Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JumpCrisscross 1676 days ago
> If an elected body is planning legislations, actively blocking it means you’re suppressing the voice of the public and the voters

This is reductive. When the Congress was writing cryptocurrency reporting rules, the crypto industry asking for clarifying amendments (to avoid classifying miners as exchanges) wasn't suppressing anyone's voice. It was supplementing it with specialist knowledge.

1 comments

When we write laws about speeding should we ask sports car owners to supplement the legislative record with their specialist knowledge?
If the legislation, as worded, applies to cars on race tracks -- probably? I think these metaphors are getting far afield.

Privacy is a fundamental thing that's more important (and harder!) to protect than most things.

It's probably also a good idea to get a breadth of stakeholder's opinions on an issue. Lobbyists definitely have a massively outsized portion of this breadth.

Even if it’s a decision that I don’t agree with, if we all agree democracy is the best form of representative government, the decision taken by the lawmakers has to be respected. It’s not optimal, it’s slow to effect changes but I still believe it’s the best form of government we have.