Disqus - Latest Comments for david_a_eaves

Re: Some thoughts on the relaunched data.gc.ca

ditrain — Mon, 24 Jun 2013 22:54:10 -0000

Nice catch! Thank you!

Re: Making Open Government Data Sustainable - Sunlight Foundation Blog

ditrain — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:43:33 -0000

I think my piece has been, in part, misunderstood. If the focus of democracy maps is to create standards that governments are to publish with then we are all in agreement. I'm deeply committed to creating standards so that these types of information becomes easier to access and use for all players. I'll be the first in line to push people towards such a standard.

It's just that reference to that goal in the proposal was tiny. Rather the emphasis was (in my reading) on the data harvesting and map creation, something I think is of less clear value (and needs to be done in a sustainable way) and is being done by a number of other parties already.

So of the goal of Democracy Map is really about driving the popolo standard then great! I just wish that had been front and centre. But if the goal is to create a map and a service, which is how i read it, then I go back to my original piece (and have many more thoughts).

Re: How Car2Go ruins Car2Go

ditrain — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 15:35:01 -0000

Hi Hugh - I've heard this from others too. This problem appears to be true on the iPhone apps and possibly some but not all android apps (haven't been able to confirm if it never happens with all of them.)
--
www.eaves.ca
@daeaves

Re: International #OpenDataDay: Now at 90 Cities (and… the White House)

ditrain — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:36:31 -0000

Chia-Kai,

Nice work. Sounds like there are a few events that are going to have 100+ people. So great to hear. Congratulations!
Am definitely looking forward to hearing updates.

Re: UPDATED: CrimeReports surpasses 80 million crimes mapped

ditrain — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 11:57:53 -0000

This is actually a terrible outcome. Crimereports requires cities to essentially hand over the rights to share crime data - so citizens in those cities cannot download, map, and share their insights with this data. It literally takes a public asset - crime data - and privatizes it. It is a great business model for crimereports as they get to gather data about how citizens view and explore this data, but it is a terrible outcome for citizens, who lose the right to engage with crime data on their own terms.

Re: #Idlenomore as an existential threat

ditrain — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 11:23:32 -0000

Neither Karen or myself is asking anyone to individually be culpable, but to recognize that we are part of a system that not only gives us that privilege but that has, and continues to, harm and marginalize some more than others. You can bend that into being called collective guilt. Or you can understand it as critical thinking and analysis. Max has chosen the former. I choose the latter. The challenge for non-aboriginal Canadians is to persuade more to choose the latter frame as well. It won't be easy, because it isn't easy.

Max Fawcett's response above is a wonderful example of everything my post is about. The inability to understand his own place of privilege, along with the defensiveness and fear the debate creates for his view of Canada and his own sense of identity is precisely my point. You can read the emotion spilling off the screen in his response. I don't say that out of disrespect, but to illuminate just how triggering, to just how much of existential threat this debate feels to many Canadians.Max does misunderstand much of my post. And his conclusion, roughly unpacked, reads "when first nations start talking in ways that make me comfortable, then they will succeed." In other words... when this conversation no longer poses an existential threat to my identity and to how I perceive my country... we can continue. This is a fascinating position. One that again takes incredible privilege to hold. It is to seek to negate any real debate before it even begins. It is also terms that First Nations will not accept. This wonderful post - Why Idle No More Never Needed Your Sympathy dives somewhat deeper in to this point. This isn't a transactional land claims negotiation. This is a conversation about identity, rights and history. It is going to last for decades, possibly longer.And the non-aboriginal side of the conversation, if we choose to have it, is going to challenging. How much so? Consider Max's second post where he affirms he will not be "shamed into not speaking honestly." I don't recall either myself (or Karen) making any such request. Of course, we did ask people to spend more time listening, and engaging that which makes us uncomfortable. But that is a far cry from censorship or even shaming. Indeed it speaks volumes about the privilege some of us have that even just been asked to listen and emerse ourselves in the discomfort of others views is seen as "shaming."It's going to be a long, uncomfortable ride. Or worse, it will all melt away and we'll be allowed to continue our lives ignoring the issues altogether.

Re: The Journal News Gun Map: Open vs. Personal Data

ditrain — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:57:20 -0000

Er... a few comments.

1. I created these diagrams for this post. They are not re-used.
2. I included the coloured button identifications to spur interest - for some people they have meaning (they are ideas championed by the white house) and i didn't have the time (and it didn't fit into the flow) to spell out what they were.
3. While I do like politicians voting records I don't think they are particularly special. In fact, you'll notice that everything in both diagrams are the same so I think it is interesting that you've zeroed in on that example.
4. I did abbrivate the personal data examples in order fit in the text in with the new purchasable data - so I resorted to the buttons cause it was easy.
5. Yes, the anonymized data could be open - I think this is an interesting point and something the diagram fails to capture as well as it could - but my main point was talking about privacy and personally identifiable data sets, so that's why they ended up there.

Re: The Journal News Gun Map: Open vs. Personal Data

ditrain — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:21:34 -0000

Okay, complicated issue that I guarantee I won't handle all the nuances of in this response, but here is where my thinking is at.
a) there are some data sets that are just plain private and only individuals should have the right to share them (in personally identifiable ways) - specifically I'm thinking health and education records and the sort.
b) that said, I don't think it is possible to put the data genie back in the bottle. Even with health records - I'm suspecting my credit card company, of even some browser cookies - can probably discern if I get cancer by looking at my spending or webpage viewing patterns.
c) so I'm thinking there are probably so core data sets we want to protect and then we will need to legislate against use - e.g. it will be illegal to de-anonymize or to reconstruct my healthcare records, or to make decisions based on inferences of what my health records might be.

Of course "c" will create a whole new set of problems, so there is not going to be any simple solutions. In addition, people's values and notions of privacy may change. What we believe should be private may evolve - certainly these norms and perspectives have shifted in the last 50, to say nothing of the last 150 or 400 years, so we should be careful about cementing in a notion too firmly and prevent it from evolving in either direction.

Re: The Journal News Gun Map: Open vs. Personal Data

ditrain — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:13:34 -0000

Fixed! Thank you!

Re: The Beneficial Impact of Newspaper Paywalls on Users

ditrain — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 13:02:32 -0000

Not a sideswipe, just an observation. I'm not their target audience. Boomers are.
That's not to say the Globe has progress on this front in the last few years (see Eat the Young from August 2009) but they know where their subscription bread is buttered, and it is not with my demographic, and the content reflects that fact.

Re: Uber in Vancouver: Some Thoughts for the Passenger Transportation Board

ditrain — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:41:51 -0000

My understanding is that legally, if they got a license (I've no idea how hard that is), they could. However, I suspect that the cab companies would pressure/order their cabs to not use them. Would be interesting to see what would happen.

Re: Uber in Vancouver: Some Thoughts for the Passenger Transportation Board

ditrain — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:40:51 -0000

Interesting benefit. Hadn't thought of that.

Re: Uber in Vancouver: Some Thoughts for the Passenger Transportation Board

ditrain — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:40:22 -0000

It is interesting to me that this comment is written from the perspective of the industry. I get the perspective, but it isn't clear to me how cheaper fares are not in the interest of the consumer.
This is not a call for complete de-regulation, but if there is downward pressure on rates, from a consumer perspective that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Re: Uber in Vancouver: Some Thoughts for the Passenger Transportation Board

ditrain — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:20:07 -0000

Good question Eric - I think the service is too new to have any data like that. Probably San Francisco would be the best place to look.
Of course, you'd need to adjust for the size of the fleet. There are now something like 60-200 more town cars operating in San Fran because Uber has made it profitable for them (so I understand).

Re: Ontario’s Open Data Policy: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and the (Missed?) Opportunity

ditrain — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:57:24 -0000

I agree that the language of the other licenses is also suboptimal - but I'm not sure that it necessarily means what you claim.

I spoked to the UK government a couple of years about this clause, they were surprised to hear about the interpretation I mentioned in my blog post. They told me they never intended to be saying that the end user is liable for 3rd party information - their intention was that they would be explicit about what third party rights but did want to be explicit that they could not offer those rights. So it was more of a lack of clarity around the language that was the issue (of course it has the impact that I mentioned in the piece).

I do actually believe that this language may be introducing a high degree of risk - so if governments are truly interested in having re-use for commercial and entrepreneurial reasons - they need to understand that this risk will very likely dampen (particularly established players) interest in the data.

Re: Broken Government: A Case Study in Penny Wise but Pound Foolish Management

ditrain — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:37:33 -0000

James - this is not what I'm hearing from sources across government. Indeed, to get approval for something now takes months since you must write up the case for the Minister/DM to approve, something that takes a huge amount of time and energy. Indeed, I've even heard of events, internal planning meetings, etc… being cancelled (and deposits being lost) because the timelines for approval are so slow.
Maybe the system will adapt, but if it does, it will just mean a whole new bureaucracy (and expense) has been created.

Re: Broken Government: A Case Study in Penny Wise but Pound Foolish Management

ditrain — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:00:12 -0000

Emails I'm getting from public servants suggest otherwise. Meetings being cancelled and general disarray.

Re: Why Banning Anonymous Comments is Bad for Postmedia and Bad for Society

ditrain — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:16:52 -0000

Editor, thank you for the comment.

Yes, I called the Globe and Mails' commenting mechanism "adequate." Thus finding an anecdotal example of poor commenting isn't going to be an insurmountable hurdle. My point however, was that there are journalists and newspapers (and many other sites) that have managed to enable decent or even great commenting without resorting to the constraints of using their Facebook identity. I've no doubt that Facebook makes it easier - that was not my point - my point is that it comes at a significant cost around who can comment and that others have found alternatives that better balance commenting with identity.

Re: How the New iPhone Will Expose Cities Lagging on Open Data

ditrain — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 04:06:16 -0000

Sadly, while I agree that Transit Authorities are not in the business of releasing their own apps I would suggest that many don't think that way. There are a large number of apps that have been produced by Transit Agencies. As I mentioned in the original comment one constant tendency has been a desire by many government agencies to "control" the connection and brand experience with users/citizens. Indeed a big challenges for governments at the moment is that they (without always being aware of it) are sometimes choosing between offering more effective service (via open data) or controlling/promoting their brand (offering it only through there app). The number of agencies that would choose the latter for reasons of internal politics and marketing should not be underestimated. As an open data advocate I've seen that result happen many times before.
And while I agree that the benefits have been significant there are still a lot of jurisdictions that have not done open data. That number dwarfs those that have. And now they have incentive not to, because they can be the gatekeeper to that data, and intact Apple will shovel users to them exclusively. What a great internal sell! We get to say we are a success because we get a ton of app traffic thanks to apple. As an open data activist Apple's decision creates a bunch of problematic incentives I've got to fight so I still find it problematic to be supportive of what they are doing. There decision advances the cause for apps, but not open data.
I'd actually love to see the number of transit authorities that have apps and don't do open data, that might help with an assessment.

Re: How the New iPhone Will Expose Cities Lagging on Open Data

ditrain — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:33:08 -0000

I'm not sure this piece is drawing the right conclusion. I can easily make the case that Apple's move will have the opposite impact argued above. Many transit authorities may see this as a reason NOT to do open data. They will see this as an opportunity to re-assert their brand by publishing their own exclusive app - branded by them - that iPhone users will have to use. They could even use this as an excuse to stop sharing GTFS data with google (or anyone) by arguing that now users can use "an app." This would, of course, be a disastrous outcome for both open data and for transit. While I hope the outcome laid out above comes to pass, I think a piece that suggests Apple is doing a good thing on this front is deeply problematic and rewards them for what could end up being behaviour that undermines much of the good work achieved in this space to date.

Re: Containers, Facebook, Baseball & the Dark Matter around Open Data (#IOGDC keynote)

ditrain — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:45:44 -0000

Thank you Joseph, glad you liked the post. Also great to hear that it would make sense for a Third Tuesday event. I don't have any trips to Ottawa planned at the moment - at least not until winter - so not sure I can get there if you build it. That said, there are definitely lots of good voices in Ottawa that could speak to these issues as well!

Re: How to Use Maps for Change with Ushahidi

ditrain — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:45:44 -0000

Dear DeadUshahidi,

Thank you for the comment - glad you liked the graph, thrilled to hear it might be useful.

I'm a little confused about the conspiracy comment when we are transparent about our funding (that being Omydiar). That substance of any alleged conspiracy feels harder still to understand given my post completely agrees with the core argument DeadUshahidi makes: that projects are more likely to be successful if they have a theory of change and a strategy.

I'd love to chat with someone from DeadUshahidi - maybe for a follow up piece? I actually have tried several times to submit a request via the "Contact Us" page on your site, but all three times that I tried I got an error message. (I've taken some screen shots with the errors in case those prove helpful to dx the problem).

I would be great to learn more about your goals as well as learn more about who is behind the project. Hope we can connect.

Best,
David
@daeaves

Re: Unstructured Thinking on Open Data: A response to Tom Slee

ditrain — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:35:48 -0000

Mike, thank you for the comment and the call out. I completely agree that I boffed that one as I was conflating the two projects. Will make the appropriate edit and please accept the apology.

Re: The End of the World: The State vs. the Internet

ditrain — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:09:39 -0000

Eniki,
Thank you for the comment - love the links, insights and suggested readings. Definitely will check them out!

Re: The End of the World: The State vs. the Internet

ditrain — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:07:17 -0000

Yes, Luke Closs reminded me of a great term around this - one way the state could decline is if gets hollowed out. There may actually be a fine line between being highly networked and hollowed out which may also make this hard to see happening.