One Strike and They Miss the Point

On Open Enterprise blog.

From Smashup to Mashup

As somebody who is not wont to restrain himself when the UK government gets it hideously wrong on the IT front (hello, ID cards), it behoves me to offer a little praise when they get things right. This seems to be a rare and therefore welcome case of the latter:

The UK Government wants to hear your ideas for new products that could improve the way public information is communicated. The Power of Information Taskforce is running a competition on the Government's behalf, and we have a £20,000 prize fund to develop the best ideas to the next level. You can see the type of thing we are are looking for here.

To show they are serious, the Government is making available gigabytes of new or previously invisible public information especially for people to use in this competition. Rest assured, this competition does not include personal information about people.

We're confident that you'll have more and better ideas than we ever will. You don't have to have any technical knowledge, nor any money, just a good idea, and 5 minutes spare to enter the competition.

This is absolutely the kind of stuff that the powers-that-be should be encouraging. I'm not exactly wildly optimistic it will lead to a sea-change in their attitude to openness in general, but it's start. If you've ever had to suppress that wild urge to (s)mash up the UK government - and let's face it, who hasn't? - here's your big chance.

Do As I Say, Not As I Do

I've noted several times on this blog the tension between openness and privacy, but reading the excellent Your Right to Know blog - which, to my shame, I've only come across recently - another dimension became apparent.

This is the interesting contrast between what UK politicians want to do to us in terms of constant surveillance and intrusion into our private lives, and their own - outraged - refusal to allow us to do the same, even when it concerns them spending our money through their extremely generous allowances. For example, try this for hypocrisy:

However, I should tell those who press and press such issues that, sooner or later, the allowances will be rolled into our salary, handed out without any claim mechanism or dealt with under some other device, because it is intolerable that this intrusion into Members’ private lives should have to be endured or should be permitted, and something will happen to prevent it from going too far. We can see what will happen: local news reporters and local political opponents will start trying to air these issues in public, which will be demeaning, as well as reducing the stature of Parliament and damaging our democracy. It cannot be right that things should reach such lengths.”

Foneros, Beware

If you're a user of the clever FON wifi-sharing system, and think you are immune to eavesdropping by UK Government spies, think again. Here's what Martin Varsavsky, Sr. FON himself, has to say on the subject:

Fon has to provide special VPN tunneling technology in the UK for the UK secret services to investigate suspected criminals and terrorists when they log on to our WiFi signal.

"Various Forms of Coercion" for ID Cards an "Option"

This is one of the most despicable documents from the UK Government it has been my misfortune to read. Ostensibly, it is an objective "options analysis" for the introduction of the ID cards. But in its cynical, cold-blooded laying out of methods to ram the things down the population's throat, it reads more like a fascist manifesto. Take the following, for example:

Various forms of coercion, such as designation of the application process for identity documents issued by UK Ministers (e.g. passports), are an option to stimulate applications in a manageable way.

How much clearer do you need it, people?

UK Government Loses 15 Million Bank Details

This has to be about the most stupid security lapse in the history of computing:

Confidential details of 15 million child benefit recipients are on a computer disc lost by HM Revenue and Customs, the BBC understands.

Insult is added to injury:

Revenue and Customs says it does not believe the records - names, addresses and bank accounts - have fallen into the wrong hands.

Yeah? And they know that precisely how - because they're psychic, perhaps?

And then the UK government wants us to trust them with our IDs, too? If we did, how long before the odd 60 million IDs get "lost"? At least you can change your bank details - you don't have that option with your identity.

Update 1: What's really heartening is that a surprisingly large proportion of those commenting here on the BBC story spot the ID card connection....

Update 2: Better make that 25 million bank details, plus key data on all children in the UK.

UK Government Votes for e-Voting Quagmire

The UK Government has this crazy idea about IT: that if they say "make it so" often enough, it is so. But what they fail to realise is that complex IT projects are, er, complex, and often/usually go wrong. Stamping your pretty little foot ain't gonna fix it. As a result of this institutional ignorance/stupidity/wilfulness, it looks like the government is ploughing on with the doomed e-voting idea. When will they ever learn?

eForum Follow-up

While I was at the Westminster eForum last week I had the pleasure of meeting Vic Keegan finally. Vic used to edit the Technology pages on the Guardian, and commissioned a number of features from me for it, but I'd never met up with him until now.

I was pleased to see that he drew on some of the stats mentioned at the forum for his column in today's Guardian, bemoaning the scandalous indifference of the present UK Government towards open source. This, in its turn, has provoked Alan Lord into a fine rant that draws together a number of related threads.

DNA = Don't Need it All

A group of eminent lawyers and scientists is calling for anyone not convicted of a crime to have their details wiped from the DNA database.

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics said it is "unjustified" to keep people on the National DNA Database when they have not been convicted of any offence.

Some four million DNA samples are on the police's database.

Good to see some sensible thinking in this area; pity the government won't take a blind bit of notice.

Telling the Ordnance Survey to Get Lost

Ordnance Survey is trying to get Web 2.0 hip:

explore is a new beta application from Ordnance Survey, allowing you to create and share your routes with the world, and join in with ones that already exist. Find out more about explore.

As this is a new application we need your help to build up the content. Please submit your routes and make explore a useful and exciting tool for all our users.

So it wants to tap into user-generated content. Which would be fine, were it not for the fact it doesn't play fair: its maps, funded directly by taxpayers, and often drawing on information provided by local authorities, also funded by taxpayers, aren't made freely available to those self-same taxpayers (ever heard of open access, chaps?). Why should people contribute to an enclosed commons? This is our data: free it, and then we'll make it soar.

Bottom line: ignore this until the Ordnance Survey (and its masters in the UK Government that lay down how the service must operate) get a real clue. (Via Ogle Earth.)

The End of the Copyright Ratchet/Racket?

Will this response from the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport go down in history as the great turning point for copyright, when the constant extension ratchet was halted and eventually reversed?

Maybe I'm an incurably optimist, but I have to say I was pretty impressed by the generally sane tone of this document after years of industry-driven exaggeration about "piracy" and such-like. The best demonstration of this comes right at the end, where the earlier proposal by the House of Commons Culture Committee to extend the term of copyright in sound recordings is discussed. Here's what the report has to say:

The Government appreciates the work of the Committee and the deliberation it has given to this subject. As the Committee noted,the independent Gowers Review also considered this issue in detail and recommended that the European Commission retain a term of protection for sound recordings and performers of 50 years. The Review undertook a detailed analysis of all the arguments put forward,including the moral arguments regarding the treatment of performers. It concluded that an extension would not benefit the majority of performers,most of whom have contractual relationships requiring their royalties be paid back to the record label. It also concluded that an extension would have a negative impact on the balance of trade and that it would not increase incentives to create new works.Furthermore,it considered not just the impact on the music industry but on the economy as a whole,and concluded that an extension would lead to increased costs to industry,such as those who use music – whether to provide ambience in a shop or restaurant or for TV or radio broadcasting – and to consumers who would have to pay royalties for longer. In reaching such conclusions,the Review took account of the question of parity with other countries such as the US,and concluded that,although royalties were payable for longer there,the total amount was likely to be similar – or possibly less – as there were fewer revenue streams available under the US system.

This is doubly important, because it will have important knock-on effects beyond the UK. As Becky Hogge of the Open Rights Groups rightly points out:

This is significant, since the UK government is likely to have a disproportionately loud voice on this issue both because it is home to the most lucrative recording industry in Europe and because it has taken the time to review this issue in detail.

So we have the prospect of Europe following the UK's lead in halting the constant copyright extension. This, in its turn, will help to put a brake on such copyright extensions around the world, since there will no longer be the argument that "eveyone else is doing it, we must follow suit". Maybe it's too much to hope that in due course copyright terms will start to be reduced - but then, as I said, I'm an incurable optimist.

Up and At 'Em, Mappam

OpenStreetMap has always been one of my favourite open endeavours. It's a fine example of people getting fed up with official intransigence - in this case of the UK Government refusing to release public geodata - and getting off their bums to do something, rather than just whinge about it as others (like me) do.

So it's particularly gratifying to see that the chaps behind it are launching a geodata-related business, called Mappam:

Mappam helps you make money by adding relevant ads targeted to the exact place your visitors are browsing.

It's easy to set up and works with all the big web map services - Google, Yahoo!, Microsoft, MultiMap and OpenStreetMap/OpenLayers.

Let's hope they've, er, found a way to make lots of dosh. (Via OpenBusiness.)

Government Glimmers: Open Source, Open Data

Kudos:

An online calculator that enables people to work out their carbon footprint was launched by Environment Secretary, David Miliband today.

Defra’s Act on CO2 calculator is designed to increase understanding of the link between individual action and climate change, through carbon dioxide emissions. It also raises awareness of the different actions people can take in their everyday lives to help tackle climate change.

Double kudos:

The software that runs the calculator, complete with the Government data, will be made freely available under general public licence. This will enable others wanting to use the software to power their own calculators, using their own branding.

Wow: open source and open data. (Via Open Source Weblog.)

Just Plain Wrong

I've noticed an interesting new meme creeping into UK politics. When the Government is presented with a statement or facts that it doesn't like, it doesn't condescend to refute them; instead it simply states they are "just plain wrong". End of argument, end of story, go away little person.

Call is the anti-open meme.

Vote for ODF

Undeterred by the fact that Our Tone simply ignored our last petition to dump ID cards, I've signed up for another one, this time calling for ODF to be used in UK government. If you're a citizen of Perfidious Albion, you might like to do the same.

Not that it will make a huge difference, but I think we have a responsibility to (a) use these new tools for democracy and (b) force the UK Government to repeat its pathetic excuses for not supporting eminently reasonable ideas. There's also increasing evidence that the e-petition site is turning into a thorn in the goverment's side - reason enough to keep using it.

Open-Mouthed...

...I am, if this "sea-change" turns out to be true (a sceptic of the UK Government writes):

The way the government makes its vast amounts of data available to the public could be about to change.

It has decided to make access to a database of UK laws completely free for the public to access and re-use.

It marks a "sea-change" in the way government information becomes available to the public, a senior civil servant has told the BBC News website.

Please, please, please, please, please.

On the Statute Book

Great that we've finally been granted free beer access to our laws; pity that it's not free as in freedom. And, of course, positively treasonable, that we don't have access to the original Anglo-Norman texts. (Via Open Knowledge Foundation.)

Scanning the Big Delta

"Delta Scan" sounds like one of those appalling airport potboilers involving mad scientists, terrorists and implausibly durable secret agents, but it's actually something much more exciting: an attempt to peek into the future of our science and technology. A hopeless task, clearly, but worth attempting if only as a five-neuron exercise.

The results are remarkably rich; considerable credit must go to the UK's Office of Science and Innovation for commissioning the report and - particularly - making it freely available. I was glad to see that there are plenty of links in the documents, which are short and to the point. Great for, er, scanning.

ID'ing Reality

The truth begins to sink in:

The government has abandoned plans for a giant new computer system to run the national identity cards scheme.

Instead of a single multi-billion pound system, information will be held on three existing, separate databases.

Well, that's a start. Just as hopeful is the statement:

Home Secretary John Reid denied this was a "U-turn" saying it would save cash, boost efficiency and cut fraud.

So, presumably cancelling the whole thing would also not be a "U-turn", since it too "would save cash, boost efficiency and cut fraud"....

Guilty Even When Proven Innocent

The Great UK DNA Database Lie continues to grow. Despite Government efforts to paint this as a deeply necessary tool to catch all those wicked evil people out there - "if you're innocent, you have nothing to fear" etc. etc. - it is increasingly becoming clear that, in the interests of total control, it is trying to create a DNA database of everyone.

As The Reg explains:

Less than two thirds of people whose profile is stored on the National DNA Database are there for having been cautioned or convicted of a criminal offence, Home Office figures have revealed.

In response to a parliamentary question, John Reid last week responded that 3,457,000 individuals are on the database, but 1,139,445 have no criminal record. The figure is eight times the total of 139,463 reported by the Home Office Earlier in March.

That's over 2% of the UK population that shouldn't be on there: only another 95% to go.