Opening & Keynote @ g0v summit 2014
編輯歷史
| 時間 | 作者 | 版本 |
|---|---|---|
| 2015-03-04 20:34 – 20:34 | r1627 – r1630 | |
顯示 diff（5 行未修改）
照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
*（徘徊）這場是不是沒有錄影紀錄呢？
+ *中研院有錄影，之後會上傳～
↓文字轉播、線上討論↓
（78 行未修改）
|
||
| 2015-03-03 05:58 – 05:59 | r1612 – r1626 | |
顯示 diff（4 行未修改）
錄影紀錄網址 (video url)
照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
+ *（徘徊）這場是不是沒有錄影紀錄呢？
↓文字轉播、線上討論↓
（78 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-17 03:41 – 03:41 | r1608 – r1611 | |
顯示 diff（86 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-10 13:59 – 13:59 | r1604 – r1607 | |
顯示 diff（1 行未修改）
more info: g0v summit 2014 hackfoldr
- 現場直播網址 (live url)、錄影紀錄網址 (video url)、照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
+ 現場直播網址 (live url)
+ 錄影紀錄網址 (video url)
+ 照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
↓文字轉播、線上討論↓
（78 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 08:55 | r1603 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on making the Open Data website] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov. this is also a valid goal because this would increase public demand(?), but you have to know wha you are doing
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on making the Open Data website] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov. this is also a valid goal because this would increase public demand(?), but you have to know what you are doing
Big Tent
（26 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 05:04 – 05:05 | r1590 – r1602 | |
顯示 diff（20 行未修改）
交流第一步是先認識彼此，先找你旁邊一位不認識的朋友打招呼。。。
（看來大家欲罷不能。。。）
- 其實今天我們所有四個議程都會在線上直播，如果你要分享，請用#g0vsummit這個hachtag
+ 其實今天我們所有四個議程都會在線上直播，如果你要分享，請用#g0vsummit這個hashtag
(接著介紹今天規定，議程及閃電秀，明日的自由提案示範，特別感謝）
（9 行未修改）
why?
reason one
- 1974 Nickson
+ 1974 Nixson
progressive coalitions/political trust crisis
Because Richard Nixon who broke political trust and caused everyone to believe we should not have this happen ever again.
（3 行未修改）
"FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
- there's some form of public demand of change that combines with some form of roganization that combines whit technology that can promote the changes we need(?)
+ there's some form of public demand of change that combines with some form of re-oganization that combines with technology that can promote the changes we need(?)
how do we increase the size of this sweet spot (Techonology + Organization + Public Demand)
（37 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:54 – 01:55 | r1535 – r1589 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on making the Open Data website] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on making the Open Data website] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov. this is also a valid goal because this would increase public demand(?), but you have to know wha you are doing
Big Tent
（26 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:50 – 01:50 | r1503 – r1534 | |
顯示 diff（81 行未修改）
問題：我是老媒體人，如何建立跨世代的和解？
+ *acknowledge differences
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:49 – 01:49 | r1494 – r1502 | |
顯示 diff（36 行未修改）
1974 Nickson
progressive coalitions/political trust crisis
- Because Richard Nickson who breaks political trust and caused everyone to believe we should not have this happen ever again.
+ Because Richard Nixon who broke political trust and caused everyone to believe we should not have this happen ever again.
reason two
（34 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win (i.e. gerrymandering)（用選區作弊）
The data IS political. (資料本身就是政治性的) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
Long form census. If I am a politician and I know that people are going to make big decisions using data, I would try to let people know what I want them to know
（3 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:48 – 01:49 | r1486 – r1493 | |
顯示 diff（79 行未修改）
Long form census. If I am a politician and I know that people are going to make big decisions using data, I would try to let people know what I want them to know
You in this room has a very special ability to know the implications of all this and it is your responsibilities to use this knowledge to public service and to let people know about this.
- 問題：
+
+ 問題：我是老媒體人，如何建立跨世代的和解？
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:48 | r1485 | |
顯示 diff（78 行未修改）
The data IS political. (資料本身就是政治性的) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
Long form census. If I am a politician and I know that people are going to make big decisions using data, I would try to let people know what I want them to know
- You in this room has a very special ability to know the implications of all this and it is your responsibilites to use this knowledge to public service and to let people know about this.
+ You in this room has a very special ability to know the implications of all this and it is your responsibilities to use this knowledge to public service and to let people know about this.
問題：
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:48 | r1484 | |
顯示 diff（79 行未修改）
Long form census. If I am a politician and I know that people are going to make big decisions using data, I would try to let people know what I want them to know
You in this room has a very special ability to know the implications of all this and it is your responsibilites to use this knowledge to public service and to let people know about this.
+ 問題：
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:46 – 01:48 | r1308 – r1483 | |
顯示 diff（77 行未修改）
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
The data IS political. (資料本身就是政治性的) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ Long form census. If I am a politician and I know that people are going to make big decisions using data, I would try to let people know what I want them to know
+ You in this room has a very special ability to know the implications of all this and it is your responsibilites to use this knowledge to public service and to let people know about this.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:46 | r1307 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. (資) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ The data IS political. (資料本身就是政治性的) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:46 | r1306 | |
顯示 diff（79 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:46 | r1305 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. (資) Wheather you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ The data IS political. (資) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1304 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. (資) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ The data IS political. (資) Wheather you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1303 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. (資) Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ The data IS political. (資) Whether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1302 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. () Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
+ The data IS political. (資) Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1299 – r1301 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. () Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are do
+ The data IS political. () Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are doing.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1298 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. ( Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are do
+ The data IS political. () Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are do
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1297 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. ( Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you ar
+ The data IS political. ( Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you are do
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1296 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you ar
+ The data IS political. ( Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you ar
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1288 – r1295 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply polit
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply political things you ar
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1287 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作ㄅㄧ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作弊）
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply polit
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1286 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作ㄅㄧ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply p
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply polit
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1285 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區ㄗ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區作ㄅㄧ
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply p
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1284 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區ㄗ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply p
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1283 | |
顯示 diff（49 行未修改）
Environmental group say greenpeace
a very clear notion of how to implement a big change
- what we want to change -> analysis -> theory -> develop campaign -> implement -> big change happens
+ what we want to change -> analysis -> theory -> develop campaign -> implement -> big change happens
(big chart of greenpeace campaign)
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
（25 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1282 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩㄢ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用選區ㄗ
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1281 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩㄢ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a de
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a deeply
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1280 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩㄢ
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a de
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1279 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a de
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1278 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用犬
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄒㄩ
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1276 – r1277 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用犬
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it is a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1275 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用券居
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用犬
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1273 – r1274 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用券居
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer,
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer, it
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1272 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄑㄩㄢ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用券居
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer,
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1271 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄑㄩㄢ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer,
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1270 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用ㄑㄩㄢ
The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1269 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用
- The data IS political. Wether you are an engine
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engineer
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1268 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （ˇ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （用
The data IS political. Wether you are an engine
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1266 – r1267 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （ˇ
- The data IS political. Wether you are an eng
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an engine
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1265 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （ˇ
The data IS political. Wether you are an eng
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1264 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （
- The data IS political. Wether you are an
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an eng
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1263 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win （
The data IS political. Wether you are an
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1262 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
- The data IS political. Wether you are a
+ The data IS political. Wether you are an
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1261 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
The data IS political. Wether you are a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1260 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
- The data IS political. Wether you are a
+ The data IS political. Wether you are a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1259 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent w
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent win
The data IS political. Wether you are a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1258 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent w
- The data IS political. Wether you are
+ The data IS political. Wether you are a
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1256 – r1257 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convient
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convientent w
The data IS political. Wether you are
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1255 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convient
- The data IS political. Wether you
+ The data IS political. Wether you are
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1254 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can conv
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can convient
The data IS political. Wether you
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1253 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can conv
- The data IS political. Wether you
+ The data IS political. Wether you
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1252 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can con
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can conv
The data IS political. Wether you
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1250 – r1251 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can con
- The data IS political. Wether
+ The data IS political. Wether you
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1249 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can con
The data IS political. Wether
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1248 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can
- The data IS political. Wethe
+ The data IS political. Wether
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1247 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties c
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties can
The data IS political. Wethe
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1246 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties c
- The data IS political. W
+ The data IS political. Wethe
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1245 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties c
The data IS political. W
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1244 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
- The data IS political.
+ The data IS political. W
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1241 – r1243 | |
顯示 diff（79 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1240 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
- The data IS political. W
+ The data IS political.
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1239 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties haㄇ
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
The data IS political. W
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 – 01:45 | r1236 – r1238 | |
顯示 diff（76 行未修改）
I would argue that the district is a complete success
the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties haㄇ
- The data IS political
+ The data IS political. W
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:45 | r1235 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the district is a complete success
- the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties haㄇ
The data IS political
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:45 | r1160 – r1234 | |
顯示 diff（74 行未修改）
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
Chicago 選區劃分
- I would argue that the
+ I would argue that the district is a complete success
+ the only way you can do this is to have public consensus data and you can draw the district so that the parties ha
+ The data IS political
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1159 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- Chicago 選區化
+ Chicago 選區劃分
I would argue that the
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1158 | |
顯示 diff（74 行未修改）
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
Chicago 選區化
- I would argue that thi
+ I would argue that the
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1157 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- Chicago 選區
+ Chicago 選區化
I would argue that thi
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1156 | |
顯示 diff（74 行未修改）
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
Chicago 選區
- I would argue that th
+ I would argue that thi
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1155 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- Chicago 選區ㄏ
+ Chicago 選區
I would argue that th
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1139 – r1154 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- CH選區ㄏ
+ Chicago 選區ㄏ
+ I would argue that th
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1138 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- CH選區
+ CH選區ㄏ
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1136 – r1137 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- 選區
+ CH選區
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 | r1135 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
+ 選區
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1133 – r1134 | |
顯示 diff（75 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1131 – r1132 | |
顯示 diff（72 行未修改）
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
Utopia!
- Loggers （伐木業） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
+ Loggers （伐木業者） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1129 – r1130 | |
顯示 diff（73 行未修改）
Utopia!
Loggers （伐木業） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
- bu
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:44 – 01:44 | r1126 – r1128 | |
顯示 diff（72 行未修改）
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
Utopia!
- Bloggers + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
+ Loggers （伐木業） + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
bu
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:44 | r1098 – r1125 | |
顯示 diff（72 行未修改）
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
Utopia!
+ Bloggers + Environmentalists + Open Data (map)
+ bu
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:43 | r1089 – r1097 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on Make] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on making the Open Data website] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
Big Tent
（16 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:43 | r1087 – r1088 | |
顯示 diff（71 行未修改）
Power
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
- Utopia!(
+ Utopia!
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:43 | r1085 – r1086 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [o] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [on Make] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
Big Tent
（16 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1084 | |
顯示 diff（71 行未修改）
Power
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
- Utopia!
+ Utopia!(
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1083 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [o] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
Big Tent
（16 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:43 | r1081 – r1082 | |
顯示 diff（71 行未修改）
Power
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
- Uto
+ Utopia!
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1080 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me []is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me [] is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
Big Tent
（16 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1079 | |
顯示 diff（71 行未修改）
Power
what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
- U
+ Uto
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1078 | |
顯示 diff（53 行未修改）
in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
- Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me []is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
Big Tent
（16 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 – 01:43 | r1072 – r1077 | |
顯示 diff（70 行未修改）
Power
- what happens when we use that power to the effec
+ what happens when we use that power to the effective and win?
+ U
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:43 | r1071 | |
顯示 diff（61 行未修改）
it is *great* that you have a diversity of goals
the real question is how do we make each of us achieve what each of us what
- patriot - careerist - the evangelist
+ patriot - careerist - the evangelist
they actually have different goals and it is easy for them see only their differences and to forget what they are trying to accomplish together
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:43 | r236 – r1070 | |
顯示 diff（42 行未修改）
"FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
- there's some form of
+ there's some form of public demand of change that combines with some form of roganization that combines whit technology that can promote the changes we need(?)
+
+ how do we increase the size of this sweet spot (Techonology + Organization + Public Demand)
+ for me to increase the organization is more important
+
+ Environmental group say greenpeace
+ a very clear notion of how to implement a big change
+ what we want to change -> analysis -> theory -> develop campaign -> implement -> big change happens
+ (big chart of greenpeace campaign)
+ in gov space there are times that we get angry and know what we want to change and skip the analysis and go straight to the implementation
+ what you actually want to change? what is your goal? change gov? make a good public site for people to use easily? have fun? these are all valid goals
+ Beware of shifting goals. the real risk of me is to shift the goal from changing the gov to embarrassing the gov <- because of increasing public demand(?)
+
+ Big Tent
+ you (people in this room) are a big tent coalition
+ when you have a big tent you have to acknowledge different motivations
+ and the big risks is to start judging people because they don't have to same goal as you
+ it is *great* that you have a diversity of goals
+ the real question is how do we make each of us achieve what each of us what
+ patriot - careerist - the evangelist
+ they actually have different goals and it is easy for them see only their differences and to forget what they are trying to accomplish together
+
+ have one community vs infect our communities
+ a single conf is important but i think it is not as important as it used to be
+ so your job is not only to go to this conference but also to *infest* all other communities
+ if you're a journalist go infect your colleagues
+
+ Power
+ what happens when we use that power to the effec
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r235 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
Access Information Act
+
why?
reason one
（9 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r234 | |
顯示 diff（41 行未修改）
"FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
- there's some form o
+ there's some form of
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r233 | |
顯示 diff（30 行未修改）
1970 Norway
1974 US
-
Access Information Act
why?
（10 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r226 – r232 | |
顯示 diff（42 行未修改）
"FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
- t
+ there's some form o
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r225 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Access nformation Act
+ Access Information Act
why?
reason one
（9 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r224 | |
顯示 diff（41 行未修改）
widespread use of photocopiers
"FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
+
+ t
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r220 – r223 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Access information
+ Access nformation Act
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r219 | |
顯示 diff（43 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r217 – r218 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Access informa
+ Access information
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r216 | |
顯示 diff（43 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r211 – r215 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Access
+ Access informa
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r209 – r210 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers
+ "FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers"
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r208 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Acces
+ Access
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r207 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated on the existence of copier
+ FOIA is predicated on the existence of copiers
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r206 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Acce
+ Acces
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 – 01:33 | r204 – r205 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated on the existence of
+ FOIA is predicated on the existence of copier
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r203 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- Ac
+ Acce
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r202 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated on the existenc
+ FOIA is predicated on the existence of
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:33 | r201 | |
顯示 diff（31 行未修改）
1974 US
- A
+ Ac
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:32 – 01:32 | r199 – r200 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated on the ex
+ FOIA is predicated on the existenc
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:32 | r198 | |
顯示 diff（30 行未修改）
1970 Norway
1974 US
-
+ A
why?
reason one
（7 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:32 – 01:32 | r196 – r197 | |
顯示 diff（40 行未修改）
reason two
widespread use of photocopiers
- FOIA is predicated
+ FOIA is predicated on the ex
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:32 | r195 | |
顯示 diff（30 行未修改）
1970 Norway
1974 US
+
why?
（8 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:30 – 01:32 | r113 – r194 | |
顯示 diff（32 行未修改）
why?
+ reason one
+ 1974 Nickson
+ progressive coalitions/political trust crisis
+ Because Richard Nickson who breaks political trust and caused everyone to believe we should not have this happen ever again.
+
+ reason two
+ widespread use of photocopiers
+ FOIA is predicated
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:29 – 01:29 | r109 – r112 | |
顯示 diff（34 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:28 – 01:29 | r30 – r108 | |
顯示 diff（24 行未修改）
David Eaves
+
+ history of opening up the government
+ the first one is 1766 Sweden
+ 1966 US
+ 1970 Norway
+ 1974 US
+
+ why?
|
||
| 2014-11-08 01:26 | r29 | |
顯示 diff（12 行未修改）
*Keynote
slides url
+
+ 介紹G0V的由來
+ 台灣社會發生了很多事，因此有人開始思考用科技改變一些事。
+ 我們從數位世代的角度，如何從零去思考，政府怎樣跟人民互動。
+ 政治獻金的數位化，醫療系統看板，食安事件豬油的統計，議員投票指南（平時議員做了些什麼事），在３１８時也有很多人跨出了虛擬的世界，到現場直播去做一些事。
+ 這兩年來，我們達到目標嗎？這是我們的目標嗎？事實上非常非常的少，因此我們今天在這邊，希望在這裡跟大家學習，分享，交流。
+ 交流第一步是先認識彼此，先找你旁邊一位不認識的朋友打招呼。。。
+ （看來大家欲罷不能。。。）
+ 其實今天我們所有四個議程都會在線上直播，如果你要分享，請用#g0vsummit這個hachtag
+ (接著介紹今天規定，議程及閃電秀，明日的自由提案示範，特別感謝）
+
+ David Eaves
|
||
| 2014-11-02 18:13 – 18:13 | r27 – r28 | |
顯示 diff Opening & Keynote @ g0v summit 2014
- 議程資訊 (zh)、session info (en)
+ more info: g0v summit 2014 hackfoldr
+
現場直播網址 (live url)、錄影紀錄網址 (video url)、照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
（9 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-10-31 20:39 – 20:40 | r1 – r26 | |
顯示 diff- Untitled
+ Opening & Keynote @ g0v summit 2014
+ 議程資訊 (zh)、session info (en)
+ 現場直播網址 (live url)、錄影紀錄網址 (video url)、照片紀錄網址 (photos url)
- This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. This allows you to collaborate seamlessly on documents!
+ ↓文字轉播、線上討論↓
+
+ *Opening
+ slides url
+
+
+
+ *Keynote
+ slides url
|
||
| 2014-10-31 20:39 | r0 | |
顯示 diff+ Untitled
+ This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. This allows you to collaborate seamlessly on documents!
|
||