Hey all, sorry for the late response. Max here, leader of Flux.
As a preface the philosophical underpinnings of Flux (fallibilism and realism) are best explained in the book: The Beginning of Infinity. I'd encourage everyone read that both in relation to this topic and life in general.
If this is a serious criticism I'd love to hear more about it. We've gone to great lengths to ensure bad policy is hard to pass, and good policy is easy. We don't care if it comes from a special interest group or not, there are plenty of those that are good (though ofc many that are interested in passing policy which privileges themselves, which we count as bad policy as it's not resistant to criticism).
We have a few ideas beyond the obvious but we're not going to choose candidates willy nilly. We're not interested in candidates not driven by the same mission, or those who don't believe in a system's ability to make better choices than an individual, regardless of who the individual is.
This is still the proposal, just the site is angled differently to attract members instead of provide some grand, detailed, philosophical vision (much less sexy). We anticipate Flux members would probably control 20-30% of the bloc.
Billions of dollars are secured via the Bitcoin network and a great deal of infrastructure has evolved to help protect this. Furthermore those criticisms are parochial -- totally addressable with technology and innovation. We're confident we can leverage existing solutions to provide reasonable security (wearables, cheap hardware devices, etc). If that's the only concern then it's a very very minor one.
Since the article you posted was published there are plenty of hardware wallets that have been developed: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hardware_wallet
This is the same question banks and medicare and whatever have. There is a very established KYC infrastructure in Aus which we'll use. Ultimately we plan to also help develop next gen ID infrastructure too.
We don't. We expect them to delegate and be notified of changes, then we react and fix if there's a problem. These criticisms really aren't nearly as existential as you seem to think. Minor parties are another issue but hardware wallets are easily cheap enough to justify, even the high end ones.
We probably won't use passwords. There won't be a central site. There may be integrations with other services like twitter or FB.
Remember the Get Swap Vote system is particularly designed to make passing bad policy expensive. This is a market, supply and demand matter.
That democracies are slow, becoming less effective, and not competing with other forms of government as competently as they can.
This is a side effect. We outcompete and make the old model redundant. No party is like us; we're fallabilist to the core. All other parties are an answer to 'who should rule?' -- see Karl Poppers philosophy and the beginning of infinity for more.
Side effect again. We don't want everyone participating, just the comparatively best people at a given time, hence GSV (get swap vote) and a market based system including arbitraging political expression over time.
Ofc not, also if they tried they'd spend the rest of their lives learning enough to even start.
That doesn't really make sense. Think about every new product that ever reached mass adoption. Nobody wanted it day 1.
Anyway, I've published lots of details about Flux over the last year, check voteflux.org/#archive for more.