What if Government had a Google Buzz moment?

Post by wooster » Sat, Feb 13, 2010, 12:02 AM UTC

cjoh wrote: post #18

wooster wrote: post #16

Um, no, we should not give the government room to screw up. The government does not exist to innovate. Nor does it exist to create "products". It exists, to quote the U.S. Constitution, to: "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" Frankly, I'm surprised to see this coming from Sunli…

So my point is (I'm the author) is: Transparency requires innovation. It requires government to take and make risks.

And I'm not exactly sure how your hypothetical example of the government doing something illegal, irresponsible, dangerous, and unconstitutional is supposed to support your point.

Post by Semiapies » Sat, Feb 13, 2010, 12:59 AM UTC

cjoh wrote: post #19

Semiapies wrote: post #17

Different levels of government "innovate" all the time and very much dislike any oversight or otherwise being open. Nor do many officials - especially at higher levels - face any real consequences for "screw ups". Somehow give them more latitude? Really? I am almost never this negative on a linked item, but this one is horrifyingly naive. Hopefully, Clay Johnson isn't in a position at Sunlight Labs where he needs to…

Are you kidding? Officials don't face any real consequences of Screw Ups? How about Van Jones-- who, 8 years ago, said something stupid, and lost his job as energy czar? There are dozens of casualties like this. Let's not conflate oversight with openness, too. You can oversee an institution without openness, but you usually can't be open without oversight. My point is this: When google messes up, we give Google a cha…

"There are dozens of casualties like this."

And thousands of such offenses. Hence the phrase "nor do many".

Re: What if Government had a Google Buzz moment?

Re: What if Government had a Google Buzz moment?