Perhaps the marker indicating where you are is supposed to work it's way up the list? I don't think what you've said here - in this thread - has been unreasonable.
I'm not sure if it's nefarious or not, but I would have to lean on the side of "If the goverment is quietly removing information then probably it's not for the benefit of the public.
Also from their own site at data.gov
> The United States Government’s open data site is designed to unleash the power of government open data to inform decisions by the public and policymakers, drive innovation and economic activity, achieve agency missions, and strengthen the foundation of an open and transparent government.
The part " to inform decisions by the public and policymakers" in particular stands out.
Anyway data sets is not exactly expensive to keep hosted for a government body so there's not really any excuse to scrub them unless they're polluted in some way ?
Even if it's polluted, you can mark it as is, with reasoning and keep it up, so you can learn what dirty/bad data is, and build quality detectors with the information contained in/with the "dirty" or "low quality" data set.
Open Data initiatives generally build upon the premise of immutability.
Data Sets can be alive, i.e. new data can be streamed into them, but they won't be purged, shortened or slimmed down.
You can expect more historical data to be opened as the digitization and organization continues, and don't expect this data to be randomly being removed from archives.
Even going one step further, if this data sets are refined and formatted, they are versioned, so you can always see the previous versions (e.g.: https://www.zenodo.org).
If you're starting to remove any data set from a data pool w/o any explanation and announcement, this means there's a new "Department of Truth" in the works, 99% of the time.
"it's not a nazi salute, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not building a camp in Guantanamo, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not getting rid of gov workers en mass, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not going to blanket pardon January 6th rioters, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not going to deport international students who protested against Israel, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not going to deregulate industries and set us back decades in term of ecological progress, don't be ridiculous"
"they're not scrubbing open gov data, don't be ridiculous" < you are here
Indeed, it would be a shame to jump to conclusions, we have 0 hints of what's happening
> < you are here
Your guesses about me are hilariously wrong.
Ex: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42816654
So trim those excessive confidence levels, and consider what you might change to improve your process.
Perhaps the marker indicating where you are is supposed to work it's way up the list? I don't think what you've said here - in this thread - has been unreasonable.
1 reply →
[flagged]
"they're not rounding up Jews and gassing them en masse, don't be ridiculous" < a lot of people during Adolf Hitler's regime
I'm not sure if it's nefarious or not, but I would have to lean on the side of "If the goverment is quietly removing information then probably it's not for the benefit of the public.
Also from their own site at data.gov
> The United States Government’s open data site is designed to unleash the power of government open data to inform decisions by the public and policymakers, drive innovation and economic activity, achieve agency missions, and strengthen the foundation of an open and transparent government.
The part " to inform decisions by the public and policymakers" in particular stands out.
Anyway data sets is not exactly expensive to keep hosted for a government body so there's not really any excuse to scrub them unless they're polluted in some way ?
Even if it's polluted, you can mark it as is, with reasoning and keep it up, so you can learn what dirty/bad data is, and build quality detectors with the information contained in/with the "dirty" or "low quality" data set.
Open Data initiatives generally build upon the premise of immutability.
Data Sets can be alive, i.e. new data can be streamed into them, but they won't be purged, shortened or slimmed down.
You can expect more historical data to be opened as the digitization and organization continues, and don't expect this data to be randomly being removed from archives.
Even going one step further, if this data sets are refined and formatted, they are versioned, so you can always see the previous versions (e.g.: https://www.zenodo.org).
If you're starting to remove any data set from a data pool w/o any explanation and announcement, this means there's a new "Department of Truth" in the works, 99% of the time.
I once read that occasionally a new Pharoah would make a point of smashing all prior evidence of a prior ruler(s). Obelisks, murals, etc.
agreed, this is very likely just incompetence or bureaucracy at play, i doubt anyone in tr*mp's administration cares about the data being removed