Comments on: What the government doesn’t understand about the Internet, and what to do about it

By: ATFlynn "Norfolk's Mutineer"

ATFlynn "Norfolk's Mutineer" — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:07:48 +0000

I wish I had found this website earlier. I was leaving comments on the Telegraph, the Daily Mail, Guardian, the Express and one or two others. That is until all but the Express got a bit choosy.
My problem is my approach to Taxation. Only a few weeks ago, the Guardian was running acampaign about Tax Havens and how they should be closed down. And yet even the Gardian is using Tax Avoidance to minimise its liability to HMRC. And again, I believe I have read in the last day or two, that the Barclay Brother’s, of the Telegraph, have set up a sort of agency in the Channel Isles to offer a Tax Avoidance service. I have no objections to that whatsoever.
But I would point out that what is really needed is an alternative system of Taxation, to the ruinous and vastly expensive system that is Westminster.
There is absulutely nothing any Government can do to prevent the Taxpayers, the Parish and Town Councils, taking control of Taxation and the collection of Revenue. In turn that is passed on to the County Council and then the District Council is Funded to provide and administer the Public Services that are required in that Location. This is only the basic outline of how I see the future. You, the People in the Villages and Towns, the Cities and in the Country side, can, within reason, ensure that the elected Members of Parliament carry out their duties as require by the Electers and Taxpayers, as they are contracted to.
Thats enough for a start.
Regards to all, ATFlynn,Norfolk’s Mutineer”

By: michael thorne

michael thorne — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:10:00 +0000

you’ve still got hacking and not cracking.

They’re two very different things.

By: Heather Niven

Heather Niven — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 23:24:13 +0000

The quality of debate available online can be exceptional and is a key leap forward over the ‘box ticking’ feedback traditionally available to public sector orgs. This coupled with the increasing ease of communication of individuals views and ideas for improvements, and the value for people in feeling ‘listened to’ by the government, would encourage involvement and reduce apathy in shaping the country’s/world’s affairs.

We are in a really exciting time and it is up to the technology minded and creative thinkers amongst us to try to persuade our public sector to embrace this chance to have a conversation with the people they are supporting.

4IP are doing great things to help http://www.whippetonthewire.ning.com

By: Michael Thorne

Michael Thorne — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 16:14:39 +0000

re: 2. Protecting people from bad things done using the Internet (terrorism, child abuse, fraud, hacking, intellectual property infringement)

That should be CRACKING not hacking.

see The Jargon File/Lexicon:

– cracking @ http://catb.org/jargon/html/C/cracking.html

– hacker @ http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html

mxt

THINK
think different
Think Open Source

By: James Munro

James Munro — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:18:10 +0000

Yes – great response Alice! Weaving through all of this is the question of power – yet sometimes we seem to be so dazzled by the wonder of the technology, and the pace of its development, that we seem to forget that boring old political reality (in the widest sense) is still there… albeit changing, in response to new technological realities and the new forms of widespread communication/connection/participation they engender.

By: Alice Casey

Alice Casey — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 10:16:00 +0000

To give up control and data is shorthand for giving up power. This is not something that systems of government are set up to do at present. To give up power and control does not come naturally to an institution.

Tensions concerning power and forms of democracy underlie this discsussion of tech and data. Will our systems of governance become more participatory through such initiatives? the internet seems to be a catalyst driving this trend forward and eroding top down systems to some extent by rebalancing power; but how do we make sure that our public services continue to function effectively during times of potentially drastic change?

Should we be talking about about removing a ‘system’ entirely, and giving up control to the network? The way the current system is embedded makes it very difficult for individuals to drive forward a more radical approach to government and public service reform. But if those in power don’t get up to speed, the consequences for everyone could be less than satisfactory – with the old system grating up against new, disruptive forms of ‘citizen-institution’

This reminded me of something I wrote about Ebbsfleet and Ed Miliband – tensions between government and the connected republic – after watching Us Now: http://cased.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/us-now-ebbsfleet-and-ed-miliband/

By: Richard Hall

Richard Hall — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:51:35 +0000

Nice post. Point 4 is critical to the re-defining that you argue for. But to succeed it also needs a wider political and cultural change that focuses upon social democracy, and empowered communities. This has to be framed by a properly democratic bill of rights, a bill of digital rights, a change to our voting system. But are the British ready for that? We like our extant power structures don’t we, and shrug our shoulders in accepting that power tends to corrupt?

By: John Howard

John Howard — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:49:07 +0000

Link referred to above – http://blogs.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/digitalengagement/post/2009/05/22/Information-and-how-to-make-it-useful.aspx

By: John Howard

John Howard — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:46:46 +0000

Tom thanks for a great wide ranging post. There’s a lot to chew on here and even more so when you consider how this might cascade down into local and regional affairs.

I’d like to join this post with another over on the Cabinet Office Digital Engagement blog, Information and how to make it useful, where there’s a discussion brewing about how to find and use all the information government publishes.

I tend to agree with James Munro (8.) that the best thing govt can do is to publish in a well understood format and get out of the way.

By: James Munro

James Munro — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:52:55 +0000

Very interesting post.
I was strongly with you until I got to item 5, which made me stop and ponder. What should govt do on the net, and what should it not do? And what should it do with its money – spend it on its own sites, on APIs, or on encouraging the vibrant ecosystem of start-ups, experiments and so on which this rapidly evolutionary environment demands?
There’s a related question here, which the net makes more pressing, about how govt relates/works with/competes with the wider ecology of sites.
For example, I see the Hansard site is being improved – how does that impact on theyworkforyou.com? And does it matter?