Rob Stein at NPR: “People often talk about how their friends feel like family. Well, there’s some new research out that suggests there’s more to that than just a feeling. People appear to be more like their friends genetically than they are to strangers, the research found.
“The striking thing here is that friends are actually significantly more similar to one another than we were expecting,” says James Fowler, a professor of medical genetics at the University of California, San Diego, who conducted the study with Nicholas A. Christakis, a social scientist at Yale University.
In fact, the study in Monday’s issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that friends are as genetically similar as fourth cousins.
“It’s as if they shared a great- great- great-grandparent in common,” Fowler told Shots.
Some of the genes that friends were most likely to have in common involve smell. “We tend to smell things the same way that our friends do,” Fowler says. The study involved nearly 2,000 adults.
This suggests that as humans evolved, the ability to tolerate and be drawn to certain smells may have influenced where people hung out. Today we might call this the Starbucks effect.
“You may really love the smell of coffee. And you’re drawn to a place where other people have been drawn to who also love the smell of coffee,” Fowler says. “And so that might be the opportunity space for you to make friends. You’re all there together because you love coffee and you make friends because you all love coffee.”…”
i-teams
New Report and Site from NESTA: “Last year we were aware of the growing trend for governments to set up innovation teams, funds, and labs. Yet who are they? What do they do? And crucially, are they making any difference for their host and partner governments? Together Nesta and Bloomberg Philanthropies set out to answer these questions.
Drawing on an in-depth literature review, over 80 interviews, and surveys, i-teams tells the stories of 20 teams, units and funds, all are established by government, and all are charged with making innovation happen. The i-teams case studied are based in city, regional and national governments across six continents, and work across the spectrum of innovation – from focusing on incremental improvements to aiming for radical transformations.
The i-teams were all created in recognition that governments need dedicated structures, capabilities and space to allow innovation to happen. Beyond this, the i-teams work in different ways, drawing on a mix of methods, approaches, skills, resources, and tackling challenges as diverse as reducing murder rates to improving education attainment.
The i-teams report details the different ways in which these twenty i-teams operate, but to highlight a few:
- The Behavioural Insights Team designs trials to test policy ideas, and achieved government savings of around 22 times the cost of the team in the first two years of operation.
- MindLab is a Danish unit using human centred design as a way to identify problems and develop policy recommendations. One project helped businesses to find the right industry code for registrations and demonstrated a 21:1 return on investment in savings to government and businesses.
- New Orleans Innovation Delivery Team is based in city hall and is tasked with solving mayoral challenges. Their public safety efforts led to a 20% reduction in the number of murders in 2013 compared to the previous year.
- PS21 encourages staff to find better ways of improving Singaporean public services. An evaluation of PS21 estimated that over a year it generated 520,000 suggestions from staff, of which approximately 60 per cent were implemented, leading to savings of around £55 million.
Alongside the report we have launched theiteams.org a living map to keep track of i-teams developing and emerging around the world, and to create a network of global government innovators. As James Anderson from Bloomberg Philanthropies says, “There’s no reason for every government to start its innovation efforts from scratch.” There is much we can learn from what is underway, what’s working and what’s not, to ensure all i-teams are using the most cutting edge techniques, methods and approaches….”
Meet the UK start-ups changing the world with open data
Sophie Curtis in The Telegraph: “Data is more accessible today than anyone could have imagined 10 or 20 years ago. From corporate databases to social media and embedded sensors, data is exploding, with total worldwide volume expected to reach 6.6 zettabytes by 2020.
Open data is information that is available for anyone to use, for any purpose, at no cost. For example, the Department for Education publishes open data about the performance of schools in England, so that companies can create league tables and citizens can find the best-performing schools in their catchment area.
Governments worldwide are working to open up more of their data. Since January 2010, more than 18,500 UK government data sets have been released via the data.gov.uk web portal, creating new opportunities for organisations to build innovative digital services.
Businesses are also starting to realise the value of making their non-personal data freely available, with open innovation leading to the creation products and services that they can benefit from….
Now a range of UK start-ups are working with the ODI to build businesses using open data, and have already unlocked a total of £2.5 million worth of investments and contracts.
Mastodon C joined the ODI start-up programme at its inception in December 2012. Shortly after joining, the company teamed up with Ben Goldacre and Open Healthcare UK, and embarked on a project investigating the use of branded statins over the far cheaper generic versions.
The data analysis identified potential efficiency savings to the NHS of £200 million. The company is now also working with the Technology Strategy Board and Nesta to help them gain better insight into their data.
Another start-up, CarbonCulture is a community platform designed to help people use resources more efficiently. The company uses high-tech metering to monitor carbon use in the workplace and help clients save money.
Organisations such as 10 Downing Street, Tate, Cardiff Council, the GLA and the UK Parliament are using the company’s digital tools to monitor and improve their energy consumption. CarbonCulture has also helped the Department of Energy and Climate Change reduce its gas use by 10 per cent.
Spend Network’s business is built on collecting the spend statements and tender documents published by government in the UK and Europe and then publishing this data openly so that anyone can use it. The company currently hosts over £1.2 trillion of transactions from the UK and over 1.8 million tenders from across Europe.
One of the company’s major breakthroughs was creating the first national, open spend analysis for central and local government. This was used to uncover a 45 per cent delay in the UK’s tendering process, holding up £22 billion of government funds to the economy.
Meanwhile, TransportAPI uses open data feeds from Traveline, Network Rail and Transport for London to provide nationwide timetables, departure and infrastructure information across all modes of public transport.
TransportAPI currently has 700 developers and organisations signed up to its platform, including individual taxpayers and public sector organisations like universities and local authorities. Travel portals, hyperlocal sites and business analytics are also integrating features, such as the ‘nearest transport’ widget, into their websites.
These are just four examples of how start-ups are using open data to create new digital services. The ODI this week announced seven new open data start-ups joining the programme, covering 3D printed learning materials, helping disabled communities, renewable energy markets, and smart cities….”
Facebook tinkered with users’ feeds for a massive psychology experiment
in AVClub: “Scientists at Facebook have published a paper showing that they manipulated the content seen by more than 600,000 users in an attempt to determine whether this would affect their emotional state. The paper, “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks,” was published in The Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. It shows how Facebook data scientists tweaked the algorithm that determines which posts appear on users’ news feeds—specifically, researchers skewed the number of positive or negative terms seen by randomly selected users. Facebook then analyzed the future postings of those users over the course of a week to see if people responded with increased positivity or negativity of their own, thus answering the question of whether emotional states can be transmitted across a social network. Result: They can! Which is great news for Facebook data scientists hoping to prove a point about modern psychology. It’s less great for the people having their emotions secretly manipulated.
In order to sign up for Facebook, users must click a box saying they agree to the Facebook Data Use Policy, giving the company the right to access and use the information posted on the site. The policy lists a variety of potential uses for your data, most of them related to advertising, but there’s also a bit about “internal operations, including troubleshooting, data analysis, testing, research and service improvement.” In the study, the authors point out that they stayed within the data policy’s liberal constraints by using machine analysis to pick out positive and negative posts, meaning no user data containing personal information was actually viewed by human researchers. And there was no need to ask study “participants” for consent, as they’d already given it by agreeing to Facebook’s terms of service in the first place.
Facebook data scientist Adam Kramer is listed as the study’s lead author. In an interview the company released a few years ago, Kramer is quoted as saying he joined Facebook because “Facebook data constitutes the largest field study in the history of the world.”
See also:
Facebook Experiments Had Few Limits, Data Science Lab Conducted Tests on Users With Little Oversight, Wall Street Journal.
Stop complaining about the Facebook study. It’s a golden age for research, Duncan Watts
We Need a Citizen Maker Movement
Lorelei Kelly at the Huffington Post: “It was hard to miss the giant mechanical giraffe grazing on the White House lawn last week. For the first time ever, the President organized a Maker Faire–inviting entrepreneurs and inventors from across the USA to celebrate American ingenuity in the service of economic progress.
The maker movement is a California original. Think R2D2 serving margaritas to a jester with an LED news scroll. The #nationofmakers Twitter feed has dozens of examples of collaborative production, of making, sharing and learning.
But since this was the White House, I still had to ask myself, what would the maker movement be if the economy was not the starting point? What if it was about civics? What if makers decided to create a modern, hands-on democracy?
What is democracy anyway but a never ending remix of new prototypes? Last week’s White House Maker Faire heralded a new economic bonanza. This revolution’s poster child is 3-D printing– decentralized fabrication that is customized to meet local needs. On the government front, new design rules for democracy are already happening in communities, where civics and technology have generated a front line of maker cities.
But the distance between California’s tech capacity and DC does seem 3000 miles wide. The NSA’s over collection/surveillance problem and Healthcare.gov’s doomed rollout are part of the same system-wide capacity deficit. How do we close the gap between California’s revolution and our institutions?
- In California, disruption is a business plan. In DC, it’s a national security threat.
- In California, hackers are artists. In DC, they are often viewed as criminals.
- In California, “cyber” is a dystopian science fiction word. In DC, cyber security is in a dozen oversight plans for Congress.
- in California, individuals are encouraged to “fail forward.” In DC, risk-aversion is bipartisan.
Scaling big problems with local solutions is a maker specialty. Government policymaking needs this kind of help.
Here’s the issue our nation is facing: The inability of the non-military side of our public institutions to process complex problems. Today, this competence and especially the capacity to solve technical challenges often exist only in the private sector. If something is urgent and can’t be monetized, it becomes a national security problem. Which increasingly means that critical decision making that should be in the civilian remit instead migrates to the military. Look at our foreign policy. Good government is a counter terrorism strategy in Afghanistan. Decades of civilian inaction on climate change means that now Miami is referred to as a battle space in policy conversations.
This rhetoric reflects an understandable but unacceptable disconnect for any democracy.
To make matters more confusing, much of the technology in civics (like list building petitions) is suited for elections, not for governing. It is often antagonistic. The result? policy making looks like campaigning. We need some civic tinkering to generate governing technology that comes with relationships. Specifically, this means technology that includes many voices, but has identifiable channels for expertise that can sort complexity and that is not compromised by financial self-interest.
Today, sorting and filtering information is a huge challenge for participation systems around the world. Information now ranks up there with money and people as a lever of power. On the people front, the loud and often destructive individuals are showing up effectively. On the money front, our public institutions are at risk of becoming purely pay to play (wonks call this “transactional”).
Makers, ask yourselves, how can we turn big data into a political constituency for using real evidence–one that can compete with all the negative noise and money in the system? For starters, technologists out West must stop treating government like it’s a bad signal that can be automated out of existence. We are at a moment where our society requires an engineering mindset to develop modern, tech-savvy rules for democracy. We need civic makers….”
The Impact of Open: Keeping you healthy
Emily Shaw of Sunlight: “In healthcare, the goal-set shared widely throughout the field is known as “the Triple Aim”: improving individual experience of care, improving population health, and reducing the cost of care. Across the wide array of initiatives undertaken by health care data users, the great majority seem to fall within the scope of at least one aspect of the Triple Aim. Below is a set of examples that reveal how data — both open and not — is being used to achieve its elements.
The use of open data to reduce costs:
-
The US Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) provided a critical boost to efforts to understand variation in health care pricing by releasing data about millions of payments to hospitals and individual physicians treating Medicare patients. Within CMS itself, this data release has powered visualization tools intended to inform and empower health care consumers; externally, researchers and journalists have used the CMS data to bring attention to unexplained variation in the cost of medical service provision. Through highlighting this variation, these analyses bring pressure to bear on high-cost places and providers.
-
Federal action has increased the pressure on states to improve collection and provide access to their health care cost data. Non-profit organizations focused on health care cost observed that while states still have a far way to go before they are providing adequate levels of information about health care costs to their citizens, there has been a substantial amount of policy action and some concrete improvements just in the last year. Cooperation between associations of health care providers, insurance groups, and evaluative NGOs have produced efforts to produce comprehensive standards for health care cost transparency.
-
Public-led efforts to increase cost transparency have led to additional non-governmental efforts to create both public-facing databases and price-check tools for private insurance subscribers, adding to the points of access for learning about variation in healthcare costs.
The use of open data to improve quality of care:
-
Using open data on a substantial series of individual hospital quality measures, CMS created a hospital comparison tool that allows consumers to compare average quality of care outcomes across their local hospitals.
-
Non-profit organizations survey hospitals and have used this data to provide another national measure of hospital quality that consumers can use to select a high-quality hospital.
-
In New York state, widely-shared data on cardiac surgery outcomes associated with individual providers has led to improved outcomes and better understanding of successful techniques.
-
In the UK, the National Health Service is actively working towards defining concrete metrics to evaluate how the system as a whole is moving towards improved quality. …
-
The broad cultural shift towards data-sharing in healthcare appears to have facilitated additional secured sharing in order to achieve the joint goal of improving healthcare quality and effectiveness. The current effort to securely network of millions of patient data records through the federal PCORI system has the potential to advance understanding of disease treatment at an unprecedented pace.
-
Through third-party tools, people are able to use the products of aggregated patient data in order to begin diagnosing their own symptoms more accurately, giving them a head start in understanding how to optimize their visit to a provider.
The use of open data to improve population health:
-
Out of the three elements of the triple aim, population health may have the longest and deepest relationship with open data. Public datasets like those collected by the Centers for Disease Control and the US Census have for decades been used to monitor disease prevalence, verify access to health insurance, and track mortality and morbidity statistics.
-
Population health improvement has been a major focus for newer developments as well. Health data has been a regular feature in tech efforts to improve the ways that governments — including local health departments — reach their constituencies. The use of data in new communication tools improves population health by increasing population awareness of local health trends and disease prevention opportunities. Two examples of this work in action include the Chicago Health Atlas, which combines health data and healthcare consumer problem-solving, and Philadelphia’s map interface to city data about available flu vaccines.
One final observation for open data advocates to take from health data concerns the way that the sector encourages the two-way information flow: it embraces the notion that data users can also be data producers. Open data ecosystems are properly characterized by multi-directional relationships among governmental and non-governmental actors, with opportunities for feedback, correction and augmentation of open datasets. That this happens at the scale of health data is important and meaningful for open data advocates who can face push-back when they ask their governments to ingest externally-generated data….”
The Data Revolution in Policy-Making
at the Open Institute: “There continues to be a great deal of dialogue and debate on what the data revolution from the report of the High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda is all about. However, some have raised concerns that the emerging narrative around opening up data, strengthening national statistics offices or building capacity for e-government may not be revolutionary enough. In thinking through this it becomes clear that revolutions are highly contextual events. The Arab spring happened due to the unique factors of the cultural and social-economic environment in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). A similar ‘spring’ may not happen in the same way in sub-Sahara Africa due to the peculiarities of the region. Attempting to replicate it is therefore an exercise in futility for those hoping for regime change.
We have just published a think piece on the role of public participation in policy making and how a data revolution could play out in that space. None of the ideas are revolutionary. They have been proposed and piloted in various countries to various extents over time. For instance, in some contexts strengthening and safe guarding the autonomy of the national statistics office may not seem revolutionary to some, in some countries it may be unprecedented (this is not part of the report). And that is okay. Nation states should be allowed, in their efforts to build capable and developmental institutions, to interpret the revolution for themselves.
In sub-Sahara Africa the availability of underlying data used to develop public policy is almost non-existent. Even when citizens are expected to participate in the formulation process and implementation of the policies, the data is still difficult to find. This neuters public participation and is a disservice to open government. Therefore making this detailed data and the accompanying rationale publicly available would be a revolutionary change in both culture and policy on access to information and potentially empower citizens to participate.
The data revolution is an opportunity to mainstream statistics into public discourse on public policy in ways that citizens can understand and engage with. I hope African countries will be willing to put an effort in translating the data revolution into an African revolution. If not, there’s a risk we shall continue singing about a revolution and never actually have one.
Download the ThinkPiece here”
15 Ways to bring Civic Innovation to your City
Chris Moore at AcuitasGov: “In my previous blog post I wrote about a desire to see our Governments transform to be part of the 21st century. I saw a recent reference to how governments across Canada have lost their global leadership, how government in Canada at all levels is providing analog services to a digital society. I couldn’t agree more. I have been thinking lately about some practical ways that Mayors and City Managers could innovate in their communities. I realize that there are a number of municipal elections happening this fall across Canada, a time when leadership changes and new ideas emerge. So this blog is also for Mayoral candidates who have a sense that technology and innovation have a role to play in their city and in their administration.
I thought I would identify 15 initiatives that cities could pursue as part of their Civic Innovation Strategy. For the last 50 years technology in local government in Canada has been viewed as an expense, as a necessary evil, not always understood by elected officials and senior administrators. Information and Technology is part of every aspect of a city, it is critical in delivering services. It is time to not just think of this as an expense but as an investment, as a way to innovate, reduce costs, enhance citizen service delivery and transform government operations.
Here are my top 15 ways to bring Civic Innovation to your city:
1. Build 21st Century Digital Infrastructure like the Chattanooga Gig City Project.
2. Build WiFi networks like the City of Edmonton on your own and in partnership with others.
3. Provide technology and internet to children and youth in need like the City of Toronto.
4. Connect to a national Education and Research network like Cybera in Alberta and CANARIE.
5. Create a Mayors Task-force on Innovation and Technology leveraging your city’s resources.
6. Run a hackathon or two or three like the City of Glasgow or maybe host a hacking health event like the City of Vancouver.
7. Launch a Startup incubator like Startup Edmonton or take it to the next level and create a civic lab like the City of Barcelona.
8. Develop an Open Government Strategy, I like to the Open City Strategy from Edmonton.
9. If Open Government is too much then just start with Open Data, Edmonton has one of the best.
10. Build a Citizen Dashboard to showcase your cities services and commitment to the public.
11. Put your Crime data online like the Edmonton Police Service.
12. Consider a pilot project with sensor technology for parking like the City of Nice or for waste management like the City of Barcelona.
13. Embrace Car2Go, Modo and UBER as ways to move people in your city.
14. Consider turning your IT department into the Innovation and Technology Department like they did at the City of Chicago.
15. Partner with other near by local governments to create a shared Innovation and Technology agency.
Now more than ever before cities need to find ways to innovate, to transform and to create a foundation that is sustainable. Now is the time for both courage and innovations in government. What is your city doing to move into the 21st Century?”
Index: The Networked Public
The Living Library Index – inspired by the Harper’s Index – provides important statistics and highlights global trends in governance innovation. This installment focuses on the networked public and was originally published in 2014.
Global Overview
- The proportion of global population who use the Internet in 2013: 38.8%, up 3 percentage points from 2012
- Increase in average global broadband speeds from 2012 to 2013: 17%
- Percent of internet users surveyed globally that access the internet at least once a day in 2012: 96
- Hours spent online in 2012 each month across the globe: 35 billion
- Country with the highest online population, as a percent of total population in 2012: United Kingdom (85%)
- Country with the lowest online population, as a percent of total population in 2012: India (8%)
- Trend with the highest growth rate in 2012: Location-based services (27%)
- Years to reach 50 million users: telephone (75), radio (38), TV (13), internet (4)
Growth Rates in 2014
- Rate at which the total number of Internet users is growing: less than 10% a year
- Worldwide annual smartphone growth: 20%
- Tablet growth: 52%
- Mobile phone growth: 81%
- Percentage of all mobile users who are now smartphone users: 30%
- Amount of all web usage in 2013 accounted for by mobile: 14%
- Amount of all web usage in 2014 accounted for by mobile: 25%
-
Percentage of money spent on mobile used for app purchases: 68%
-
Growth of BitCoin wallet between 2013 and 2014: 8 times increase
- Number of listings on AirBnB in 2014: 550k, 83% growth year on year
- How many buyers are on Alibaba in 2014: 231MM buyers, 44% growth year on year
Social Media
- Number of Whatsapp messages on average sent per day: 50 billion
- Number sent per day on Snapchat: 1.2 billion
- How many restaurants are registered on GrubHub in 2014: 29,000
- Amount the sale of digital songs fell in 2013: 6%
- How much song streaming grew in 2013: 32%
- Number of photos uploaded and shared every day on Flickr, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and Whatsapp combined in 2014: 1.8 billion
- How many online adults in the U.S. use a social networking site of some kind: 73%
- Those who use multiple social networking sites: 42%
- Dominant social networking platform: Facebook, with 71% of online adults
- Number of Facebook users in 2004, its founding year: 1 million
- Number of monthly active users on Facebook in September 2013: 1.19 billion, an 18% increase year-over-year
- How many Facebook users log in to the site daily: 63%
- Instagram users who log into the service daily: 57%
- Twitter users who are daily visitors: 46%
- Number of photos uploaded to Facebook every minute: over 243,000, up 16% from 2012
- How much of the global internet population is actively using Twitter every month: 21%
- Number of tweets per minute: 350,000, up 250% from 2012
- Fastest growing demographic on Twitter: 55-64 year age bracket, up 79% from 2012
- Fastest growing demographic on Facebook: 45-54 year age bracket, up 46% from 2012
- How many LinkedIn accounts are created every minute: 120, up 20% from 2012
- The number of Google searches in 2013: 3.5 million, up 75% from 2012
- Percent of internet users surveyed globally that use social media in 2012: 90
- Percent of internet users surveyed globally that use social media daily: 60
- Time spent social networking, the most popular online activity: 22%, followed by searches (21%), reading content (20%), and emails/communication (19%)
- The average age at which a child acquires an online presence through their parents in 10 mostly Western countries: six months
- Number of children in those countries who have a digital footprint by age 2: 81%
- How many new American marriages between 2005-2012 began by meeting online, according to a nationally representative study: more than one-third
- How many of the world’s 505 leaders are on Twitter: 3/4
- Combined Twitter followers: of 505 world leaders: 106 million
- Combined Twitter followers of Justin Bieber, Katy Perry, and Lady Gaga: 122 million
- How many times all Wikipedias are viewed per month: nearly 22 billion times
- How many hits per second: more than 8,000
- English Wikipedia’s share of total page views: 47%
- Number of articles in the English Wikipedia in December 2013: over 4,395,320
- Platform that reaches more U.S. adults between ages 18-34 than any cable network: YouTube
- Number of unique users who visit YouTube each month: more than 1 billion
- How many hours of video are watched on YouTube each month: over 6 billion, 50% more than 2012
- Proportion of YouTube traffic that comes from outside the U.S.: 80%
- Most common activity online, based on an analysis of over 10 million web users: social media
- People on Twitter who recommend products in their tweets: 53%
- People who trust online recommendations from people they know: 90%
Mobile and the Internet of Things
- Number of global smartphone users in 2013: 1.5 billion
- Number of global mobile phone users in 2013: over 5 billion
- Percent of U.S. adults that have a cell phone in 2013: 91
- Number of which are a smartphone: almost two thirds
- Mobile Facebook users in March 2013: 751 million, 54% increase since 2012
- Growth rate of global mobile traffic as a percentage of global internet traffic as of May 2013: 15%, up from .9% in 2009
- How many smartphone owners ages 18–44 “keep their phone with them for all but two hours of their waking day”: 79%
- Those who reach for their smartphone immediately upon waking up: 62%
- Those who couldn’t recall a time their phone wasn’t within reach or in the same room: 1 in 4
- Facebook users who access the service via a mobile device: 73.44%
- Those who are “mobile only”: 189 million
- Amount of YouTube’s global watch time that is on mobile devices: almost 40%
- Number of objects connected globally in the “internet of things” in 2012: 8.7 billion
- Number of connected objects so far in 2013: over 10 billion
- Years from tablet introduction for tables to surpass desktop PC and notebook shipments: less than 3 (over 55 million global units shipped in 2013, vs. 45 million notebooks and 35 million desktop PCs)
- Number of wearable devices estimated to have been shipped worldwide in 2011: 14 million
- Projected number of wearable devices in 2016: between 39-171 million
- How much of the wearable technology market is in the healthcare and medical sector in 2012: 35.1%
- How many devices in the wearable tech market are fitness or activity trackers: 61%
- The value of the global wearable technology market in 2012: $750 million
- The forecasted value of the market in 2018: $5.8 billion
- How many Americans are aware of wearable tech devices in 2013: 52%
- Devices that have the highest level of awareness: wearable fitness trackers,
- Level of awareness for wearable fitness trackers amongst American consumers: 1 in 3 consumers
- Value of digital fitness category in 2013: $330 million
- How many American consumers surveyed are aware of smart glasses: 29%
- Smart watch awareness amongst those surveyed: 36%
Access
- How much of the developed world has mobile broadband subscriptions in 2013: 3/4
- How much of the developing world has broadband subscription in 2013: 1/5
- Percent of U.S. adults that had a laptop in 2012: 57
- How many American adults did not use the internet at home, at work, or via mobile device in 2013: one in five
- Amount President Obama initiated spending in 2009 in an effort to expand access: $7 billion
- Number of Americans potentially shut off from jobs, government services, health care and education, among other opportunities due to digital inequality: 60 million
- American adults with a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 7 out of 10
- Americans aged 18-29 vs. 65+ with a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 80% vs. 43
- American adults with college education (or more) vs. adults with no high school diploma that have a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 89% vs. 37%
- Percent of U.S. adults with college education (or more) that use the internet in 2011: 94
- Those with no high school diploma that used the internet in 2011: 43
- Percent of white American households that used the internet in 2013: 67
- Black American households that used the internet in 2013: 57
- States with lowest internet use rates in 2013: Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas
- How many American households have only wireless telephones as of the second half of 2012: nearly two in five
- States with the highest prevalence of wireless-only adults according to predictive modeling estimates: Idaho (52.3%), Mississippi (49.4%), Arkansas (49%)
- Those with the lowest prevalence of wireless-only adults: New Jersey (19.4%), Connecticut (20.6%), Delaware (23.3%) and New York (23.5%)
Sources
- “A Focus on Efficiency: A whitepaper from Facebook, Ericsson and Qualcomm,” internet.org, September 16, 2013.
- “Always Connected: How Smartphones And Social Keep Us Engaged,” IDC Research Report, 2013.
- Blumberg, Stephen J., Nadarajasundaram Ganesh, Julian V. Luke, and Gilbert Gonzales. “Wireless Substitution: State-level Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, 2012,” National Health Statistics Reports, Number 70, December 18, 2013.
- Cacioppo, John T., Stephanie Cacioppo, Gian C. Gonzaga, Elizabeth L. Ogburn, and Tyler J. VanderWeele. “Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110, no. 25 (2013): 10135-10140.
- “Connections Counter: The Internet of Everything in Motion,” Cisco, July 29, 2013.
- Cooper, Belle Beth. “10 Surprising social media statistics that might make you rethink your social strategy,” Buffer, July 16, 2013.
- Duggan, Maeve and Aaron Smith. “Social Media Update 2013” Pew Research Center, January 2014.
- “Facebook Quarterly Earnings Slides,” Q1 2013, Facebook.
- Hachman, Mark. “Facebook Used by Half of the World’s Internet Users, Save Asia,” PC Mag, February 2012.
- Hanun, Marya. “Klout,” Foreign Policy, August 9, 2013
- Howle, Cynthia, Glenny Brock, and Alan Blinder. “Most of U.S. is Wired but Millions Aren’t Plugged In,” The New York Times, August 18, 2013.
- “Key ICT indicators for developed and developing countries and the world (totals and penetration rates)”, International Telecommunications Unions (ITU), Geneva, February 27, 2013.
- “Global Internet User Survey Sumary Reports,” The Internet Society, 2012, Accessed on August 13, 2013.
- Goldsmith, Belinda. “Porn passed over as Web users become social: author,” Reuters, September 2008.
- Meeker, Mary. “Internet Trends 2013,” KPCB, presented at D11 Conference, Rancho Palos,Verdes, California, May 28-30, 2013.
- Meeker, Mary. “2014 Internet Trends,” KPCB, May 28, 2014.
- Mirani, Leo. “A snapshot of one minute on the internet, today and in 2012,” Quartz, November 26, 2013.
- Piombino, Kristin. “How Internet Users Worldwide Spend Time Online,” May 17, 2012.
- Qualman, Erik. “Social Media Revolution,” YouTube, March 21, 2013.
- “Statistics,” YouTube, Accessed December 6, 2013.
- Sullivan, Danny. “Google: 100 billion Searches Per month, Search to integrate Gmail, Launching Enhanced Search App for iOS,” Search Engine Land, August 8, 2012.
- “Twitter Now The Fastest Growing Social Platform In The World” Global Web Index, January 28 , 2013.
- “Wearable Tech Device Awareness Surpasses 50 Percent Among US Consumers, According to NPD,” NPD Group, January 2014.
- “Wearable Technology Market – Global Scenario, Trends, Industry Analysis, Size, Share and Forecast, 2012- 2018,” Transparency Market Research, 2013.
- “Wikimedia Report Card” Wikimedia Labs, December 2013.
- “World Market for Wearable Technology – A Quantitative Market Assessment – 2012,” IMS Research, 2012.
- “Would you want a digital footprint from birth?” AVG Blogs, October 6, 2010.
- Zickuhr, Kathryn and Aaron Smith. “Digital Differences,” Pew Internet & American Life Project, April 13, 2012
- Zickuhr, Kathryn and Aaron Smith. “Home Broadband 2013,” Pew Internet & American Life Project, August 26, 2013.
A Big Day for Big Data: The Beginning of Our Data Transformation
Mark Doms, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs at the US Department of Commerce: “Wednesday, June 18, 2014, was a big day for big data. The Commerce Department participated in the inaugural Open Data Roundtable at the White House, with GovLab at NYU and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The event brought businesses and non-profit organizations that rely on Commerce data together with Commerce Department officials to discuss how to make the data we collect and release easier to find, understand and use. This initiative has significant potential to fuel new businesses; create jobs; and help federal, state and local governments make better decisions.
Under Secretary Mark Doms presented and participated in the first Open Data Roundtable at the White House, organized by Commerce, GovLab at NYU and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
Data innovation is revolutionizing every aspect of our society and government data is playing a major role in the revolution. From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) climate data to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent and trademark records, and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) research, companies, organizations and people are using this information to innovate, grow our economy and better plan for the future.
At this week’s Open Data 500, some key insights I came away with include:
- There is a strong desire for data consistency across the Commerce Department, and indeed the federal government.
- Data should be catalogued in a common, machine-readable format.
- Data should be accessible in bulk, allowing the private sector greater flexibility to harness the information.
- The use of a single platform for access to government data would create efficiencies and help coordination across agencies.
Furthermore, business leaders stand ready to help us achieve these goals.
Secretary Pritzker is the first Secretary of Commerce to make data a departmental priority in the Commerce Department’s Strategic Plan, and has branded Commerce as “America’s Data Agency.” In keeping with that mantra, over the next several months, my team at the Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA), which includes the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau, will be involved in similar forums. We will be engaging our users – businesses, academia, advocacy organizations, and state and local governments – to drive this open data conversation forward.
Today was a big first step in that process. The insight gained will help inform our efforts ahead. Thanks again to the team at GovLab and the White House for their hard work in making it possible!”