Data.gov To Launch In May 111
An anonymous reader writes "In late May, Data.gov will launch, in what US CIO Vivek Kundra calls an attempt to ensure that all government data 'that is not restricted for national security reasons can be made public' through data feeds. This appears to be a tremendous expansion on (and an official form of) third-party products like the Sunlight Labs API. Of course, it is still a far cry from 'open sourcing' the actual decision-making processes of government. Wired has launched a wiki for calling attention to datasets that should be shared as part of the Data.gov plan, and an article on O'Reilly discusses the importance of making this information easily accessible."
Hardfought (Score:2, Interesting)
The longer I live, the more Greg Bear's story "Hardfought" bothers me.
Here, it's the "mandate" in the story: iirc, every warship (and they're all warships) is required to carry all of mankind's digital knowledge on board to ensure that everyone has access to facts and reason to back their arguments.
Vivek did a good job with this in DC (Score:4, Interesting)
This will also be an extension of what Vivek Kundra implemented in DC:
http://data.octo.dc.gov/ [dc.gov]
Re:Hardfought (Score:3, Interesting)
When I hear of something this I personally think of Walter Jon Williams' Aristoi, in which the sum of human knowledge is stored in a vault known as the Hyperlogos. It's allegedly above tampering. I don't want to ruin the story, but they make such a big deal out of how incorruptible it is that you know it's going to figure into the story. Same here; this just seems like a single clearing-house for deception. Still, I suppose it's a step in the right and wrong direction at once...
Open source goverment, no thanks! (Score:4, Interesting)
If this results in the same performance expectations as OSS projects, I'll take the current government of ANY country on Earth over an OSS one any day.
For every successful OSS project, I'd say there are at least 10,000 pitiful ones, thanks to their management. Compare that with the current way goverment works on the planet and I'd say that for all their problems, the current systems used to form goverments are all, with out any doubt in my mind, far better performers than the average OSS project.
Why would we want to make things WORSE for pretty much everyone, in the off chance that we happen to get lucky enough to get the right people on it to make it successful. The successful OSS projects that you can think of are exceptions to the rule, not the norm. While they are great and all, I'm not personally willing to play those odds. Its not like playing the lottery where you have as a 1 in 14 million chance of winning a few million dollars, but you're only out 1 if you don't win. While it would be fabulous if we did it and it worked, the risk involved if we fail alone makes it not worth attempting in my mind, add in the odds of it working and its almost worth shooting you just so no one else gets this crazy idea in their head. Obviously a little late now, but I think you get my point.
Re:First thing I want to get data on (Score:3, Interesting)
To me foreigner (not US resident) the whole birth certificate show down looked quite silly from the start.
I was surprised that same US citizens complaining on overreaching powers of their intelligence services, fail to understand that CIA starts background check on all involved people right after they declare their intent to run for the office. So that politicians who have something cloudy in their past can bail out from race long before they are actually nominated by parties. AFAIK this is standard for pretty much all branches of office: not only president candidates get screened, all of the officials who hold any kind of responsibility before taking post are checked by CIA. That's actually one of the reasons why such nominations take that long time to proceed.
Re:Open source goverment, no thanks! (Score:3, Interesting)
But that isn't what you're talking about... Just wanted to make that point first.
This is a stretch, but in a way -- on paper -- we already have an 'open source' government. You contribute by suggesting/complaining to your congress critter and they are supposed to represent you. The idea is that your contribution will be taken into consideration, expanded upon and eventually legislated. You elect these officials and the idea is that they are supposed to represent your ideals. These people are the management, in a sense.
The reality, of course, is it doesn't quite work that way. But I think that's the idea behind our system.
By 'open sourcing' the government more, I think we can improve this process. Our system is archaic, designed for people getting messages on horseback. We have all of these great, easy, instant ways to communicate now and lots of people have lots of ideas. While a pure OSS model might not work out so well -- opening up the government a little more, loosely based on OSS ideas and principles -- I theorize would be a good thing.
Re:First thing I want to get data on (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Don't give a rat's ass (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes you can, it's called Dual Citizenship [wikipedia.org] and is possible with many nations. I think the whole "Obama is really this guy with a different name and he's not an American citizen" smacks of cheap tactics on whatever side didn't want him elected.
Is it possible? Yes. Any chance in hell of proving it to the point that he'll be removed from office? No.