Canada_First Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Strange...they love race based data and statistics on many other things. No matter...when Canadians can't find domestic data or don't want to bother trying to find it, they just default to what is readily available from the United States. "It's just easier". Hehe. I'm sure you're right. It is easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted September 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Hehe. I'm sure you're right. It is easier. Easier, and not very smart. There are no doubt plenty of demographic commonalities between the United States and Canada, but there are also significant differences. Simply throwing in the towel and resting your laurels on US social and demographic research seems rather foolish to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada_First Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Easier, and not very smart. There are no doubt plenty of demographic commonalities between the United States and Canada, but there are also significant differences. Simply throwing in the towel and resting your laurels on US social and demographic research seems rather foolish to me.why does the left wants stats and studies on everything except race based crime stats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 why does the left wants stats and studies on everything except race based crime stats? I want the stats, but I want to choose the people who get to look at them with me. We had a reasonable discussion recently whereby somebody quoted that a certain group had been causing a problem and somebody else quoted statistics that showed that crime stats in the region in question were typical. It all went quite well, but still was difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 I want the stats, but I want to choose the people who get to look at them with me. We had a reasonable discussion recently whereby somebody quoted that a certain group had been causing a problem and somebody else quoted statistics that showed that crime stats in the region in question were typical. You want to choose the people? Is this just more of the underlying mistrust that is part of Canada's data collection and access gap ? Why continue the cycle ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Easier, and not very smart. There are no doubt plenty of demographic commonalities between the United States and Canada, but there are also significant differences. Simply throwing in the towel and resting your laurels on US social and demographic research seems rather foolish to me. Well, to be fair, quoting the NOAA above is just more of the same. U.S. research is more abundant and accessible....Canada appears to be challenged in this regard no matter who the PM may be. Must be cultural..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 You want to choose the people? Is this just more of the underlying mistrust that is part of Canada's data collection and access gap ? Why continue the cycle ? Of course I do. I want to be King of Everything. Don't you ? But, in all seriousness, a public group can be self-selecting and - based on topic matter interest and vested interest in the results - should be able to discuss an issue responsibly even if it's online. I don't think anonymity would work for that but still it's possible to collaborate and discuss on real issues in a relevant way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 ....But, in all seriousness, a public group can be self-selecting and - based on topic matter interest and vested interest in the results - should be able to discuss an issue responsibly even if it's online. I don't think anonymity would work for that but still it's possible to collaborate and discuss on real issues in a relevant way. Collection and preservation of raw datasets are different from analysis, information, and policy. Is there something missing at the lowest organic collection level that gets suffocated in Canada because of the perceived political/policy threat by partisans? Loss of the long form census should not have been an excuse for other collection channels to just roll over and die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Collection and preservation of raw datasets are different from analysis, information, and policy. Is there something missing at the lowest organic collection level that gets suffocated in Canada because of the perceived political/policy threat by partisans? Loss of the long form census should not have been an excuse for other collection channels to just roll over and die. Gee, I don't know. I'm honoured that you would think I could answer such a thing though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 My bet is that science funding likely declined. But this isn't just about funding of research, this is about what looks like a wholesale attack on retaining even existing data, attacks on the academic freedom of government-funded and directly employed researchers. There is no such thing as 'academic freedom' among those who are employed by ANYONE other than universities. There isn't even the concept of academic freedom, as far as I'm aware. Whatever you're working on belongs to your employer, not you, that includes any findings you make and what, if any use those findings are put to. The government produces an incredible mass of information every year. Every database is continually being overloaded with it. Every time we had to weed through all the junk on our shared drive to see what we could delete it was a major undertaking, a project which took months. Every government group, large and small, has to do the same on a continuing basis. I doubt anything of unique value was lost, though given the ability of bureaucrats to make mistakes it's certainly possible. I wouldn't ascribe it to some kind of 'hate' of science by the Tories, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 .... I doubt anything of unique value was lost, though given the ability of bureaucrats to make mistakes it's certainly possible. I wouldn't ascribe it to some kind of 'hate' of science by the Tories, though. Agreed....data proliferates at an alarming rate in both the public and private sector. As a matter of policy it has to be managed by governance practices at the technical and policy layer. Total destruction of data actually takes a concerted, expensive effort (e.g. classified information)...with witnesses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Gee, I don't know. I'm honoured that you would think I could answer such a thing though. Well, you have been calling for open data policies for a long time (e.g. Sunlight Foundation). So you must have given it some consideration. My only quibble would be equating old school data collection and storage methods with purposeful obstruction compared to automated data warehouses and user access. Sometimes you just have to put in the tedious work on the microfiche reader ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Well, you have been calling for open data policies for a long time (e.g. Sunlight Foundation). So you must have given it some consideration. My only quibble would be equating old school data collection and storage methods with purposeful obstruction compared to automated data warehouses and user access. Sometimes you just have to put in the tedious work on the microfiche reader ! Well, I have some opinions on it - with of course no strong way to back them up. I feel Canada could be a bad environment for Open Data to work because: - people don't question government as much as other countries anyway - stodgy and conservative practices here mean we will take forever to get started - there is more centralized control over data among other reasons I could think of I feel Canada could be a good environment for Open Data to work because: - we love talking about things to death, and Open Data could fuel the fires of conversation - there are lots of lefty student groups who get behind these things - once the Americans do it we'll imitate them Just some thoughts, off topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 There is no such thing as 'academic freedom' among those who are employed by ANYONE other than universities. There isn't even the concept of academic freedom, as far as I'm aware. Whatever you're working on belongs to your employer, not you, that includes any findings you make and what, if any use those findings are put to. The government produces an incredible mass of information every year. Every database is continually being overloaded with it. Every time we had to weed through all the junk on our shared drive to see what we could delete it was a major undertaking, a project which took months. Every government group, large and small, has to do the same on a continuing basis. I doubt anything of unique value was lost, though given the ability of bureaucrats to make mistakes it's certainly possible. I wouldn't ascribe it to some kind of 'hate' of science by the Tories, though. Nothing to do with intellectual freedom, it's to do with the destruction of, the hiding of, and the muzzling of, previous data, current research results, and the people who's work created it, from the people who actually paid for it, namely the taxpayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Well, I have some opinions on it - with of course no strong way to back them up.... I agree that the Americans are certainly part of the problem...and solution. Canadians recoil at the thought of American database warehouse and tools vendors supporting government projects, but there is no domestic interest in paying for duplicate capabilities and services that are strictly CanCon. Add in some NSA/Five Eyes paranoia plus Google universe, and paralysis quickly sets in. Still, I am surprised that datasets and access would not survive in Canadian academia regardless of the political wrangling and budget cuts. Ease of data access and total destruction are two very different things. Perhaps we have been spoiled by the Interwebs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada_First Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 The Torys are simply making cuts to save money. Not because they hate data. They hate waste. If we can streamline our operations then it should be done. No one should be in favor of government waste. We need to save costs if we can. By saving money we can then ensure more money gets to the people who are in need of it instead of supporting government bureaucracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 The real issue is this: even today, there are things that the government is doing that it shouldn't be involved in. We spend a lot of money needlessly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 "venal self interest" really, that's more than a stretch of the imagination. Not when you've seen lobbyists and the most powerful bureaucrats and influential players in the industry revolving in and out of each other's domain over the years. Your governance is being played like a fine fiddle, to borrow a phrase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted September 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 The Torys are simply making cuts to save money. Not because they hate data. They hate waste. If we can streamline our operations then it should be done. No one should be in favor of government waste. We need to save costs if we can. By saving money we can then ensure more money gets to the people who are in need of it instead of supporting government bureaucracy. How precisely does less accurate census data save money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) The big question - is it day-da or dah-da? I heard one fellow on CBC use both pronunciations in the same paragraph. Most Canadians prefer the American pronunciation, I think. That census business was so weird at the time and positively comical post-Snowden, now that we have some inkling of the warrantless and intrusive surveillance going on across the country. Edited September 22, 2015 by SpankyMcFarland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted September 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) The big question - is it day-da or dah-da? I heard one fellow on CBC use both pronunciations in the same paragraph. Most Canadians prefer the American pronunciation, I think. That census business was so weird at the time and positively comical post-Snowden, now that we have some inkling of the warrantless and intrusive surveillance going on across the country. I fail to see what one has to do with the other, and it's not like the Tories have not proposed or passed legislation that makes using the long form census as a spying tool look like a joke. Edited September 22, 2015 by ToadBrother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 I fail to see what one has to do with the other, and it's not like the Tories have not proposed or passed legislation that makes using the long form census as a spying tool look like a joke. I meant the govt created a public fuss about the intrusiveness of the census while secretly doing far worse things through CSIS at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 The real issue is this: even today, there are things that the government is doing that it shouldn't be involved in. We spend a lot of money needlessly. Nice platitude, but having accurate longitudinal data on the various health and social wellness metrics is crucial to a properly functioning social welfare state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Nice platitude, but having accurate longitudinal data on the various health and social wellness metrics is crucial to a properly functioning social welfare state.Have you looked at the long from census? It has questions about race, education, unpaid/self employment work and prior addresses. It is gross exaggeration to say this information is necessary for 'proper functioning of the state'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted September 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Have you looked at the long from census? It has questions about race, education, unpaid/self employment work and prior addresses. It is gross exaggeration to say this information is necessary for 'proper functioning of the state'. According to the guy who rejects any science at a whim. According to statisticians, it is essential. Why would I believe you over the experts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.