The the only sentiment I take from the article is that wealthy countries are open with their data compared to poorer countries, which author seems to believe, are intentionally hiding things.
That does not sit well with me. I'm from Canada and have spent a decade making use of gov't data and while Canada does open up a bunch of it, 90% of what they open is benign. The important data, or rather the data which would expose problems, is kept from the public.
These wealthy countries also have other ways to hide even the open data from prying eyes, they simply charge high prices for the data. This easily prevents the general public, who would use the data more critically, from actually using the data.
The "why" in the headline strongly hints at some sort of causal relationship, but the article only goes so far as to point out the obvious correlation. The "why" is never answered at all.
I suspect wealthy countries release a much smaller proportion of total data. I would wager there are exabytes of phone calls and satellite imagery, heck, raw census data is probably pretty elaborate (though not on the same scale). what fraction of that data do we actually have access to? i'd guess it's a pretty small number.
I should read the OP, for as a quick comment, for me it comes down to cooperation versus competition. And for cooperation to succeed, there needs to be effective communication and a shared understanding (albeit not necessarily or even desirably "perfect" and without diverging opinions).
P.S. I was interrupted by a phone call. The other point I wanted to make, building off of the above, is that humans have created more and more complex results through cooperation than competition alone. I view cooperation as an essential part of modern society and progress.
This is an open data metric conceived by the creators of Sim City. What's important is what data they have, not what data a primitive city-state might have. And the resultant list is a complete farce: the UK and US is at the top next to Denmark. Russia has a score in openness about government spending that is 7-fold higher than Norway.
Can anybody explain why Moldova is doing so well with this despite being so poor?
I can see various initiatives they have undertaken that would get them moving in the right direction such as joining the Open Development Technology Alliance (ODTA) - but I can't figure out the underlying reasons for success.
The responses I got here pretty much confirm my thoughts that HN is mostly inhabited by people who are either angry, too serious, or a combination of the two. I deal with all kinds of people, but this is bad for your health, folks! :)
Making inflammatory comments with no supporting material, reasoning or other form of exposition does nothing to inform or encourage useful discourse.
Even if you had a point (I'm not claiming anything one way or the other) that point is poorly served by a flippant passing comment. Why would being a wealthy country make someone more adept at misleading their populace? If they were, what would be the benefit?
As a PhD student doing research in data analysis, I support governments being open with data whole heartedly. UK government schemes like this [1] are invaluable.
Well put. I'm definitely a "never assume the government is telling the truth" person, but even if finishingmove were right in this case (I don't think the idea that wealthy governments release false data explicitly for the purpose of misleading people when they could just not release it is compelling, but hey, they've probably done stranger things), the GP hasn't even hinted at context or support for such a statement here.
"I don't think the idea that wealthy governments release false data explicitly for the purpose of misleading people when they could just not release it is compelling"
1. Arousing passion or strong emotion, especially anger, belligerence, or desire.
My comment was definitely not inflammatory in nature. Being the author of my comment, I'm pretty sure I have higher authority than you to be the judge of this. It was meant to be thought-provoking, in a very casual way. But that doesn't seem to be appreciated on HN (my general impression) Hint: don't take everything so seriously.
"Why would being a wealthy country make someone more adept at misleading their populace? If they were, what would be the benefit?
As a PhD student..."
A wise man once said (can't remember where the quote originates from), "The purpose of doing a PhD is learning how to learn" (paraphrased). I hope that the experience will help you answer your own questions, in a few years. For now, just use your imagination...
Arguing that, as the author of your comment, you are more capable of judging how inflammatory it is than the comment's readers is a logical fallacy. How inflammatory something is would be entirely dependent on how it is received by its audience.
Furthermore, responding to my questions by patronisingly telling me to "use my imagination" conveniently avoids those questions. Hint: DBAD ;)
So you confirm that you are one of these angry HN readers? :) I don't see how you could have found yourself angry by my comment, other than being angry already... :) Cheers then.
That does not sit well with me. I'm from Canada and have spent a decade making use of gov't data and while Canada does open up a bunch of it, 90% of what they open is benign. The important data, or rather the data which would expose problems, is kept from the public.
These wealthy countries also have other ways to hide even the open data from prying eyes, they simply charge high prices for the data. This easily prevents the general public, who would use the data more critically, from actually using the data.