Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Does Open Data Have a Dark Side?

Posted by samzenpus on from the the-good-and-the-bad dept.

itwbennett writes A Forbes article last month explored some of the potentially darker sides of open data — from creating a new kind of digital divide to making an argument in favor of privatizing certain government services. But how real are these downsides of open data? The World Wide Web Foundation's Open Data Program Manager Jose Alonso is unconcerned, telling ITworld's Phil Johnson via email that the WWWF "believes there is no substantial evidence yet that the availability of Open Data leads to the marketization of public services or public spending cuts." But Ben Wellington, a professor in the City & Regional Planning program at the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York and author of the popular blog I Quant NY, takes a more cautious stance, acknowledging that there are some real concerns that may call for regulation. But, at least for now, "there's a lot more innovation and positive things coming out than these corner cases," says Wellington.

1 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. Privatization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Critics of the government can use open data to make a case for cuts in government spending on public services, potentially leading to the privatization of such services and related assets.

    How the fuck is this even remotely a "dark side" of open data?

    If the government is wasting money on a program that can be served at a lower cost by private industry... that seems like a benefit to me. Now, there's certainly the risk that "somebody will distort the data" -- but after all, if the data is open, anybody with Excel and a little bit of time should be able to refute the conclusions of the person doing the distortion.

    Only in the eyes of Slashdot would "somebody criticizing the government and arguing in favor of privatization of wastefully-managed services" be a bad thing. Repeat after me, Slashdotters: government services are not a fact of nature to be unquestioningly accepted and blindly supported. Fuck, you lot spend more time questioning ACTUAL laws of nature than you do the proper role of your government.

    And to head off the "hurr durr Ayn Rand reader alert neocon" tards: I am neither Randian nor Republican. I am a fan of *objectively* assessing the performance of my government and killing programs that are less effective and efficient than equivalent services that could be provided by some other non-governmental organization. In other words, I am in favor of using open data to measure and improve the efficiency of government.