Free data

FREE DATA (free standard)

Free data is where data evolution wants to go further, because it is to be more meaningfully managed this way

Data evolves within the same mechanism as other more solid matter does. Data, as everything else, is not free but also, naturally speaking, data wants (as any other natural form) to be everytime more free (have more agency and presence). Evident is the fact that we humans have very much focused on developing its managements, perhaps by the simplexity of Binary data to be a very accessible scaled projection from the bipolar ground to be more easily experienceable.

For data to be freer, these are proposed parameters:

  1. Free Privacy: Secrecy options and education about publicity
  2. Free Network: Backend for storage and service
  3. Free Content: Usability and categorizing
  4. Free Analysis: Crawling and suggestions
  5. Free Culture: Licensing and redistribution

They can be applied by parts, but for a more strict overall data freedom metric of a product, they should count as relatives to each other. I.e. if one parameter qualifies as 10% only, the overall qualification could be seen as 10% too.

 

WHY FREE

Privative data Personal data Open data Free data

Personal data is a standard name, where mydata is good communtarian umbrella for projects aligned with that standard. There is not a decent free data proposal yet, this is a step forward for that. We could have choosen another keyword as lovely data or else to avoid the «open source software initiative» creation aside of the «free software» one, but we should not avoid the freedom debate either, and open data is already very pumped.

By relating data to freedom we bring data to see its function in a the social scope more directly, where it is perhaps not being located in much enough well yet.

 

WHY FREE DATA

Free data is a proposed new standard is for improving people’s choices about data management, appliable from a small group of people offline up to a big data pool. A new standard proposition aims to improve an already working on situation by proposing mechanics that are not yet developed by any other project, but then it has to foresee it being adopted in some near (or even far) future and or propose a prototype for the short term of that. Flove.org project is proposed as an initial prototype of the free data standard.

Free data standard is needed because of the natural-class struggle in the data management side of things. Whatever resources management privileges reaches a critical point where there are some parties that feel too dependant of that and start to develop other alternatives for being able to better manage their own resources. At this present 2020 time, in the data management side of things, there is a big gap between «big data» management companies and other smaller data management companies or projects. Big data companies have every time more data, feel less accountable for society and (or because) there is also short collaboration in the smaller data management initiatives. New common standards could ease these needed alliances and promote better practices at no so social media companies.

Free data standard should be patching the bugs we see the big data pools have towards their users, and also patch the bugs of previous struggles. Data management natural (class) struggle should be wiser than previous strugglers at doing this. Every code developer knows well that you have to provide a transitional link and or portability between the old paradigm or platform (still very used) and the proposed new one (not used yet). Free data struggle is a very good opportunity for ‘natural struggle’ concept to have a more consistent and pleasant look.

Faceboogle is nowadays the best data management project because an overwhelming majority of people use it. It has done it amazingly quite coercitiveless. While appreciating all their development examples and use of their services if you want or need, we shouldn’t forget to be hands on developing other better ways to manage data, whether main actors use, copy and or fork it or not.

 

 

WHY AND NOT OTHER PROJECTS

Why and not mydata umbrella

The free data standard is completely aligned with mydata petition and its main proposed differences or extensions or improvements to it is a more clear defined categories and depth of the standard for facilitating the implementing of partial metrics and modular applications of the standard.

Mydata is a communitty that proposes to share some principles for data management resumed in a petition. Some key points at the manifest propose very ambituous objectives (for gathering support from a broad audience) with very open-to-interpretation words (i.e. portability, control, my, etc). The petition also manifests its willing to support the ongoing projects which comply with the standards and proposes the development of new prototypes for non-existing practices of the proposed standards. But mydata community doesn’t corporately invest in any specific development or prototype beyond one annual gathering and few actions about that from the organizers. More concrete details about the methodology for support or develop are not further specified, hence such ambitious proposals are left to a limbo since there are no many further mechanics to implement the declared intentions in the standard.

The petition format is already an strategic move to serve as a communitarian umbrella for cross-colaboration between projects with affinity to the values expressed there, but mydata itself doesn’t want to go very much further itself. Since Mydata communitty appeared as a need to develop collaborative ways to manage data in a historical moment where access to the resource was not enough decentralized, mydata communitty does already enough by being only an umbrella (a place for cross projects collaboration), and don’t need to propose more concrete standards (either philosophically or technically), nor get to develop altogether some key prototypes. By being just an umbrella it does better its communitary function because a low profile community has a very low entry-acceptability barrier.

mydata could do a step forward and develop metrics appliable to projects, but mydata could also perfectly don’t develop them since there could be some very participant projects in the umbrella which would score a low compliance of mydata standards, and by being more clearly pointed as not much communitarian, that could discourage its participation (i.e. such projects marketing would recommend to ‘not link that much to a cluster where they show other competing projects as better than ours’).

We can love mydata as an umbrella but should mechanize further the wished features explained in mydata petition. And for doing that, we also have to unavoidably take further steps in a spin-off of mydata communitty that more straight and more real makes the more ambituous stands such as metrics, prototyping needed forks and further communitarian build ups.

 

Why and not qiyfoundation contract

Qiyfoundation is aligned with mydata petition and it is perhaps the more ambituos (in the sense of full compliance with the mydata standards) project within the mydata community projects. It proposes an ambituos contractual prototype that already has (at least partly) specified the free analysis. It also gets quite concrete in the proposal of values for freedom of service and storage (free network) but through a blockchain not very specified. Qiyfoundation network standards and application proposal are not better than the secushare platform parameters for defining the freedom of a network, or any of the applications showcased at the comparision tables there. Qiyfoundation neither involves deeply or extend usability or semantic standards for data.

 

Why and not secushare network prototype

Secushare is by far aligned with mydata petition and there are not anywhere else better defined standards for privacy in a social network software. This makes secushare a preferent network software prototype to try to implement free data through. But such very innovative and deep standards are not offered as a social communitarian standard intiative-like (not even as free network). That tool is neither acceptable to be featured in the secusahre project itself, since in the case of willing to do it, it should rather be done through the GNU project itself (its parent), which may require an upgrade which it is not likely to happen as GNU-FSF domain of action of «Just Software and Documents for software» as it has been repeteadly expressed in the past, i.e. CreativeCommons (so called free culture) was started from a FSF contributor outside the GNU communitty, etc.

This free data thread has been raised at some GNU specific forums (GNU consensus) in a much more raw format than this, with little interest exposed received.  Secushare does not involve standarization of usabilty, nor it is much interested in implementing analytics featuring in the software (it is not interested in «free big data» because it is against «big data» because of spying concerns so it doesn’t care much about analytics) as i.e. qiyfoundation rather cares.

 

See specifications page for the flove.org design as a free data prototype

See floves page for wholist reducted view and concrete projected apps

See love page for abstract crowd-semantics developments