An Introduction

February 8th, 2019

‘Data Critiques’ is an informal group of collaborators around the topic of “Data Custody and Access”. We are exploring ways to have a global impact on the collection, custody, analysis, value extraction and value sharing, of personal and societal data.

• Andrew Hoppin - Chair, Global Integrity
• Anouk Ruhaak - Journalist & Engineer, Newspeak House
• Jessy Kate Schingler - Software Engineer, Space Policy and Governance Researcher, Embassy Network
• Jonnie Penn - Historian, Cambridge
• Joshua McKenty - Generalist & Canadian
• Tony Lai - Lawyer, Stanford
• Zoe Schlag - Impact Investor, Techstars

As a guiding principle, we strive to avoid a “paternalistic” approach. We look for opportunities to join existing efforts, and to collaborate across institutions.

Some of the ways we believe we can effect change are the following:

• Convening people (in person, and virtually)
• Connecting funding with expertise and specific problems
• Crafting concepts and grammar
• Writing (both for general as well as specific audiences) and Publishing
• Building programs (with specific outcomes, activities and timelines)
• Developing prototypes (of technologies, companies, and networks)
• Drafting policy frameworks, and advocacy of them

Each of the members of this collaboration are also involved in adjacent efforts, ranging from computational law, to developing indicators and trading markets for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to forming new sovereignties, to transforming how labour unions function. We attempt, whenever possible, to limit this group’s scope and context to data custody only. Even with this stated goal, however, what remains is quite broad:

• Ownership vs. Custody: Legal, Conceptual, Moral and Economic framings
• Consent and Permissions: Data Capture, Access, Use and Derived Works
• Collective Bargaining: What’s possible, what role might Unions or others have?
• New Economic Models: How can this deliver revolutionary change, but with incremental adoption models?

So far, we seem pretty sure that the following concepts will be useful:

• Common Pool Resource theory from Ostrom
• Informed Consent regulation from US Health Care

Finally, we strive to not let the “good” become the enemy of the “best”. There is a very real risk that a “practical” or feasible effort in this direction, would become a barrier to a truly progressive improvement. So we favor insanely bold ideation first, and pragmatic action plans second, if at all.

Community Collaboration Disclaimer: We intentionally embrace an ethos that values the diversity of perspectives and experience of our community. This means that, while we focus our efforts on areas of shared critique, one or more of us may disagree with the stated community position on any given topic. We also allow ourselves, individually and as a group, to learn, debate, and change our mind as we progress.