How each model solves the same problems
Instead of “democracy versus anarchism”, compare the concrete ways collective problems get solved.
| Question | ✕ | ✕ | ✕ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How are decisions made? | Participants submitted and voted on statements in Polis; researchers kept statements with cross-group agreement and converted them into training principles. | Each listed body sets its own well-being objectives and steps; the Welsh Ministers publish national indicators and a future trends report after each election. | A statutory authority (UIDAI) under the central government sets rules; ministries decide where Aadhaar is required; Parliament legislated in 2016 and 2019.Digital identity | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Polis maps disagreement into opinion groups; statements lacking consensus across groups were excluded rather than adjudicated. | The Commissioner may review a body and recommend; the body must take reasonable steps to follow or publish reasons (s 22). The Auditor General examines application of the principle. | Grievance channels at UIDAI and service agencies; constitutional challenges in the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2017 and 2018. | |
| How are public goods funded? | A published public constitution, methodology and evaluation results reusable by other developers and researchers. | Covers the Welsh Ministers, local authorities, health boards, national park authorities and other listed bodies; public services boards plan locally. | A universal, low-cost proof of identity used for welfare transfers, financial inclusion and public services. | |
| How is AI used? | Constitutional AI: the model applies the written principles to critique its own outputs and generate training feedback. | No documented AI role. | No AI in decision-making as such; automated biometric matching and deduplication decide authentication, and face authentication was added in 2018. | |
| What are the main risks? | Organiser discretion in translation, unrepresentative or small samples, no ongoing accountability and voluntary uptake by the developer. | Soft 'follow or explain' enforcement; procedural compliance; difficulty measuring long-term and preventative benefits. | Exclusion through authentication failures, data leaks, surveillance and profiling, weak independent oversight and function creep.CLM-0544 |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.