random($foo)

Open Sourcing and Improving the Citizen’s Briefing Book #

random($foo) is the personal site of Leonard Lin, where I collect shiny things and publish original writing and code. more »

The formatting got a little messed up (no paragraphs!) for my posting, but I’ve left my 2-cents for the Obama Administration for my thoughts on implementing and improving future participatory online tools.

If you’re so inclined, give the posting a look (and vote or comment on what you think). The Citizen’s Briefing Book project closes at 6PM today, so if you want to put anything up, now’s probably the time to do it. (there are almost 50K entries so far – that’s a lot of internet rantings to sort through :)

Also, a copy of what I posted (w/ paragraphs):

Open Sourcing and Improving the Citizen’s Briefing Book

The Citizen’s Briefing Book was a great project and I’d like to commend everyone involved. I’m looking forward to seeing these experiments with participatory tools continue with the Administration at WhiteHouse.gov.

This is an area I’m particularly interested in, so my suggestions pertain to the meta-discussions that have popped up around improving the Briefing Book (voting bias, aggregating and surfacing related ideas and discussions probably being at the top of that list). While the suggestions themselves point to specific weaknesses in the current implementation, I believe that they more importantly highlight the larger opportunities of generating useful discussion, analysis and direct involvement in improving future participatory online tools.

I’m aware that most government IT is contracted out, but the development of these online tools should perhaps be an exception, both because of their strategic importance to the government and the people, but also for the more pragmatic reasons of their development intensiveness and the deep, fast-changing, and often esoteric expertise required. As talented as agencies like Reside, or Blue State Digital are, many of the most difficult challenges exceed the capabilities of any single group and would benefit from tapping into a much larger pool of motivated technologists.

While, MyBO (which, full disclosure, I worked on last year) and Change.gov were campaign or pseudo-governmental projects, as “government works,” the new WH.gov projects would provide a great, high-profile opportunity for the new Administration to embrace an open process, not just in publishing the source code, but by actively encouraging participation and engagement with distributed source control, open APIs and bulk data access, and dedicated discussion and feedback loops. Furthermore, it’s my belief (based on my observations and experiences within the high technology and the Internet) that creating a transparent and level playing field would also serve to encourage the best and brightest in industry when it comes to contributing infrastructure and other resources that would be required for any sort of serious online undertaking.

There are many talented people working on political tools, and many great third-party non-profits (Sunlight, Maplight, MySociety, to name a few) working on data transparency and other aspects of digital government, but when I look at the challenges facing the development and scaling (in both technical and social interaction terms) of what may eventually be the most transformative of new online democratic tools–those for radically distributed policy deliberation, agenda setting, and direct involvement–it seems to me that fostering an open approach would do much to spur development with tremendous benefits (and almost no additional cost) for all parties, not least of which would be the American people.

Notes on the development of the Citizen’s Briefing Book app:

Tags: , ,

  • http://mill-industries.com Eric Mill

    Awesome — entirely agree. This administration has the potential to be the first to eschew the mentality that proprietary software necessarily equals greater security and reliability.

    How about we both move to DC and get involved in this scene and start pushing?

  • http://randomfoo.net/ lhl

    Hey Eric, I don't think know anything about the prior WH.gov web team, but on the web side, I don't think there's a strong ideological bent – WH.gov is running Apache, and although it's all pre-baked so there's not much more info, following along to USA.gov shows their site running Apache 2 w/ a mix of languages (some PHP, as well as some ancient Netscape Enterprise served Java – oh, they're using Roller to power blogs.usa.gov). Now, I don't much care about open sourcing code just for the heck of it – that portal code is probably half proprietary, mega-crusty and really wouldn't help improve access and would just be a waste of resources, but for a project like developing new (completely as of yet non-existent) tools for direct democracy? That'd be more interesting. I can't really fault the web teams for not doing anything like that – certainly no administration has looked to actively push the boundaries there before the Obama Administration (which it seems has tried more with things in the past couple months on Change.gov than I've seen in the past 8 years)

    “How about we both move to DC and get involved in this scene and start pushing?”

    Ahh youthful enthusiasm. I dropped a line so they have my number (and yours too I'm assuming) but life goes on – I'm pretty much booked out for at least the next few months and am currently focusing on a new small biz…

    That being said, I'm working under the assumption that whether it's Kundra or someone else (but particularly if it's Kundra) as CTO, that they'll “get it” and be able to tap into some pretty excited people at the OMB (E-Gov) or GSA (USA.gov) — see, I don't even know anything about the federal level bureaucracy (they have semi-regular pow-wows apparently, but I wouldn't exactly call it a “scene”).

    Who knows, maybe the WH web team has some expertise in building and scaling complex social web apps, but regardless if they opened up a new high-profile project like a version of the Change Book, I suspect they'd get help from a lot of people and make a lot more progress. Even if I might not drop everything to go work on it, I'd do something like write some data exporter scripts for them, which probably wouldn't take more than an hour or two to do. After I (or any third party, which is the important thing) were motivated, could write all kinds of term-extraction and relatedness algorithms on the textual content or relatedness/recommendations based on user votes…

    Of course, there's a lot of infrastructure and cat wrangling involved in fostering a working community for that sort of thing, and while there are challenges in striking the right tone and making it really effective, I think the bar is set pretty low at the moment.

  • http://randomfoo.net/ lhl

    Hey Eric, I don't think know anything about the WH.gov web team, but on the web side, I don't think there's a strong ideological bent – WH.gov is running Apache, and although it's all pre-baked so there's not much more info, following along to USA.gov shows their site running Apache 2 w/ a mix of languages (some PHP, as well as some ancient Netscape Enterprise served Java – oh, they're using Roller to power blogs.usa.gov). Now, I don't much care about open sourcing code just for the heck of it – that portal code is probably half proprietary, mega-crusty and really wouldn't help improve access and would just be a waste of resources, but for a project like developing new (completely as of yet non-existent) tools for direct democracy? That'd be more interesting. I can't really fault the web teams for not doing anything like that – certainly no administration has looked to actively push the boundaries there before the Obama Administration (which it seems has tried more with things in the past couple months on Change.gov than I've seen in the past 8 years)

    “How about we both move to DC and get involved in this scene and start pushing?”

    Ahh youthful enthusiasm. They have my number (and yours too I'm assuming) but life goes on – I'm pretty much booked out for at least the next few months and am currently focusing on a new small biz… I've said in the past that if called, I'd serve, but honestly, unless it was something that was directly impactful and where I'd have the resources and influence to be able execute, it'd probably be a waste of time and energy.

    I don't think you could be that effective pushing an agenda (externally or internally) that doesn't want to be pushed, but I'm working under the assumption that whether it's Kundra or someone else (but particularly if it's Kundra) as CTO, that they'll “get it” and be able to tap into some pretty excited people at the OMB (E-Gov) or GSA (USA.gov) — see, I don't even know anything about the federal level bureaucracy (they have semi-regular pow-wows apparently, but I wouldn't exactly call it a “scene”).

    Who knows, maybe the WH web team has some expertise in building and scaling complex social web apps, but regardless if they opened up a new high-profile project like a version of the Briefing Book, I suspect they'd get help from a lot of people and make a lot more progress. Even if I might not drop everything to go work on it, I'd do something like write some data exporter scripts for them, which probably wouldn't take more than an hour or two to do. After I (or any third party, which is the important thing) were motivated, could write all kinds of term-extraction and relatedness algorithms on the textual content or relatedness/recommendations based on user votes…

    Of course, there's a lot of infrastructure and cat wrangling involved in fostering a working community for that sort of thing, and while there are challenges in striking the right tone and making it really effective, I think the bar is set pretty low at the moment.

  • http://randomfoo.net/ lhl

    Hey Eric, I don't think know anything about the WH.gov web team, but on the web side, I don't think there's a strong ideological bent – WH.gov is running Apache, and although it's all pre-baked so there's not much more info, following along to USA.gov shows their site running Apache 2 w/ a mix of languages (some PHP, as well as some ancient Netscape Enterprise served Java – oh, they're using Roller to power blogs.usa.gov). Now, I don't much care about open sourcing code just for the heck of it – that portal code is probably half proprietary, mega-crusty and really wouldn't help improve access and would just be a waste of resources, but for a project like developing new (completely as of yet non-existent) tools for direct democracy? That'd be more interesting. I can't really fault the web teams for not doing anything like that – certainly no administration has looked to actively push the boundaries there before the Obama Administration (which it seems has tried more with things in the past couple months on Change.gov than I've seen in the past 8 years)

    “How about we both move to DC and get involved in this scene and start pushing?”

    Ahh youthful enthusiasm. They have my number (and yours too I'm assuming) but life goes on – I'm pretty much booked out for at least the next few months and am currently focusing on a new small biz… I've said in the past that if called, I'd serve, but honestly, unless it was something that was directly impactful and where I'd have the resources and influence to be able execute, it'd probably be a waste of time and energy.

    I don't think you could be that effective pushing an agenda (externally or internally) that doesn't want to be pushed, but I'm working under the assumption that whether it's Kundra or someone else (but particularly if it's Kundra) as CTO, that they'll “get it” and be able to tap into some pretty excited people at the OMB (E-Gov) or GSA (USA.gov) — see, I don't even know anything about the federal level bureaucracy (they have semi-regular pow-wows apparently, but I wouldn't exactly call it a “scene”).

    Who knows, maybe the WH web team has some expertise in building and scaling complex social web apps, but regardless if they opened up a new high-profile project like a version of the Briefing Book, I suspect they'd get help from a lot of people and make a lot more progress. Even if I might not drop everything to go work on it, I'd do something like write some data exporter scripts for them, which probably wouldn't take more than an hour or two to do. After I (or any third party, which is the important thing) were motivated, could write all kinds of term-extraction and relatedness algorithms on the textual content or relatedness/recommendations based on user votes…

    Of course, there's a lot of infrastructure and cat wrangling involved in fostering a working community for that sort of thing, and while there are challenges in striking the right tone and making it really effective, I think the bar is set pretty low at the moment.