<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Towards a New Democracy: Consensus Through Quantum Parliament · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0503078/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0503078/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Towards a New Democracy: Consensus Through Quantum Parliament — mentioned by jessriedel</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7886953</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:physics_0503078:7886953</guid><pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2014 01:07:42 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In fact other systems actually encourage cooperation and favor candidates that are more in the center. Actually, single-round winner-take-all democracy induces a race toward the middle, not polarization. (If everyone is aligned on a 1D spectrum and votes for the candidate closest to their position, then both candidates are incentivized move toward the median position.) What you&amp;#x27;re really getting at isn&amp;#x27;t the idea of polarizations versus moderation, it&amp;#x27;s voting coordination (i.e. political parties) aka collusion. Unfortunately, alternate voting systems don&amp;#x27;t eliminate collusion, they just…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0503078/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.soc-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
