“Storage of IBM record cards at the Federal records center in Alexandria, Virginia, November 1959. Between 1950 and 1966 the records centers received millions of cubic feet of records, saving the federal government more than the total spent for the entire operation of the National Archives Records Service.” Note: There are about 20 rows of pallets visible, each row is 15 pallets wide, pallets are stacked two high (at least). Each pallet contains 45 boxes of punched cards. Standard card boxes contained 2000 cards. Each card held up to 80 characters, for a total of about 4.3 billion characters of data in this storage facility – about the same as a 4Gb flash drive.
The Journal of Community Informatics Vol 10, No 1 (2014) Table of Contents http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/issue/view/48 Editorial -------- Beyond Access: Libraries are the New Telecentres Michael Gurstein Articles -------- Local e-Government in Sweden - Municipal Contact Center implementation with focus on Citizens and Public Administrators Irene Cecilia Bernhard Bridging the Digital Divide in Dunn County, Wisconsin: A Case Study of NPO use of ICT Elizabeth Bogner, Kevin W. Tharp, Mary McManus Community, Group and Individual: A Framework for Designing Community Technologies Sheena L. Erete Shared identity and personal tie in influencing cooperative behavior Hao Jiang, John M. Carroll Failures and success in using webcasts, discussion forums, Twitter, and email to engage older people and other stakeholders in rural ageing Ray B Jones, Janet Smithson, Catherine Hennessy From Pebble to Avalanche: How Information and Communications Technologies Empowered Underprivileged Actors Through Ages Piotr Konieczny Exploring the Formation of Social Capital in a Malaysia Virtual Community Dr. Shafiz Affendi Mohd Yusof, Kamarul Faizal Hashim Emergent digital activism: The generational/technological connection Fernando Adolfo Mora Drive-by Wi-Fi and digital storytelling: development and co-creation Jo Tacchi, Kathi R Kitner, Kiran Mulenahalli How Does Internet Usage Influence On Social Capital, Connectedness, Success And Well-Being Of Grassroots Level Inventors In Sri Lanka? Chaminda Nalaka Wickramasinghe, Nobaya Ahmad Internet Access At Public Access Venues In A Developing Countries: Lessons from Yogyakarta, Indonesia Stevanus Wisnu Wijaya, Agnes Maria Polina Reviews -------- Changing youths role in development through ICT enterprise and investment Michael D Williams Research Methods: Information, systems and contexts Martin Wolske Case Studies -------- Engaging Stakeholders: The First Step to Increasing Digital Inclusion Abstract Angela Siefer Notes from the field -------- An Inquiry into Community Members’ Use and Attitudes toward Technology in Mishkeegogamang First Nation Connie Gray-McKay, Kerri L. Gibson, Susan O'Donnell, The People of Mishkeegogamang
No doubt, the reader, if any, of this incredibly boring blog has already learned of how some UK government offices are supposedly switching to open source alternatives to that moneysucker, Microsoft Office. Included and named: OpenOffice, my old and continuing love and life (and destiny, it seems).
But here’s a charming article on the joys of Excel. Granted, Excel has seldom given me joy. But I do recognize that it is the best of Office and the one module that few who use it dedicatedly would want to give up. (I actually believe no one should really give up the tools of production they prefer but that all tools of production should be made available to those who need them, and that implies sustainable development à la open source.)
…. and I, like many others, have probably come across more than enough companies evidencing these flaws….
The point is not to treat the participants as children or to offer more or less bogus rewards for work (and then pretend that it’s been turned to play) but to articulate an environment where free flows of ideas and achievements are encouraged.
These are not dumb ideas. They are kind of obvious, but that’s only because I and others have also thought of them. But that’s also irrelevant. These ideas actually work, and there is even theoretical backing that I can cite for them–always a plus, for me.
The title is brilliant. And the article interesting.
The key point: “Data privacy laws regulate minds, not technology. Thus, for all practical purposes, and in every context relevant to the privacy debates, data is speech.”
Privacy laws rely on the unexamined assumption that the collection of data is not speech. That assumption is incorrect. Privacy scholars, recognizing an imminent clash between this long-held assumption and First Amendment protections of information, argue that data is different from the sort of speech the Constitution intended to protect. But they fail to articulate a meaningful distinction between data and other, more traditional forms of expression. Meanwhile, First Amendment scholars have not paid sufficient attention to new technologies that automatically capture data. These technologies reopen challenging questions about what “speech” is.
This Article makes two bold and overdue contributions to the First Amendment literature. First, it argues that when the scope of First Amendment coverage is ambiguous, courts should analyze the government’s motive for regulating. Second, it highlights and strengthens the strands of First Amendment theory that protect the right to create knowledge. Whenever the state regulates in order to interfere with knowledge, that regulation should draw First Amendment scrutiny.
In combination, these claims show clearly why data must receive First Amendment protection. When the collection or distribution of data troubles lawmakers, it does so because data has the potential to inform, and to inspire new opinions. Data privacy laws regulate minds, not technology. Thus, for all practical purposes, and in every context relevant to the privacy debates, data is speech.