[MyData & Open Data] this group's thoughts on definitions

Thu Dec 19 21:13:46 UTC 2013

On 19 December 2013 16:22, stef <s at ctrlc.hu> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 03:48:02PM -0400, Song, Stephen wrote:
> > I agree with Stef although perhaps not for precisely the same reasons.
>
> :)
>
> > Lastly, I think the Gun Map debacle (
> > http://irevolution.net/2013/01/23/perils-of-crisis-mapping/) hints at
> the
> > needs for a more nuanced approach to privacy that is no longer the binary
> > option of open or closed.
>
> i do not see causality between one badly applied technology and your
> conclusion. i think this only shows that indeed there is a gap in
> understanding where and how to wield the "open data flag" responsibly. we
> should always make sure that we focus on publicly financed data or data,
> that
> pertains to the functions holding power over parts of our society. deans,
> politicians, law enforcement, banks, etc, must be transparent. civilians
> demonstrating, being generally victims, getting a pension or healthcare,
> etc
> must be protected. i believe, if this simple rule would've been applied the
> above might not have caused so much excitement. lastly, i think, this
> issue is
> of fundamental human rights, and as such i think we should contemplate the
> meaning of the word "fundamental" for a few minutes before we continue into
> "no longer black and white" land. ;)
>

In suggesting the need for a nuanced approached, I was getting at the fact
that what understand as open data can change qualitatively in a
frictionless environment.  Data that was available for someone to go by a
municipal office and look up record by record is not the same as a google
map pinpointing every record.  There was an element of practical obscurity
that disappeared with the Internet and data processing tools.  We see the
same in the discussion around the publication of court records which have
historically been open to the public but which may end up compromising
individuals when published on the net.  This address (
http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/sp-d/2011/sp-d_20111109_e.asp) by Canadian
Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart does a great job of unpacking the
tension between transparency and privacy in that context.  I can imagine a
scenario where it might be necessary to re-introduce some "friction" in
some situations such as the issue of court records.  What that friction
looks like might be some sort of differential access that might be
determined by the type of organisation requesting access or perhaps by
simply limiting the depth or number of queries that can be made.

Perhaps differential access sounds like heresy in an Open Data forum.  I
hope not.

Regards... Steve

>
> --
> pgp: https://www.ctrlc.hu/~stef/stef.gpg
> pgp fp: FD52 DABD 5224 7F9C 63C6  3C12 FC97 D29F CA05 57EF
> otr fp: https://www.ctrlc.hu/~stef/otr.txt
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/mydata-open-data/attachments/20131219/37426667/attachment-0003.html>