Archive for the ‘civic garden’ Category

disappointed by the debates? be the change

Thursday, April 17th, 2008

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, melanoma our capacity to work together for a better city, cheapest and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fall short when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

This model is the embodiment of a fair amount of wisdom. In the local issues forums certain guidelines and constraints are necessary to safeguard the spirit and intention of civic space. Participants are expected to identify with a real name; everyone is limited to two posts a day; and topics are focused on our lives within the polity, from a local frame. In terms of technology – there is a sensible bridging of modes of online interaction. members can participate through email, through the web forum or they can keep up with the discussion via RSS feeds. None of these technologies are new, but they aren’t exactly going away either. They are widespread in use, and they represent a framework that can be built upon.

I know there is probably temptation for the civic minded tech group to roll your own, or perhaps make use of “groups” tools on well-known sites. I thought a lot about those options myself. It was easier for me to dismiss the latter as not being the best strategy for an effort intending to foster civic discourse. First, there is the issue of whether the public/commercial site will persist over the long haul or whether it’s policies might fundamentally change. Second there is the general issue of “joining” a site and submitting oneself to the terms of use under which your personal data is regarded as an asset they might trade upon, and where you are the object of marketing which relates directly to the third issue I’ll address in relation to this … maintaining the civic discourse in a space free from commercial speech (i.e. advertising).

I haven’t addressed the issues around “rolling your own” civic forum … certainly with the diffusion of open source content management systems such as Drupal, setting up a forum is relatively easy.

Establishing a successful online community isn’t as easy. Earlier I brought up the notion of “ownership” and perceptions of constituency building and branding opportunities that come up when a group launches efforts like this. We bypass those pitfalls in promoting the e-Democracy model. We’re not making a claim of ownership over the initiative – except in broadest sense of collective ownership. The other issue is that you are going to have to make a lot of design choices, and while exploring the technical issues is a topic of interest to me and many in the circles I frequent, it’s going to delay the effort, and the group may drop the project or worse the effort may fork based on ego or conflicting tech-philosophy.

Who’s with me?

Got Data? 8 bright IDEAs for Chicago

Wednesday, March 12th, 2008

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

Get Illinois Online: Join the conversation

Wednesday, February 27th, 2008

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Join Us as Community Advocates & Web Innovators

ChicagoNet2Tuesdays

Join us, tuberculosis so Chicago can grow more technology savvy social change organizations that benefit our local communities.

Staff and volunteers of non-profits, viagra 40mg web innovators, prosthetic and any individuals pushing for change are encouraged to attend. Come tell us about your effort, your concerns, and what you need and want from a collective of like-minded individuals and organizations.

“Net Tuesday” meetings are a program of NetSquared whose mission is to spur responsible adoption of social web tools by social benefit organizations.

NetSquared is a project of TechSoup (http://www.techsoup.org) the technology place for nonprofits.

RSVP to Aaron With at The Point, please, so we can be sure to have adequate refreshments for your enjoyment: aaron@thepoint.com or call 312.676.4535.

Public Transportation: 600 W. Chicago is a 4 block walk west from the Chicago stop on the Brown Line. The Chicago Avenue (#66) bus drops you off directly in front of the building at Larabee.

Parking Information: There is some limited free parking 1-2 blocks North on Larabee. Metered parking on Chicago 1-3 blocks East, though this is often taken. Paid parking across the street from our building costs $6 for under 2 hours and $8 for 2-4 hours..

Call Aaron at 312.676.4535, if you need information about getting to The Point.

Our first meeting will be hosted and sponsored by The Point, a new group action network that helps people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen.

Organizers:

Demetrio Maguigad, New Media Manager with Community Media Workshop at Columbia College, manages online new media projects, and also conducts community-based popular education workshops.

Michael Maranda – promoting digital excellence, media & social justice through purposive community.

David Marques is an IT Coordinator with the Southwest Youth Collaborative, a community-based youth services and activist agency.

Justin Massa is executive director of MoveSmart.org, a startup non-profit organization that promotes racial and economic integration through technology.

Jean Russell nurtures nonprofit leaders and weaves networks for social change (nurture.biz).

Aaron With is a Community Organizer for The Point and has a background working with Chicago non-profits.


Date: Tuesday, March 11th, 2008

Time: 6pm-7:30pm

Location: The Point

600 W. Chicago Ave, Suite 830

(entrance is North on Larabee)

Chicago, IL 60610

Co-convene with us.

UPDATE: We have a Meetup group (and a Facebook group)!

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Join Us as Community Advocates & Web Innovators

ChicagoNet2Tuesdays

Join us, tuberculosis so Chicago can grow more technology savvy social change organizations that benefit our local communities.

Staff and volunteers of non-profits, viagra 40mg web innovators, prosthetic and any individuals pushing for change are encouraged to attend. Come tell us about your effort, your concerns, and what you need and want from a collective of like-minded individuals and organizations.

“Net Tuesday” meetings are a program of NetSquared whose mission is to spur responsible adoption of social web tools by social benefit organizations.

NetSquared is a project of TechSoup (http://www.techsoup.org) the technology place for nonprofits.

RSVP to Aaron With at The Point, please, so we can be sure to have adequate refreshments for your enjoyment: aaron@thepoint.com or call 312.676.4535.

Public Transportation: 600 W. Chicago is a 4 block walk west from the Chicago stop on the Brown Line. The Chicago Avenue (#66) bus drops you off directly in front of the building at Larabee.

Parking Information: There is some limited free parking 1-2 blocks North on Larabee. Metered parking on Chicago 1-3 blocks East, though this is often taken. Paid parking across the street from our building costs $6 for under 2 hours and $8 for 2-4 hours..

Call Aaron at 312.676.4535, if you need information about getting to The Point.

Our first meeting will be hosted and sponsored by The Point, a new group action network that helps people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen.

Organizers:

Demetrio Maguigad, New Media Manager with Community Media Workshop at Columbia College, manages online new media projects, and also conducts community-based popular education workshops.

Michael Maranda – promoting digital excellence, media & social justice through purposive community.

David Marques is an IT Coordinator with the Southwest Youth Collaborative, a community-based youth services and activist agency.

Justin Massa is executive director of MoveSmart.org, a startup non-profit organization that promotes racial and economic integration through technology.

Jean Russell nurtures nonprofit leaders and weaves networks for social change (nurture.biz).

Aaron With is a Community Organizer for The Point and has a background working with Chicago non-profits.


Date: Tuesday, March 11th, 2008

Time: 6pm-7:30pm

Location: The Point

600 W. Chicago Ave, Suite 830

(entrance is North on Larabee)

Chicago, IL 60610

Co-convene with us.

UPDATE: We have a Meetup group (and a Facebook group)!

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Join Us as Community Advocates & Web Innovators

ChicagoNet2Tuesdays

Join us, tuberculosis so Chicago can grow more technology savvy social change organizations that benefit our local communities.

Staff and volunteers of non-profits, viagra 40mg web innovators, prosthetic and any individuals pushing for change are encouraged to attend. Come tell us about your effort, your concerns, and what you need and want from a collective of like-minded individuals and organizations.

“Net Tuesday” meetings are a program of NetSquared whose mission is to spur responsible adoption of social web tools by social benefit organizations.

NetSquared is a project of TechSoup (http://www.techsoup.org) the technology place for nonprofits.

RSVP to Aaron With at The Point, please, so we can be sure to have adequate refreshments for your enjoyment: aaron@thepoint.com or call 312.676.4535.

Public Transportation: 600 W. Chicago is a 4 block walk west from the Chicago stop on the Brown Line. The Chicago Avenue (#66) bus drops you off directly in front of the building at Larabee.

Parking Information: There is some limited free parking 1-2 blocks North on Larabee. Metered parking on Chicago 1-3 blocks East, though this is often taken. Paid parking across the street from our building costs $6 for under 2 hours and $8 for 2-4 hours..

Call Aaron at 312.676.4535, if you need information about getting to The Point.

Our first meeting will be hosted and sponsored by The Point, a new group action network that helps people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen.

Organizers:

Demetrio Maguigad, New Media Manager with Community Media Workshop at Columbia College, manages online new media projects, and also conducts community-based popular education workshops.

Michael Maranda – promoting digital excellence, media & social justice through purposive community.

David Marques is an IT Coordinator with the Southwest Youth Collaborative, a community-based youth services and activist agency.

Justin Massa is executive director of MoveSmart.org, a startup non-profit organization that promotes racial and economic integration through technology.

Jean Russell nurtures nonprofit leaders and weaves networks for social change (nurture.biz).

Aaron With is a Community Organizer for The Point and has a background working with Chicago non-profits.


Date: Tuesday, March 11th, 2008

Time: 6pm-7:30pm

Location: The Point

600 W. Chicago Ave, Suite 830

(entrance is North on Larabee)

Chicago, IL 60610

Co-convene with us.

UPDATE: We have a Meetup group (and a Facebook group)!

G I O – Get Illinois Online. We’ve been hosting an email conversation for several years. Join the conversation.

Google Groups
Subscribe to GIO-Talk
Email:
Visit this group

There is also a more Chicago-centric mailing list, this web here:

Google Groups
Subscribe to GIO-Chicago
Email:
Visit this group

Truer than Truth

Thursday, January 10th, 2008

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

There’s a confessional book out on the New Hampshire “phone jamming” effort to impact the elections back in 2002. The author was interviewed on Democracy Now (Tuesday, generic Jan 8 2008). His work in New Hampshire and New Jersey under the direction of leadership is a emblematic of the most impoverished war mentality: winning at all costs.

Witness the two examples offered: first, the “phone jamming” … the overloading of the phone system at the NH democratic campaign offices embodies a straight-forward tactic in warfare, it amounts to taking out communications of your opponent. (Do you hear an echo of Sun Tzu?)

A second example, fits the category of psychological operations … creating pre-recorded messages simulating an automated phone message campaign of the democrats, republican operatives played upon racial fears and labor force insecurity by using minority voices/accents in NJ. Ugly rumors, manipulation of media messages, cultural stereotypes in the general school of low-rhetoric has become accepted. Impersonation of the opponent’s communications, and selective targeting of their likely supporters with divisive messages is significantly more calculated and abhorent.

(Other infamous moments in electoral history reek of the war mentality and speak poorly of our national politics: watergate – irangate.)

Party leadership (of any party) should not conduct itself in a manner beneath the dignity of our republic. Playing hard and playing to win – i.e. with determination – are not the same as winning at any costs. (We can debate this, but I think that even in war, we should not seek to “win at any cost”.) If in our politics we aim for a simple majority of the votes that are counted… partisan electioneers will tend to lose interest in a whole and healthy polity in the scramble for what amounts to a cheapened “victory”.

There’s a lot of room for criticism of our political system… winner take all appears much less attractive than proportional representation (beyond the two-party system), alternative run-off and consensus building paradigms.

Winning at all costs has a deleterious effect… it debases all involved. (But, as debasing as phone jamming and domestic psy-ops may be – challenging voter eligibility and undermining the integrity of the ballot system seem more nefarious. The former being a mean spirited and perhaps racially charged invoking of the letter of the law, the latter demoralizing those who might otherwise argue that our system works despite it’s flaws.)

I’m once again brought back to Kant’s maxim: never fight (a war) in such a manner that would preclude a future peace. I try to apply this at many layers of my life… personal relationships, issue advocacy, political rhetoric. It places one in a very different mind than the war profiteers and war mongers who are vested in perpetual domination and conflict.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

There’s a confessional book out on the New Hampshire “phone jamming” effort to impact the elections back in 2002. The author was interviewed on Democracy Now (Tuesday, generic Jan 8 2008). His work in New Hampshire and New Jersey under the direction of leadership is a emblematic of the most impoverished war mentality: winning at all costs.

Witness the two examples offered: first, the “phone jamming” … the overloading of the phone system at the NH democratic campaign offices embodies a straight-forward tactic in warfare, it amounts to taking out communications of your opponent. (Do you hear an echo of Sun Tzu?)

A second example, fits the category of psychological operations … creating pre-recorded messages simulating an automated phone message campaign of the democrats, republican operatives played upon racial fears and labor force insecurity by using minority voices/accents in NJ. Ugly rumors, manipulation of media messages, cultural stereotypes in the general school of low-rhetoric has become accepted. Impersonation of the opponent’s communications, and selective targeting of their likely supporters with divisive messages is significantly more calculated and abhorent.

(Other infamous moments in electoral history reek of the war mentality and speak poorly of our national politics: watergate – irangate.)

Party leadership (of any party) should not conduct itself in a manner beneath the dignity of our republic. Playing hard and playing to win – i.e. with determination – are not the same as winning at any costs. (We can debate this, but I think that even in war, we should not seek to “win at any cost”.) If in our politics we aim for a simple majority of the votes that are counted… partisan electioneers will tend to lose interest in a whole and healthy polity in the scramble for what amounts to a cheapened “victory”.

There’s a lot of room for criticism of our political system… winner take all appears much less attractive than proportional representation (beyond the two-party system), alternative run-off and consensus building paradigms.

Winning at all costs has a deleterious effect… it debases all involved. (But, as debasing as phone jamming and domestic psy-ops may be – challenging voter eligibility and undermining the integrity of the ballot system seem more nefarious. The former being a mean spirited and perhaps racially charged invoking of the letter of the law, the latter demoralizing those who might otherwise argue that our system works despite it’s flaws.)

I’m once again brought back to Kant’s maxim: never fight (a war) in such a manner that would preclude a future peace. I try to apply this at many layers of my life… personal relationships, issue advocacy, political rhetoric. It places one in a very different mind than the war profiteers and war mongers who are vested in perpetual domination and conflict.

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

Excellent framing of consumption.

What’s a tasty domain? The domain you want! (and sometimes the domain you had….)

Slashdot points to an important story for those following Internet/ICANN policy issues.

Domain Tasting occurs through a nice set of loopholes in Internet domain name governance. Some feel that the market will eventually sort this out, approved and others think that this much abused policy is a nice perk of the industry.

Most tasting occurs in what is known as the ‘add grace period” (agp) … a window of 5 days in which a domain can be returned to the pool of unregistered domains, more about but tasting can also occur after a domain expires.

Tasting refers to determining whether the domain has value… value has some subjective dimensions here, but two rather reductionist perspectives narrow in on whether 1) a domain is likely to attract plenty of traffic (so that even when parked it can generate profit) or 2) there are parties who will pay a premium price for control of that domain. This boils down to “what financial value can be extracted from control or resale of the domain.

A domain name being held by a Taster may be returned to the pool of unregistered names before the grace period ends at no cost… (excepting the case of .org domains, PIR.org having instituted a nominal restocking fee to dis-incent this behavior.

Tasting connects to a number of behaviors that may be detrimental to the name system and against the interest of Internet users in general.

Tasting identifies domains which can be snapped up and taken from the unregistered pool and which can be made profitable to the owner, but largely useless to everyone else (i.e. more noise and unavailable to meaningful development). If it looks like a domain is likely to generate revenue that would cover the cost of buying it, it makes perfect sense for them to hold on to it.

We have domain holders interested only in what they can monetize out of the domain … we have registrars engaged in holding domains in the add-grace and redemptive-grace period… we have perpetual holding of domains in successive registration and dropping of the same domain within add-grace provision…

Value of a domain should be more than this narrow sense of financial return.

The value of domains to the informational commons (the Internet) should also be considered.

The add-grace period may have made sense in the past. The Internet community would probably be better without it, but following the PIR lead, restocking fees may offer a partial solution. It’s a strategy favored by many as a solution to tasting.

However, if tasting is but one aspect of the behaviors in the domain ecology we shouldn’t treat it in isolation. Unfortunately the ICANN policy process favors segmenting some important issues (tasting, kiting, etc.) This divide the issues and conquer strategy benefits certain constituencies at the expense of others and at the expense of Internet users at large (all of us).

If we got rid of the add-grace period entirely… what would be the disadvantage to that? Think about it: a domain registration isn’t a large expense. The value of the time spent by an end user in the process of registering a domain, and dealing with the registrar easily outstrips the registration expense. (Just calculate the time spent by a modest hourly approximation of earning potential of the person in question.)

If we are talking about any scenario that isn’t a bulk processing of domains, the end user’s time (and the potential time of anyone he’d have to interact with assuming even the slightest possibility of a non-automated interaction) it makes no sense to have the AGP at all! If you bought it you bought it… let there be a restocking fee or return it to the pool (with no refund) if you made a mistake and don’t want to develop it. In short it doesnt save any legitimate buyer any real expense to be able to return a domain during AGP. (imagine the hurdles just in dealing directly with the registrar)

And in the case of bulk processing of domains, what basis would there be for return of domains other than your tasting didn’t return signs adequate value?

So, again, what domain is really tasty? The domain you want. Who has an inkling you might want a domain? A registrar where you checked the availability of a given domain name. They’re in a privileged position if you don’t take the domain. They’re also in a very privileged position if you fail to renew your domain in time, and they stand to make a nice profit off what was once your domain in that scenario. They may even play you off against others all the while offering to act in your interest for a premium price.

But that’s another topic. Or is it?

There’s a confessional book out on the New Hampshire “phone jamming” effort to impact the elections back in 2002. The author was interviewed on Democracy Now (Tuesday, generic Jan 8 2008). His work in New Hampshire and New Jersey under the direction of leadership is a emblematic of the most impoverished war mentality: winning at all costs.

Witness the two examples offered: first, the “phone jamming” … the overloading of the phone system at the NH democratic campaign offices embodies a straight-forward tactic in warfare, it amounts to taking out communications of your opponent. (Do you hear an echo of Sun Tzu?)

A second example, fits the category of psychological operations … creating pre-recorded messages simulating an automated phone message campaign of the democrats, republican operatives played upon racial fears and labor force insecurity by using minority voices/accents in NJ. Ugly rumors, manipulation of media messages, cultural stereotypes in the general school of low-rhetoric has become accepted. Impersonation of the opponent’s communications, and selective targeting of their likely supporters with divisive messages is significantly more calculated and abhorent.

(Other infamous moments in electoral history reek of the war mentality and speak poorly of our national politics: watergate – irangate.)

Party leadership (of any party) should not conduct itself in a manner beneath the dignity of our republic. Playing hard and playing to win – i.e. with determination – are not the same as winning at any costs. (We can debate this, but I think that even in war, we should not seek to “win at any cost”.) If in our politics we aim for a simple majority of the votes that are counted… partisan electioneers will tend to lose interest in a whole and healthy polity in the scramble for what amounts to a cheapened “victory”.

There’s a lot of room for criticism of our political system… winner take all appears much less attractive than proportional representation (beyond the two-party system), alternative run-off and consensus building paradigms.

Winning at all costs has a deleterious effect… it debases all involved. (But, as debasing as phone jamming and domestic psy-ops may be – challenging voter eligibility and undermining the integrity of the ballot system seem more nefarious. The former being a mean spirited and perhaps racially charged invoking of the letter of the law, the latter demoralizing those who might otherwise argue that our system works despite it’s flaws.)

I’m once again brought back to Kant’s maxim: never fight (a war) in such a manner that would preclude a future peace. I try to apply this at many layers of my life… personal relationships, issue advocacy, political rhetoric. It places one in a very different mind than the war profiteers and war mongers who are vested in perpetual domination and conflict.

I’m taking a course on storytelling. Although I have been involved in community informatics for several years as an activist and organizer on digital divide/digital excellence and community networking, resuscitator I found this work to involve the telling of stories and general reframing community and what we are about, more about or what is possible for us.

I was watching a video from the TED conference where Isabel Allende offered the old adage: What is truer than truth? The story. (Variants on this answer may be a matter of translation: Legend, Myth, Story, Narrative.)

I grew up on Grimm, and many mythologies… great preparation for an early encounter with Joseph Campbell via the Power of Myth (where Bill Moyers, another hero, interviewed him). I later made extensive study of semiotics and have an enduring interest in narrative, and the importance of story and discourse.

In recent years Italo Calvino brought me back to the play of stories/storytelling in the work of the OuLiPo — where art is craft that you work at each day, and good art or literature arises from finding the right combination of signs through experiment and experienced judgment.

Campbell’s work on myth and ritual, the idea of the story opening a path to greater truth than mere facts, or perhaps a greater truth in discourse around a story than in any particular telling or offering of an account, and the idea in Calvino that folktale is not myth degenerated but that myth arises out of folktale when the right combination his hit upon, these are all connected.

Storytelling is part of the natural and necessary repertoire of human behavior… it helps us cope and adapt as well as honor and remember. Though stories can be used to divide, their healing potential is critical in this moment. Our creative play can reconfigure our individuality and our collective life.

Don’t be sold an invisible thread, get all the threads your community needs

Monday, August 20th, 2007

Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
From: http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/

The Keep The Core Neutral Coalition is committed to protecting freedom of expression and innovation in domain name policy at ICANN.

This means basing gTLD-approval policy on criteria of only a technical/operational and related nature, prostate and refraining from embedding any particular national, regional, moral, or religious policy objectives into global ICANN policy.

http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/join

(more…)

Minneapolis’ Digital Inclusion Fund RFP

Sunday, August 5th, 2007

Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
From: http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/

The Keep The Core Neutral Coalition is committed to protecting freedom of expression and innovation in domain name policy at ICANN.

This means basing gTLD-approval policy on criteria of only a technical/operational and related nature, prostate and refraining from embedding any particular national, regional, moral, or religious policy objectives into global ICANN policy.

http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/join

(more…)

3 critical aspects of public communications & technology projects and an inconvenient truth

Saturday, August 4th, 2007

Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Whether public or private and whatever the scope, food there are three critical aspects to any communications or technology project:

  1. the ownership and business model, cure
  2. the state of the technology (physics/network/system considerations), and
  3. the purpose (or purposes).

Of course these aspects are interwoven, but each heading stands on its own, and we can determine a logical flow for project planning. We’ll need clarity on each, and anything less would be irresponsible.

Consider public communications initiatives such as municipal (or more accurately, city-wide) wireless and broadband networks as have been the focus of many cities and towns across the country, including Chicago.

The inconvenient truth about communications infrastructure (and other public technology) projects is that we’re horribly irresponsible about achieving the clarity needed in these three areas for a good outcome.

Our tendency has been to take the ownership and business model for granted (let industry do it!), to accept the technology on offer by the vendors, and to build a constituency for the network among different interest groups with claims that the network will meet their needs and desires.

We’re doing this bass-ackwards, we’re costing the people, the public, a lot of money (in aggregate, and individually), and we aren’t getting the reliability and functionality we should be getting from these networks.

Network purpose (or purposes) and character should be the logical driver of the process. Purpose should drive technology choice and together these should map out the options for ownership and business model.

We shouldn’t accept any limitation on the ownership/business model options without a deep and clear understanding of the network purpose and the sort of reliability, functionality and accountability that purpose demands. Too much effort is spent in debates and lobbying promulgated by the usual suspects, the purveyors of networks. Unchecked, each vendor’s biased agenda with respect to business model and ready-technology warps public deliberation.

All too often, American cities have closed the doors to viable ownership models as a result of lobbying and tactical rhetoric. To state the case more strongly: they do so at great cost to the public and to the commonweal; they do not serve our interests well, they do not proceed with clarity of public purpose.

What are the ownership models? We can build, buy, or rent. If we take business as our paradigmatic example, big businesses tend to build and buy their own networks whenever they can. Doesn’t it make as much sense for communities and for local governments to do likewise?

I’ve spent a lot of time arguing which of the three aspects should drive the other, and why the business-ownership model should not drive the process. Exploring the technology and the purposes of the network are a lot more work, but that is where we should be directing our attention.

I’ll only briefly mention that the range of technology options is more constrained by a policy regime then it is by the physics and network design.

The definition of network purposes is left as an exercise for your community.