com/Death-
           | Gods-Global-Power-Grab/dp/17851...
           | 
           | As well as Chris Horton's piece in MIT Tech Review:
           | https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/08/21/240284/the-
           | simpl...
        
           | rytor718 wrote:
           | Yeah this should be linked in the top comment because I
           | couldn't really grasp what Polis was even for by going to the
           | link on this topic. This article really does a great job of
           | clearing up its purpose and benefits. Thanks a lot for
           | linking this!
        
         | Rygian wrote:
         | Really confused as to why that page tries to load javascript
         | from facebook.net
        
           | colinmegill wrote:
           | Old login code, I'm assuming, but it's OSS if you want to
           | check.
        
       | humanistbot wrote:
       | So you upvote and downvote comments, which are presented randomly
       | and by themselves. No support for replies or threading? Seems a
       | step backwards to me.
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | The lack of replies is a feature, not a bug. Polis is about
         | generating consensus from what I'm reading about it, not about
         | maximizing engagement ala Twitter, FB, et al.
         | 
         | From the Polis FAQ: https://compdemocracy.org/faq/
         | 
         | "Structured replies also eliminate the possibility of trolling
         | by replying directly (and thus provoking further response)."
         | 
         | This Wired article has more:
         | https://www.wired.co.uk/article/taiwan-democracy-social-medi...
         | 
         | "Using the Internet to pull people together rather than split
         | them apart requires designing an environment very different
         | from the usual online forums for political debate, such as
         | Twitter or Facebook."
         | 
         | "Polis has reengineered many of the features we take for
         | granted on social media. No reply button - hence no trolling.
         | No echo-chambers, replaced by an attitudes map showing you
         | where you are in relation to everyone else. The platform does
         | not highlight the most divisive statements, but gives more
         | visibility to the most consensual ones."
        
         | colinmegill wrote:
         | Correct. For smaller discussions in the 10s, or potentially
         | 100s of participants, the limitations of randomness and no
         | direct replies are unnecessary. They become useful assumptions
         | given thousands and tens of thousands of participants.
         | 
         | The comments are sent out semi-randomly:
         | https://compdemocracy.org/comment-routing/
        
       | bijant wrote:
       | In 2018 I was involved with an NGO that planned on using Polis in
       | their work. They contacted the maintainers who recommended
       | contracting an agency which had experience with Polis as many of
       | the core developers worked there. The NGO did just that, and paid
       | a huge sum for the deployment. The first discussion resulted in a
       | total overload of their servers. The NGOs marketing spent for
       | this project was completely wasted and its reputation tarnished.
       | I was brought in in the aftermath to communicate with the Agency
       | and to scale the deployment. They were unable to scale even to
       | 100s of simultaneous users. We tried to deploy it on our own,
       | only to find out, that the public source code on github did not
       | match the one deployed by the agency. The OpenSource Version on
       | GitHub lagged the version the agency deployed by about a year.
       | Some files critical to deployment were completely missing from
       | the public release. Furthermore the Code was a complete mess.
       | Apparently they never had a successful deployment. The fact that
       | 3 years later in this very thread people are still pointing out
       | that it was used years ago in Taiwan (which was the PoC that
       | convinced the execs at my NGO in 2018) is a testament to that. If
       | you look at their GitHub (which they don't promote a lot on their
       | website) they explicitly say: ,, If you'd like to set up your own
       | deployment of Polis, we encourage your to reach out to us for
       | support. We look forward to working together" This is the real
       | purpose of their project, they try to get consulting gigs for
       | themselves and extract a maximum of money out of unsuspecting
       | NGOs and Govermental Orgs. They have sweet talking sales people
       | but are unable to deliver on their promises. Never Again!
        
         | colinmegill wrote:
         | Feel free to DM me on twitter if you care to elaborate and want
         | to discuss, this is strange and I'm not sure what you're
         | referring to. The reason we're a registered 501c3 is that the
         | overwhelming majority of the consulting services we provide
         | around the world are done pro bono or at a loss. I'm not sure
         | what provider you're referring to.
        
           | bijant wrote:
           | The question is why your consulting services are necessary in
           | the first place. Most Open Source Projects I know can be set
           | up by anyone who is competent in the underlying technology.
           | You explicitly warn people that they will be unable to set it
           | up on their own and that they will need your services. You
           | had years to simplify deployment and haven't done so. Your
           | Github is still lagging the version that you're privately
           | deploying. Can You point to logs of any recent deployment
           | that scaled to 100s or 1000s of simultaneous users ?
           | Somewhere else in this thread you claim that OSS software has
           | a competitive advantage in the EU. Is this the reason you
           | pretend that your software is OSS while in practice it is not
           | ?
        
             | colinmegill wrote:
             | The software is entirely open source and multiple
             | independent instances exist. Our main deployment at pol.is
             | runs off the same docker containers available to the
             | community.
             | 
             | While some time ago, here's an instance that scaled to
             | 30,000+ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yh2yKHUKU8
        
               | bijant wrote:
               | Wow, this is beyond ridiculous. This is the NGO I was
               | involved with. It did not scale to 30,000 it failed
               | miserably at merely dozens of simultaneous Users. The
               | linked Video is the Exec who took responsibility for
               | ordering Polis trying his best at PR Crisis Management.
               | He was fired shortly afterwards. Apparently You don't
               | understand German, because in the video he is admitting
               | the technical problems with polis. I'm just amazed how
               | anyone would point to that video, to tout the supposed
               | strengths of their platform.
        
               | colinmegill wrote:
               | Interesting! This instance had thousands of concurrent
               | users for a total of 33,000+ and was one of the larger
               | instances of usage of the tech. There was no independent
               | deployment of the technology in this case, so, that is
               | inaccurate.
        
               | bijant wrote:
               | The instance failed at mere DOZENS of simultaneous users.
               | Clients kept retrying and then there were thousands of
               | requests of users who were unable to interact with the
               | instance. I went though the logs in detail. It was a
               | clusterfuck.
        
       | rocauc wrote:
       | you know, Jared Polis would likely appreciate this.
        
         | colinmegill wrote:
         | He did not.
        
           | namlem wrote:
           | Did he not like the name?
        
       | eterps wrote:
       | This is really interesting technology for people to find 'common
       | ground' in polarized discussions. I really wish more research
       | would be done in this direction.
        
       | colinmegill wrote:
       | Hi everyone! Co-founder here / AMA.
       | 
       | We've been working on this for coming up on 10 years. We launched
       | on HN in August of 2014:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8228974
       | 
       | Brief technical description: 1. produce a matrix of C comments
       | (submitted by participants) * V votes (in 1, 0, -1 form for
       | agree, disagree, pass). 2. Run dimensionality reduction (PCA) and
       | clustering (K-means). 3. Find out which comments best
       | differentiate clusters, show those to everyone
       | https://compdemocracy.org/representative-comments/ 4. Identify
       | comments in which the majority of every cluster is voting the
       | same, way, show those to everyone:
       | https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/
       | 
       | For more, we've recently published a paper describing the
       | underlying methods:
       | https://twitter.com/colinmegill/status/1445044310722822147
       | 
       | The 501c3 works around the world (USAID, UNDP, cities, countries)
       | to help advance the usage of the method in deliberative
       | democratic settings. Multiple cities (such as Amsterdam) now have
       | their own deployments. We'd love to hear from you! If interested
       | in the project or volunteering, please reach out to:
       | hello@compdemocracy.org
        
         | kodah wrote:
         | Does agree/disagree/pass really reflect what people think even
         | in short form? A lot of voting may occur on a particularly
         | emotional point, even though a voter may disagree with the rest
         | of a statement. I've seen this on Reddit and here, and it's
         | always made me wonder how we can actually capture the net of
         | people's sentiments accurately.
        
           | colinmegill wrote:
           | Great question. You can see raw data from a conversation on
           | biodiversity that took place in New Zealand in partnership
           | with the Ministry of Conservation and hosted by an
           | independent news organization here:
           | 
           | https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-.
           | ..
           | 
           | If you take a look at the comments file, you can judge
           | whether the system has been successful at getting people to
           | submit a single idea at a time for people to agree and
           | disagree on. My assessment is: mostly yes, sometimes there
           | are still multiple ideas in 140 characters.
           | 
           | The system encourages the decomposition of ideas, so that we
           | can identify which factors may be ignorable and which are
           | significant to our purposes
           | (consensus/disagreement/differentation).
        
           | patcon wrote:
           | This is a great question. I've been using Polis for maybe 5
           | years.
           | 
           | The "pass" is a catch-all for many things[1], including
           | "rejecting a premise". It's non-obvious in the current
           | interface, but there's room for coaching/learning how to
           | engage with "complex/mixed" statements. For example,
           | statements you encounter that conflict with your own
           | emotional or factual sensibilities, which you're reluctant to
           | respond to in a simple way (with agree/disagree). In this
           | case, users can just "pass" on that statement, and
           | immediately go below and submit a new "corrected" statement,
           | or alternatively divide that one statement into a few
           | separate ones, that can be reacted to more authentically.
           | 
           | That way, you're not forced to weigh in on things you find to
           | be leading statements or overly simplistic. And the pool of
           | statements for everyone becomes ever-more-nuanced through
           | these sorts of interactions, and the map of the sentimental
           | landscape becomes more high-resolution :)
           | 
           | [1]: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/discussions/774
        
         | DLA wrote:
         | Why is it so hard to find the code? Links to open source and
         | the license.
        
           | wffurr wrote:
           | It's straight from the Welcome page under "community":
           | https://compdemocracy.org/Welcome
           | 
           | https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis
           | 
           | GNU AGPL 3:
           | https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/blob/dev/LICENSE
           | 
           | There's a doc on embedding it on a site, too, if that's the
           | end you're interested in:
           | https://compdemocracy.org/embedding-polis-on-your-web-
           | proper...
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | This is fascinating stuff and seems like a leverage point to
         | apply technology to actually solve some of the big problems
         | facing humanity, which at their core are political problems,
         | not necessarily technological ones.
         | 
         | Where do you need help the most with this project?
         | 
         | Where do you see it going from here?
         | 
         | Any interesting big trials or deployments in the works?
        
           | colinmegill wrote:
           | Thanks, and great questions!
           | 
           | 1. Where can I help?
           | 
           | We have a range of volunteer opportunities for frontend and
           | backend engineers (React/legacy Backbone.JS/D3), as well as
           | data scientists (python / clojure). We also have a range of
           | opportunities to work with organizations around the world
           | that need but don't have the data science background
           | necessary to properly implement the tool. There's manual work
           | to do here that usually means getting on video with people in
           | different time zones.
           | 
           | We have some refactoring needs that are still in flight as we
           | are still in a long transition from startup codebase to 'easy
           | to deploy' generalized OSS repo.
           | 
           | 2. Where is this going?
           | 
           | We're excited to see people deploying this around the world,
           | (a process that has been eased by community volunteers along
           | with investment from governments). Because of Schrems II, OSS
           | platforms have a degree of competitive advantage in Europe as
           | those governments that need to own their own data, and there
           | are also big pushes for deliberative democracy there.
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/ICesnulaityte/status/1463426562783694857
           | https://participedia.net/ https://netdem.nl/en/projects/pol-
           | is-in-nederland/
           | 
           | While we've worked around the world, bringing the methods /
           | deliberative democracy to the United States is still
           | something we're working out. The 501c3 is presently pursuing
           | a strategy to 'compile' online deliberations to ballot
           | propositions in places with small amounts of signatures
           | needed, with the idea that if we take a known issue area (say
           | opioids) + population sample + emergent discussion we'll
           | discover a solution space, as the tech has elsewhere (like
           | Taiwan), that won't then kick off the kind of adversarial
           | advertising campaigns referendums usually attract.
           | Potentially multiple zeros cheaper, and hopefully better
           | outcomes. We're presently working on our first of these.
           | Follow https://twitter.com/compdem for updates.
           | 
           | My writing about the future of democracy (working on a book)
           | is presently focused on whether or not we can replace
           | political parties in practice and compile a better high
           | dimensional space to a legislature of independents. https://w
           | eb.archive.org/web/20190629035125/https://civichall...
           | 
           | 3. Any big deployments?
           | 
           | UNDP has just concluded what they think may have been the
           | largest _online_ deliberative exercises in the developing
           | world in history, in Bhutan, Pakistan, and East Timor. The
           | full report will eventually be posted to
           | https://twitter.com/compdem
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-27 23:01 UTC)