[MyData & Open Data] Personal data & privacy logo

Sun Oct 26 10:41:45 UTC 2014

Hello everyone,

- "personal data & privacy" is indeed different from "mydata & open data"
- "mydata" is a slippery concept that carries lots of hidden assumptions
about "data ownership"

Therefore
- Having a group to discuss mydata (and its pitfalls) can be interesting
(but also time-consuming)
- I'd rather spend my time on a group focused on personal data &
privacy, including
  data portability, in a more "neutral" setting, as stef suggests it
(NB: this could also be a place to
  talk about mydata without taking its framing hypotheses for granted)
- Above all, I think maintaining confusion is misleading and dangerous

Have a nice day,

Lancelot

>> hence all our communication platforms including the Twitter account and
>> web/wiki pages were known as such. However, for some reason the mailing was
>> designated as 'mydata and open data' making it confusing even for us within
>> Open Knowledge.
> i also remember there was an initial blogpost that was so wrong i joined this
> mailing list immediately (i usually do not subscribe to any mailinglist)
>
>> people within the group are rightly interested in exploring the
>> possibilities of how individuals can manage their own data. As such we
>> would need to find a way to have that aspect also represented in how we
>> communicate about what the group is about.
>> I don't have an easy answer to how to resolve that confusion around the
>> names and how to harmonize them into one, but as there seems to be no
>> strong objections to either,
> either what? i tried to represent a very strong opposition to the mydata
> subversion.
>
>> I will leave it as it is for now. I have been
>> informed off-channel that in the near future, some members of the group are
>> interested in revisiting the constitution of the group (it's name, brand,
>> objectives vis a vis the role of Open Knowledge etc.).
> that sounds like propaganda stuff, how about either 1/ building up
> competences in this regard or 2/ accept the fact that this is outside OKF
> available capacities.
>
>> I of course have no objections to that and look forward to seeing how these
>> discussions evolve.